Anti-gun organizations will try anything to change public opinion on guns. They normally enjoy a boost in the wake of a mass shooting, but when emotions settle down, people recognize that the solutions being put forth by groups like Giffords and its cohorts aren’t going to have the impact these groups claim.

So what’s left for an anti-gun group to do? Do whatever you can to keep emotions riled up.

Statues depicting people terrified by gun violence represent the latest effort by a gun-control group and its allies to win support for their cause, according to reports.

The statues, created with 3-D printers, are to be “strategically placed in 10 notoriously pro-gun rights districts,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported, while paired with demonstrations led by student organizers.

The targeted locations are in Parkland, Fla.; Las Vegas; Denver; Minneapolis; Irvine, Calif., Milwaukee; Houston; Sarasota, Fla.; Spokane, Wash.; and Philadelphia, according to the website of Giffords Courage, a gun-control group.

The statues were designed with help from Manuel Oliver, an artist who lost his son, Joaquin, 17, in the mass shooting last February at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla.

The statues are part of a nationwide voter registration drive to urge voters to elect candidates who back gun-control measures, the report said.

Of course, this just proves they can’t win with logic and reason and must resort to trying to sway people through emotional appeals.

Contrary to what groups like Giffords like to claim, there’s absolutely no evidence that any of their proposals would have curtailed mass shootings in this country nor the violent crime rate in general. We’ve tried gun control before. It didn’t work. Especially the assault weapon ban.

But that’s logic and reason. Those are the facts.

Giffords and other gun grabbing groups want nothing to do with any of that.

So, instead, they create statues of children hiding under desks, fearful of the armed intruder looking to gun them down.

However, that statue makes me wonder something very different. It makes me wonder how that child would feel if she’d known that someone was willing to allow his teacher to be armed, but groups like Giffords did everything they could to block it. Would a child in that situation feel relieved? Would they be happy that the one adult present in that moment that they could trust was required to be disarmed?

I’d think that at that moment, that fearful child would appreciate Mr. or Mrs. Jones pulling out a pistol to meet the threat and defend their life.

Too bad Giffords isn’t willing to even consider that. I mean, if teachers are oh-so-responsible and should be held up as pinnacles of our society–something I won’t disagree with in most cases–then why can’t they be trusted with a firearm in the school when many states will trust them with one almost everywhere else?

Of course, Giffords doesn’t want people to ask questions like that. It just wants you to look at the statue, feel bad, and then push for policies that violate the constitution and do nothing to protect children.