The liberal reflexive knee-jerk reaction of calling for more gun control before any facts about the San Bernardino shooting were even known is a perfect example of what Evan Sayet calls "not just wrong, but as wrong as wrong can be."  Gun control, far from being the solution, is arguably the #1 problem here; the good, law-abiding and innocent people were disarmed and helpless against determined assassins. 

It is not a coincidence that the Paris attack didn't happen in Switzerland, or that the San Bernardino attack didn't happen in Texas.  Future attacks are unlikely in Arizona, or upstate New York, or Brevard County, Florida, or other places where sheriffs are encouraging legally licensed gun owners to carry at all times.  The next attack, and the next, and the next after that, are likely to occur again in "gun-free zones."

Meanwhile, we continue the interminable arguments about whether this is terrorism, crime, or "workplace violence," whether it has nothing (or everything) to do with Islam, whether it could just as likely have been a lone wolf, a white supremacist waving a Confederate flag, or a deranged Christian fundamentalist screaming "Jesus is Lord!" while sending dozens of people to an instant meeting with Jesus with an assault rifle purchased at a gun show.

The left wrings its hands over the possibility that these events could lead to a backlash against Muslims, resulting in – gasp! – profiling.  The CAIR spokesmen get on Instant TV to denounce "violence" and assure everyone that this has nothing to do with Islam, and then go back to openly strategizing the triumph of sharia law in America.

How about we make a deal with the left?  We will stop expressing any doubts about Islam being a religion of peace; we will echo Hillary's proclamation that "We are not at war with Islam"; we will toe the politically correct line about the Qur'an.  In exchange, we permit every adult native-born American citizen without a criminal background to carry, concealed or openly, anywhere in the United States.

Would the San Bernardino terrorists have attacked this target if they knew that the party-goers were armed?  If half of them were?  If one in ten was?  If even one attendee at that party had been armed, lives could have been saved.  If terrorists had any doubt as to the possibility of their targets being capable of shooting back, they would have been deterred from making the attack in the first place.

I grew up in the liberal-leftist anti-gun environment of Berkeley, California in the 1960s and '70s.  I was taught that guns are bad and should be banned.  We took pride in our moral superiority to the yahoos of America's traditional gun-owning culture.  We considered that everyone who didn't agree with us should be ashamed of himself.

It's time to change the narrative.  Maybe our ancestors were on to something when they inculcated the duty of every boy, if he wanted to be considered a man, to protect and defend his sister, his wife, his children, his family, and his community.  Maybe every military-age man present at that party – and at all such future scenes of slaughter of innocent Americans – should hold his manhood cheap that he had failed in even lifting a finger to prepare for the first duty of a man: to protect his kin.

I would have to be counted among those holding their heads in shame.  But visit a gun shop or a firing range anywhere in America today, and you will see that millions of Americans – men and women – are waking up and deciding to be part of the solution instead of sitting ducks or helpless bystanders.  Not vigilantes "taking the law into their own hands," but responsible citizens of a free, constitutional (with a living, breathing Second Amendment), Judeo-Christian republic. 

Howard Hyde edits the website www.CitizenEcon.com.