Right wing ranter Dana Loesch has appointed herself the “Defender of the Sacred Gun.” Immediately following the terrible shootings at Oregon’s Umpqua Community College, she rushed an article into print attacking President Obama (of course, it always comes down to that) and asserting that UCC is a “gun-free zone.” She then posted dozens of tweets making the same claim, and attacking anyone who disputed it.

Here’s that article; it hasn’t been updated since she posted it on October 1: After UCC Tragedy, White House Calls for Stronger Gun Laws | Dana Loesch Radio.

I’m pointing out that it hasn’t been updated because it’s now indisputably clear that the campus was absolutely not a “gun-free zone” at all; this is yet another deceptive right wing attempt to shift the discussion away from doing something about America’s out-of-control gun fetish, and advocate even more guns everywhere by getting rid of real gun-free zones.

In The Oregonian, reporter Betsy Hammond sets the record straight: Umpqua Community College Not a Gun-Free Zone: Oregon Laws Prevent That.

Umpqua Community College, site of a mass shooting Thursday, bans guns, knives longer than 4 inches and other weapons from campus.

But that policy has one big exemption that renders the pastoral 100-acre campus near Roseburg anything but a gun-free zone: Everyone with a concealed firearms license is allowed to bring guns on campus.

That is because a 1989 Oregon law forbids any public body except the Legislature from restricting the rights of concealed weapons permit-holders to bring guns where they wish.

Proponents of gun rights have seized on Thursday’s tragic killing of eight Oregon college students and their writing instructor as evidence that so-called gun-free zones, or places where all guns are banned, are especially dangerous because a gunman plotting a mass killing will know there is no armed person there who can stop him. Proponents of gun restrictions have shot back with their own take on gun-free zones.

The college’s no-guns policy seems to be obvious evidence that the Umpqua campus was such a place. But Oregon gun owners with concealed firearms licenses know those licenses entitle them to carry loaded guns in nearly all public places.

So when can we expect Dana Loesch to issue a retraction and acknowledge these facts?

What? “Never,” you say? Unfortunately, that’s probably right.