The tragic school shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis has prompted the usual calls for gun control, which means these incidents will keep happening. Every time leftist anti-gunners make school shootings about gun control, they distract from those putting forth actual solutions that would decrease the number of people who lose their lives in these cases.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has been among several Democratic politicians calling for more gun restrictions after Robert “Robin” Westman opened fire at Annunciation Catholic Church, killing two children and wounding over a dozen more.
During a Wednesday appearance on MSNBC, Frey issued the clarion call for gun restrictions.
“I'm a mayor, and I operate in the reality business. The reality is that we have more guns in America than we have people,” he said. “The reality is that we have these assault rifles that can reel off 30 clips in conjunction with a magazine before the person even needs to reload. The reality is that these guns make their way into cities across America by the trunk load, and it's terrifying. Look, we need an assault weapons ban.”
Jacob Frey wants to ban your guns — but doesn’t have a clue about the guns he wants to ban:
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) August 28, 2025
"I’m in the reality business. The reality is we have these assault rifles that can reel off 30 clips in conjunction with a magazine."
“We need an assault weapons ban nationwide." pic.twitter.com/5Ay8c9rXr4
Westman, a man who identified as a woman, used a pistol, shotgun, and rifle to carry out the attack, according to law enforcement. Yet, many who knew him indicated that he showed no signs that he might commit mass murder.
Westman’s neighbors told Fox News that they never saw any red flags. A man and woman who lived in the same apartment complex described him as a typical young tenant who “didn’t look any different than any other strange person.” Both of these individuals are mental health professionals.
They stated that Westman acted as a normal 20-something — working, ordering fast food, and socializing with friends. “We work in mental health and I never saw anything that would indicate issues,” the woman said.
This is where I would typically ask the question I always ask anti-gunners after a mass shooting: What gun control law would have stopped this shooting?
The question is like kryptonite to these people because they can never come up with an answer. Even the shooter in his manifesto noted that gun control laws do not stop people like him.
So, the only sensible solution for this problem would be to harden schools, a proposal Democrats tend to reject because it does not involve disarming law-abiding gun owners, which is their actual objective.
Several states have passed legislation allocating funding for armed guards, cameras, and other security measures to protect schoolchildren. They recognize that being able to stop a potential shooter before they can victimize children is far more effective than passing useless laws aimed at making people feel more secure without actually making them more secure.
In 2018, a school resource officer at Dixon High School in Illinois stopped at 19-year-old former student who opened fire at students near the gymnasium during a graduation rehearsal. The officer chased the gunman off campus and shot and wounded him. Nobody else was harmed during the incident.
Two school resource officers at Apalachee High School in Georgia stopped a 14-year-old student from carrying out a mass shooting last year. The officers had extensive training in active shooter responses. They quickly confronted the would-be shooter, who had already killed four people. The gunman surrendered, which means he was unable to take more lives.
In 2010, a gunman entered Sullivan Central High School in Tennessee. He took the principal hostage at gunpoint. However, a school resource officer drew her firearm and kept the gunman at bay until backup arrived. Police shot and killed the assailant after he pointed his gun at them. Nobody else was harmed in the encounter.
The question we must ask is: What would have happened in these scenarios if there were no armed personnel on the premises? Many more lives would have been snuffed out. Gun control laws did not stop these individuals — people with guns did.
Over the past five years, there have been many high-profile school shootings which left 70 to 80 people dead. Want to guess how many mass shootings took place at places like city halls, courthouses, and other government facilities?
I could only find four news reports about shootings in these buildings. These didn’t only include mass shootings. A total of four people were left dead in these situations, and they weren’t the result of mass shootings.
There’s a reason for this. These buildings typically have plenty of armed officers inside. Moreover, many have metal detectors to make sure people cannot bring weapons through the entrance. There are cameras all over the place.
To put it simply, we protect our politicians and government officials more than our schoolchildren. This has got to stop.
This is not to claim that heightened security measures will stop every mass shooters. There are never any guarantees. But it is obvious that taking action to stop these shooters before they manage to shoot students is far more effective than passing laws that will be ignored anyway. Unfortunately, since post-school shooting conversations tend to focus on gun control than on security measures, there will be more of these tragedies in the future.
