A "Security Blanket" for American SchoolchildrenThe response to an armed criminal is not to take away his gun, but instead to give a good person a gun - at least according to Wayne LaPierre, executive of the National Rifle Association. In his response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, he said the only way to protect schoolchildren from shootings is to put armed security in every school. The issue is what publicists call “spin jobs”. His goal is simple: defend the NRA. Overall, responses to the speech ranged from mild surprise to outrage. Most articles point out that LaPierre serves as a scapegoat for the government and the media, which is undoubtedly true, but this statement is too simplistic. A closer look at the methods behind blame-shifting reveals remarkable and complex metaphors that constitute a dual defense. LaPierre first dissociates the organization from the shooters, then frames the traditionally accepted authorities as the enemy and the NRA as a white knight; together, these tactics convey a narrative of oppression that victimizes the organization and alters who the public views as the “bad guy.” Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay To prevent calls for legislation and preserve his own interests, LaPierre must disassociate the NRA from the violence and actions of the killers. It characterizes them as otherworldly predators, creating an apocalyptic scene in which the state participates. His language is notable for its extremism and insistence. Assassins are omnipresent, with an innate instinct like “predators”, who act “evil” and “crazy”. They are “real monsters” driven by demons. The term “Demonized,” which has roots in actual demonic body possession (OED), suggests that even removing weapons from the situation would not prevent any potential harm to society. While such dramatic language naturally vilifies the killer, it also polarizes the gun-owning community. In this case, the only alternative to being a demon is to be human. Thus the language characterizes most gun owners and NRA members as rational, not driven by base impulses like prowling shooters. His language is so effective at separating these populations that he can claim that gun laws are enacted unfairly against “peaceful and lawful people” even after his description of the killers. If shooters are warm-blooded predators, the state is their cold-blooded counterpart. . LaPierre connects the violence of offenders with the actions of the government, the first place people might look to in a crisis. For example, he claims that Obama has “reset” school emergency policies, echoing his previous statements about killers “leaving their mark.” It features the President shooting a metaphorical bullet at the well-being of citizens, in much the same way that assassins shoot innocent people. With this language, gun control advocates become violent and calculating. Tax language pervades his descriptions. They “invest” and collude to “inflict maximum chaos with minimum risk,” and the media is in a “race to the bottom.” Such phrases convey actions designed to cause systematic harm. These parallel characterizations of government, media, and potential shooters use the language associated with guns to recapture the terror that comes from shooting their adversaries. LaPierre simultaneously generates paranoia which generates apocalyptic visions. However, the fear it inspires is effectivebecause it is targeted: it directs it specifically against the agents it defames (e.g., the media). Some of his fear tactics are generic, as when he compares society to a body in which criminals “spread like cancer,” and are therefore intractable, or the equally uncontrollable process of “maturation.” The term “national media machine” inspires images of weapons and destruction at the hands of an abstract entity. Other phrases invoke food metaphors, such as “recipe,” “filler,” and “toxic mix.” In reference to the state of the nation, these phrases suggest an agent who is creating unsafe conditions. After all, someone has to fill, mix and create a recipe. It also describes hundreds of other potential shooters as “waiting in the wings.” This theatrical metaphor resembles a scene scripted, written, directed, and performed by a variety of actors. No one is safe from LaPierre's accusations: everyone, from the media to shareholders, from corporate managers to legislators, are "accomplices" to the harm done to American children. They are “enablers,” who act as “corrupt” “co-conspirators,” who “shock,” “violate,” and hide truths from the public. Implied collusion is present in abundance and fuels conspiracy and paranoia. When working in conjunction with gun metaphors, LaPierre imagines not a broken society, but a society that has been deliberately manipulated by malevolent forces that allow shooters to take center stage. Criticism of these forces requires the public to consider an alternative: the National Rifle Association. . He describes the children and the organization in similar terms, and thus his victimization carries with it a sense of innocence. The contrasts between these and the previous “conspirators” are so extreme as to be painfully obvious. The victims of Sandy Hook are “loved,” “innocent,” “vulnerable,” and “defenseless.” LaPierre uses the same language to describe the NRA and connect the two. He claims the government is “consumed by fear and hatred of the NRA” and has “denied us the right…to protect ourselves.” Legislation is being “imposed” against their will, and he can “imagine the shocking headlines” that unfairly turn the public against the organization. More ironically, LaPierre equates guns with care and reimagines guns as protection. We care about the President, for example, so we protect him with “armed secret service agents.” The same goes for banks, airports, offices, power plants and courts. LaPierre's most egregious suggestion is when he calls for a "security blanket" consisting of armed security at every school. If you care about something, you have to protect it, in this case by surrounding it with weapons. He also says that dedication and courage can be “deployed” just like parachutes carrying supplies. In fact, on the last page he uses this word five times in reference to the organization. Instead of graphic images of weapons, use military language associated with authority, control and security. It re-associates the military and guns, and therefore the NRA, with valor. Another example is the description of the Sandy Hook school principal being forced to “protect” schoolchildren, an antiquated and weak form of protection compared to Adam Lanza's Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle. Compared to such antiquated self-defense, LaPierre's call for armed school security seems logical, even appropriate. He seems to embrace the concept of persuasion by pure repetition: he describes those responsible for this security blanket eight times as qualified and trained professionals, emphasizing that the “good guys” can also carry guns. He calls for a "cordon of protection" around children, creating an evocative image of wall-to-wall troop protection that could