Noem's Travel Ban: Because Military Shootings Require More Bans, Not Fewer Guns
Following a National Guard shooting, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem recommends a new travel ban, effectively suggesting that the solution to domestic violence, even within militarized ranks, is to prevent more foreigners from entering the country. The New York Times dutifully reports this rhetorical pivot as a serious policy consideration. One might wonder if the Governor's attention is
strategically diverted from addressing the actual issues contributing to such incidents, perhaps a more introspective look at firearm policy or military culture. This isn't an isolated incident of misdirection. Politicians, particularly those eyeing higher office, frequently leverage tragic events to push unrelated agendas. It's a classic playbook: when faced with a crisis that demands nuanced
domestic policy, simply pivot to an old favorite like 'travel bans'—a move almost guaranteed to energize a certain base while entirely bypassing the difficult questions. The fact that the 'National Guard' is explicitly mentioned, yet the discussion immediately shifts to 'travel bans,' speaks volumes about the priorities at play. It's almost as if the gun in the Guardsman's hand is less concerning
than the passport of an unseen 'other.'