That’s not quite what this editorial says. Rather, it pushes the tired agenda of criminals-don’t-obey-laws-so-why-regulate-guns with some (typically) intellectu

That’s not quite what this editorial says. Rather, it pushes the tired agenda of criminals-don’t-obey-laws-so-why-regulate-guns with some (typically) intellectually dishonest sophistry, claiming for example that Illinois’s “red flag” law should have caught the shooter when the mechanics of that particular law are about enabling individuals to proactively petition the court to prevent someone from obtaining a gun. And, anyway, they are not anti-intellectuals; indeed the National Review is chock-full of ego-bruised Never Trumpists who proudly (if somewhat more quietly, now) champion their classical educations. Isn’t it doubly damning, then, to see them deploy their abilities in service of deceptive polemic?