viz.

Source: http://youtu.be/8hPrjMQlb6Y

There were several emotional speeches broadcast today from the Senate hearing on the problem of gun violence. Former Representative and shooting victim Gabrielle Giffords opened the session with a brief but urgent call to action, citing the deaths of children as reasons to "be bold." Later the committee heard gun activist Gayle Trotter's testimony which raised concerns for women, especially single mothers, who rely on guns to protect themselves and their families. The National Rifle Association's chief Wayne LaPierre also summoned pathos to his cause. LaPierre pointed to the NRA's model school shield program, an initiative to increase security in public schools as a way to stop tragedies like the horrific school shooting that occured in Newtown, Connecticut last month.

To advocate for placing armed guards in more schools LaPierre employed a peculiar, and what I find to be an alarming, figure of speech.  Punning on the term "security blanket" he proposed, "It’s time to throw an immediate blanket of security around our children" (see clip above).

Image Credit: the365plan.blogspot.com

This is the traditional notion of a security blanket. Like so many children, the Peanuts character Linus derives a sense of comfort and safety from his trusted blanket and he's rarely seen without it. Given that the "blankey" is commonly associated with dependency, trust, and familiarity, LaPierre's metaphor seems to imply that kids (and presumably their parents) need and want the presence of armed guards on their school campuses, and that guards' presence would be comforting. Should we be troubled by this vision of childhood? Clutching a favorite piece of fleece and hopefully casting it aside before one gets too old seems harmless enough. But growing up inured to the sight of guns, and possibly forming an attachment to them, might not be as innocuous. Perhaps kids won't be able to shake the "blanket of security" and will carry it with them into adulthood, surrounding themselves with weapons because they have always equated them with safety and confidence. The idea of an adult security blanket may sound unhealthy to some readers, but it likely does not to the head of the NRA.

This "blanket of security" concept fascinated me so much that I decided to look for similar rhetoric in other statements by LaPierre.  Recently in America's 1st Freedom, a magazine published by the NRA for its members, LaPierre portrays guns and gun ownership as a matter of "survival" in a world beset by "Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals." LaPierre contends that, in the absence of a "secure border fence," guns and the law abiding citizens who carry them are a crucial line of defense against the "terrorists" and "Latin American drug gangs" who have invaded the southwest. Not only are we told that gun culture can act as a barrier to these alien threats, but also that the NRA is an "indispensable shield against the destruction of our nation’s Second Amendment rights."  Thus, the phrase "blanket of security" fits in with a family of terms that the NRA uses to describe guns, gun supporters and the "legal" use of firearms. Like a fence or a shield, a blanket is both passive and protective. All are strictly technologies of defense. 

Image: www.nrapublications.org

In the same America's 1st Freedom piece LaPierre warns readers about an imminent "tsunami of gun control," a "flood of new anti-gun federal regulations," and a "coming seige" of opposition directed at the 2nd amendment.  The deliberate reversal of terms is hard to miss. LaPierre styles the threat of gun reform--restrictions on guns sales and/or the tightening of gun laws--as active and chaotically destructive forces. In contrast, guns and gun owners are the beseiged.  Instead of actively shaping or harming society, gun culture is a passive bulwark against attacks on our constitutional rights.

Is that stretching the truth? I'll leave it to readers and the Senate Judiciary Committee to decide.