The most tiring argument is that its all the Republicans fault that we don't have "common sense gun control". How quickly we forget a Democratic controlled Senate or House couldn't/didn't pass gun control either. If Democrats really believe their gun control ideas would have saved all these lives, shame on them for not passing gun control when they controlled both Houses. Obamacare was more important that preventing 33,000 gun deaths a year? In reality, Democrats can't muster the support amongst their own members and also know their common sense ideas, within the constraints of 2nd Amendment, wouldn't change the situation.
18
"Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children."
You want to know how crazy the (official) American attitude is (has become) over guns? Read the above, and imagine we lived in a country with no 2nd amendment (as virtually every other nation on earth does).
Fundamentally, guns are just another consumer item. But an item we see/hear/speak no evil about...even with 33,000 dead bodies PER YEAR to show for it. We excuse that carnage because of a wilfully misinterpreted piece of text in our Constitution. Any, and I mean ANY, other consumer item with that kind of body count (cars) would garner, at the very least, close regulatory attention.
The fact that we're collectively more in love with the idea of a 'personal right' to weaponry, rather than horrified by the actual, annual, 33,000+ body count that 'love' of a contestable right is costing us is what makes it 'pathological'.
Their last refuge is attempting to 'love' the Constitution while hating the government it brings into being, with their 18th century declarations of a 'guarantor against tyranny!' in our wired, 21st century world.
Our government can't get anything done even when 90% percent of the people WANT it, yet we're supposed to be afraid of a government that WILL do something that nobody wants? Pathological...and schizophrenic.
You want to know how crazy the (official) American attitude is (has become) over guns? Read the above, and imagine we lived in a country with no 2nd amendment (as virtually every other nation on earth does).
Fundamentally, guns are just another consumer item. But an item we see/hear/speak no evil about...even with 33,000 dead bodies PER YEAR to show for it. We excuse that carnage because of a wilfully misinterpreted piece of text in our Constitution. Any, and I mean ANY, other consumer item with that kind of body count (cars) would garner, at the very least, close regulatory attention.
The fact that we're collectively more in love with the idea of a 'personal right' to weaponry, rather than horrified by the actual, annual, 33,000+ body count that 'love' of a contestable right is costing us is what makes it 'pathological'.
Their last refuge is attempting to 'love' the Constitution while hating the government it brings into being, with their 18th century declarations of a 'guarantor against tyranny!' in our wired, 21st century world.
Our government can't get anything done even when 90% percent of the people WANT it, yet we're supposed to be afraid of a government that WILL do something that nobody wants? Pathological...and schizophrenic.
77
We used to think drunk driving accidents and deaths were inevitable, too. And then Mothers Against Drunk Driving took on Congress, the liquor industry, and a complacent and passive public. We CAN make the changes we want.
291
I'm a (new) mother, and my son will never live in a house where there are guns. But that does nothing to protect him from the guns in other people's homes.
It's sad, because I used to think gun control legislation was possible. Now, I feel like one of those silly politicians who say that nothing can be done. Seriously, in today's USA, nothing about guns is going to change. So, more people will die unnecessarily.
It's sad, because I used to think gun control legislation was possible. Now, I feel like one of those silly politicians who say that nothing can be done. Seriously, in today's USA, nothing about guns is going to change. So, more people will die unnecessarily.
13
Guns don't kill people, people kill people which is true but the very availability of guns gives those who have a propensity for violence and the mentally ill an easy and effective way to kill masses of people. People will tell you that in the old West people carried guns. They did except in many towns that did not allow people to do so. Also they had reasons other than killing each other. I know people who have hunting rifles who do not carry them into Walmart but do use them in the game reserve. Hand guns are only for killing people. Most people in the old West did not have hand guns. Guns were expensive so you bought the most useful gun for everything, hunting and defense. Today you are just defending yourself against mentally ill people, very seldom do you have to defend yourself against bandits in today's world. Generally when you hear a noise you call the cops who are better suited to find out if it is a burglar or some of the neighborhood kids. Coming out shooting at a noise could kill your own child.
We have lost our sense of community. Our children are not safe because of some mysterious stranger but from our own fearfulness. Everyone is the enemy even a child carrying Skittles and a pop. We have come a long way from "the only thing to fear is fear itself". The only thing to fear is our own fearfulness and our arming of ourselves. Everyone has become the boogeyman in the closet including ourselves. We are our own worst enemies.
We have lost our sense of community. Our children are not safe because of some mysterious stranger but from our own fearfulness. Everyone is the enemy even a child carrying Skittles and a pop. We have come a long way from "the only thing to fear is fear itself". The only thing to fear is our own fearfulness and our arming of ourselves. Everyone has become the boogeyman in the closet including ourselves. We are our own worst enemies.
40
Both Nancy Lanza and Laurel Harper had adult children residing with them who they knew had serious psychiatric illness, and who they knew were beyond their control (hard as they tried to manage these young men, they were not able to). It is my sincere wish that the families of the Oregon victims will at least sue Laurel Harper in civil court. And at the very least we need legislation which will hold any gun owner who does not PROTECT their firearms from misuse, criminally accountable.
43
Right, so instead of examining our lack of social services or lax gun laws, we can pin this on women who fail to use their "special bond" to properly restrain their mentally ill sons.
This is a new low.
This is a new low.
28
I never said this before, but I'm actually scared to cross the US border knowing almost everybody has a gun somewhere. In the house, in the car or just carrying it around. People are so stressed and tense. The smallest spark can be the end of me.
19
I have nothing but disgust for any adult who does not secure their guns from their underaged children, their emotionally impaired children, and theives and bystanders [this is a callout to security personnel who leave their guns in toilets]. In my opinion, if your gun is used to commit a crime you are at fault for not using appropriate care with your gun. If your gun gets into the hands of someone who should not have your gun, you are at fault. You are not a respectable law-abiding citizen, you are an idiot who should not be allowed to have access to weapons.
39
Please note the following homicide rates per 100,000 people:
Whites: 2.5
Blacks: 19.4
The white homicide rate puts the US 7th among developed countries (still too high) but it's the black homicide rate that is the real outlier. That's where we need to focus our attention.
Source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-time...
Whites: 2.5
Blacks: 19.4
The white homicide rate puts the US 7th among developed countries (still too high) but it's the black homicide rate that is the real outlier. That's where we need to focus our attention.
Source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-time...
10
The eleven year old boy - was he a member of a traditional family? Was he prone to outburst of anger & violence previously? Was he on pharmaceuticals?
And lastly, how is it a shotgun was left accessible?
And lastly, how is it a shotgun was left accessible?
12
According to the NRA, mental illness is to blame rather than guns. Well, in that case, we should test all parents with mentally ill children should undergo complete testing for mental illness before they can acquire guns. NRA should'nt have problems with that, right?
16
Anyone who calls for a ban on "assault weapons" is either ignorant or dishonest. Those are the only two options.
2
The mothers of both Lanza and Harper Mercer deserve a huge chunck of the blame - neither young man had the skills to land a job that would have allowed them to buy the guns/ammo/car/gas required to commit mass murder!
21
There has been much talk about tightening gun laws...Absolutely needed! But we also desperately need a cultural change in our ideas around guns. Major shifts in thinking about important issues have happened many times in American history. (Examples: The abolition movement helped make slavery unacceptable to many, the suffrage movement helped people see that women deserve rights too, and recently the gay rights movement has made marriage the law of the land.) It needs to become very uncool to have a gun and totally socially unacceptable to allow anyone remotely unstable near guns. We need to glorify the rights of living people to continue living as a higher value than allowing all people, no matter how unsuitable, to possess guns. Laws AND attitudes have to change.
28
I would change Egan’s sentence – “Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children,” to – “Only a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about parents would remain blind forever to their influence on children, the future shooters.” Parenting is probably our most enduring chauvinism: Our effect on our children extends from wonderful to corrosive and insane; most of it is hidden; most of it is acceptable because of the Gold Seal of “parent.”
7
It won't change. The NRA and their gun obsessed believers are almost there. The president inadvertently signaled their victory. These mass shootings are becoming routine. That means they move to the back pages of the news media, barely worth a mention. We will hear about the odds we will be shot, much like the odds we'll die in a car crash or of obesity. We looked for a tipping point when we'd be fed up, sickened, and ready to enact sensible gun regulation. Instead we are approaching an entirely different tipping point, where ennui and apathy get the upper hand, and we simply accept that this is the way things are.
We'll know the awful day has arrived when being armed is once and for all seen as our only defense.
We're almost there.
We'll know the awful day has arrived when being armed is once and for all seen as our only defense.
We're almost there.
26
Like Syrians, Americans are clueless to the suction of the vortex of political violence.
7
You don't need guns to protect against gun culture. You need guns to protect yourself against popular culture...the culture of violence on TV, glorification of death and violence, nihilism and most of all the culture of narcissism. Ben Carson did not "imply" that the nine victims were to blame. He stated what he would aspire to do. The left muddies the statistics on gun crime to reconcile gun violence with its narrative. ITs a lie.
Here is what makes me sick. I am sick of hearing people, like the president of the college who interfered with the legislatively granted right of students to defend themselves by forbidding guns in the schools policies, talk about these tragedies in terms of "bringing us all together". I don't want to get together to go to more funerals. What nonsense...albeit frequently repeated. Deal with the problem. Stop broadcasting schools as safe zones. THe argument that everyone needs to carry a gun is a straw man. It is sufficient if the perp knows that someone may be armed. The school could require faculty and students who carry to register with the school, flag their schedules so the administration knows at any given time who on campus is armed. I know many people who have concealed carry permits that hardly ever actually carry one, but the crooks don't know that. It is the possibility of being contested that counts. It counts in politics, foreign affairs and economics, but this president wouldn't know anything about any of those, either.
Here is what makes me sick. I am sick of hearing people, like the president of the college who interfered with the legislatively granted right of students to defend themselves by forbidding guns in the schools policies, talk about these tragedies in terms of "bringing us all together". I don't want to get together to go to more funerals. What nonsense...albeit frequently repeated. Deal with the problem. Stop broadcasting schools as safe zones. THe argument that everyone needs to carry a gun is a straw man. It is sufficient if the perp knows that someone may be armed. The school could require faculty and students who carry to register with the school, flag their schedules so the administration knows at any given time who on campus is armed. I know many people who have concealed carry permits that hardly ever actually carry one, but the crooks don't know that. It is the possibility of being contested that counts. It counts in politics, foreign affairs and economics, but this president wouldn't know anything about any of those, either.
6
In your scenario we only know which gunner will be the perp when he starts shooting.
19
When, in the context of a discussion on the shooting, you talk derisively about how you wouldn't "just" stand there, I think it's fair to say that you are implying that the people who did just stand there wer foolish or cowardly. That may not be your *intention*, but language often has a way of spilling out and revealing what you truly mean rather than what you want to be heard saying.
As for your angry, partisan claims about statistics, there's one very simple and undeniable fact that the whole world knows: these shootings happen far less in other countries, even when you control the numbers for relevant differences. The US is up there with Mexico and Argentina, four places behind Brazil.
If you can't see this, how can you be part of a rational, goal-oriented debate that does not devolve to slogans and dogma?
As for your angry, partisan claims about statistics, there's one very simple and undeniable fact that the whole world knows: these shootings happen far less in other countries, even when you control the numbers for relevant differences. The US is up there with Mexico and Argentina, four places behind Brazil.
If you can't see this, how can you be part of a rational, goal-oriented debate that does not devolve to slogans and dogma?
18
Wow, the idea that mass murderers would register with the school is ridiculous. People bent on killing don't follow rules.
11
Here's the real pathology in America today. It takes outrageous comments by a loony tune politician like Ben Carson for even a modicum of discussion about the merits of practically non existent gun laws. Forget the shootings, whether of the "mass" variety or the mundane shootings of one kid by another. They are too commonplace to raise eyebrows in the general public. Right now, there is a serious epidemic we haven't woken up to, one whose contagion is evident in the 3 college shootings in the space of less than ten days. The US has nothing to be proud of with this manic obsession with gun rights over the real threat to our schools, playgrounds, cinemas, malls, and other public places. Australia swiftly learned its lesson by putting in place strict gun laws which the result that these mass shootings are a virtual non-occurrence now in Australia. The gun rights nuts love to say Australia has less First Amendment style freedom than the USA -- even though this is absolutely untrue (Australians and many other saner rich countries enjoy ALL the freedoms of America and arguably more because of safety from the plague of mass gun violence). Americans are going to lose academic freedom in gun-infested campuses, social freedoms in malls and other public places, if we let this pathology and contagion continue. Professors have started voting with their feet, migrating to Australia. Others will follow.
45
The second amendment:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
This is clear to me, meaning that the well regulated militia can bear arms, none other.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
This is clear to me, meaning that the well regulated militia can bear arms, none other.
47
Except for the right of the people part.
2
Unfortunately for you, the Supreme Court disagrees with you, and that really is the end of the discussion.
6
the word gun does not appear in the second amendment or anywhere in the constitution. the document refers to arms and if accepted as the NRA suggests there can be no limits.
yet the right to bear arms would include the right to a stinger missle, a nuke or a fighter jet. but we are apart enough to impose limits and now if the time to expand reasonable limits that improve safety while respecting the right of individuals to hunt, to sporting, even to safety. a better balance can be found and the majority of people want just that. the NRA and their wholely owned subside army, the national Republican Party, must be backed away so smart people and especially smart gun owners can help us find a safer way to live with our right to bear arms
yet the right to bear arms would include the right to a stinger missle, a nuke or a fighter jet. but we are apart enough to impose limits and now if the time to expand reasonable limits that improve safety while respecting the right of individuals to hunt, to sporting, even to safety. a better balance can be found and the majority of people want just that. the NRA and their wholely owned subside army, the national Republican Party, must be backed away so smart people and especially smart gun owners can help us find a safer way to live with our right to bear arms
27
Seriously? It's the mother's fault? Sorry, but this argument has been bankrupt for a l-o-n-g time.
13
Ok, you're right. Parents fault then.
2
Any parent who buys guns for their mentally ill child is at fault.
The argument that it is never the parents fault for the abhorrent behavior of their children is what has been bankrupt for a long time.
The only people who disagree with this are the ones who were terrible parents.
The argument that it is never the parents fault for the abhorrent behavior of their children is what has been bankrupt for a long time.
The only people who disagree with this are the ones who were terrible parents.
16
How unfortunate that the old, tired, sexist, "blame the mother" mindset is injected into this serious issue. BOTH parents bear some responsibility as does the larger community/society---not to mention that more often it is the father who bonds with the son through guns and hunting.
It would be more accurate to say that the machismo, paternalistic culture in this society is largely to blame (not the mothers) for the violence.
It would be more accurate to say that the machismo, paternalistic culture in this society is largely to blame (not the mothers) for the violence.
5
So if you think that if you repackage the old anti-Constitution, anti-Bill of Rights tripe in fresh packaging from mom, you'll have better luck? Didn't they try that after Newtown, with the parents working as unregistered lobbyists for passage of legislation, and seeking to lobby senators not their own?
1
What part of "well regulated militia" do you not understand?
1
Any American citizen has every right to lobby ANY politician, any time they like, on any subject they wish.
You seem to be confusing paid professional lobbyists, who must obey certain laws and (precious few) restrictions on lobbying.
You seem to be confusing paid professional lobbyists, who must obey certain laws and (precious few) restrictions on lobbying.
Maybe this is just social darwinsim at work and americans are not going to make it as a species.
10
Hilarious how adherents to biological evolution tremble to embrace societal evolution using the same fanciful template!
Carson’s words were much more visceral than Bush’s, but they made exactly the same point. Senseless killings are devastating, but regulating guns to make them more uncommon is worse. In the nakedest political sense, this kind of unvarnished expression of the Republican/Tea Party’s gun rights calculus is more valuable than taking pot shots at Jeb Bush for a sentiment he almost certainly doesn’t hold.
Gun control has become a polarizing concept in recent years, but the notion that maintaining an armed society should entail certain basic tradeoffs has not. Comments like Bush’s and Carson’s underscore the extent to which the Republican/Tea Party rejects all of those tradeoffs.
Though the murder rate is much lower today than it was 15 years ago, it’s still high enough to be a national embarrassment, and that’s a direct consequence of our unwillingness to regulate guns. Even the modest reforms that fell to a Republican/Tea Party-led filibuster after the Newtown massacre, like extending background check requirements to private sales, or similar proposals, such as setting a federal floor for the amount of training required to purchase a firearm in every state, would put a dent in the death toll.
Gun control supporters can’t wish away the gun lobby, but they can dramatize gun violence in a way that brings the implacability of gun rights absolutists into full view. Every American ought to be confronted with and shown images of murdered children at Sandy Hook and gun victims.
Gun control has become a polarizing concept in recent years, but the notion that maintaining an armed society should entail certain basic tradeoffs has not. Comments like Bush’s and Carson’s underscore the extent to which the Republican/Tea Party rejects all of those tradeoffs.
Though the murder rate is much lower today than it was 15 years ago, it’s still high enough to be a national embarrassment, and that’s a direct consequence of our unwillingness to regulate guns. Even the modest reforms that fell to a Republican/Tea Party-led filibuster after the Newtown massacre, like extending background check requirements to private sales, or similar proposals, such as setting a federal floor for the amount of training required to purchase a firearm in every state, would put a dent in the death toll.
Gun control supporters can’t wish away the gun lobby, but they can dramatize gun violence in a way that brings the implacability of gun rights absolutists into full view. Every American ought to be confronted with and shown images of murdered children at Sandy Hook and gun victims.
19
"Every American ought to be confronted with and shown images of murdered children at Sandy Hook and gun victims." Yes
10
For second amendment fetishists and constitutional originalists who consistently misinterpret this amendment: you can possess all the single shot ball and powder weapons you like. Anything else was not foreseen by the founders and so are subject to regulations including bans.
31
We needn't resort to satirically strict constructionism to crack down on guns. We already accept certain limits on speech despite the First Amendment. We should just apply the same reasoning to the Second. Claiming it is absolute is kind of an aberration. No one would accept that idea that we can bear any type of arm. The pro-gun wing of Congress is just too cowardly to find out where the line is.
13
This frivolous argument again? By your standard, the 1st Amendment doesn't protect speech on TV or the Internet, as it wasn't foreseeable by the founders. And the 14th Amendment certainly doesn't protect a form of "marriage" that didn't exist when it was written.
1
Even the most recent pro-gun decision by the Supreme Court, no less than Justice Scalia clearly stated that their decision did NOT bar individual states from issuing reasonable restrictions and requirements for gun ownership, as no Constitutional right is unlimited and without restrictions...including the 2nd Amendment!
12
I am fortunate to live in a state with strict gun control laws. Yet, there are still countless and senseless murders occurring daily in the greater NYC metro area. Statistics show that a large percentage of killings are the result of guns obtained illegally. We have to find a way to limit the illegal sale of guns. It would be nice if we could take some of the guns out of the hands of young people in the cities.
I also feel that we have to start making parents aware of their responsibilities and to hold them accountable to some degree for their children's crimes. People are quick to point out that Adam Lanza was home schooled by his mother who owned many guns. People seldomly recognize that Adam's father hadn't lived with his family for quite some time. Possibly, his father could have balanced out his wife's extreme viewpoints.
Most importantly, communities need to surround isolated families with support whether it's through churches, schools, local governments, etc. We all need to be more sensitive about and recognize those families that don't have the resources or experience to deal with their children's problems and help them.
The Sandy Hook Promise organization in Newtown, CT offers programs for communities to use to discuss guns, violence and how to avoid tragedy.
It's time to act.
I also feel that we have to start making parents aware of their responsibilities and to hold them accountable to some degree for their children's crimes. People are quick to point out that Adam Lanza was home schooled by his mother who owned many guns. People seldomly recognize that Adam's father hadn't lived with his family for quite some time. Possibly, his father could have balanced out his wife's extreme viewpoints.
Most importantly, communities need to surround isolated families with support whether it's through churches, schools, local governments, etc. We all need to be more sensitive about and recognize those families that don't have the resources or experience to deal with their children's problems and help them.
The Sandy Hook Promise organization in Newtown, CT offers programs for communities to use to discuss guns, violence and how to avoid tragedy.
It's time to act.
5
To deal with the problem of illegal guns, you first must deal with the drug trade that funds the illegal gun market. Let's try an experiment. Legalize all illicit drugs and make them available dirt cheap to users such that no crimes are committed to pay for drugs. Take away the market for illegal drugs, and there will no longer be a need for guns to defend that market. The illegal gun market will then dry up for all practical purposes.
Thank God for you, Mr. Egan! Keep on with that old song, 'Tell it like it is!' Maybe someday our country will come out of the evil fog in which it is shrouded.
4
If an 11 years old on purposely kills an 8 years old with a gun , means that NRA's mission is accomplished after all. NRA has captured hearts and minds of people.
When it is over , it is over.
Gun control lost.
When it is over , it is over.
Gun control lost.
6
Nope. According to the CDC, it's the 100,000 Americans killed and wounded each year who lost, along with their families, their colleagues, their neighbors, taxpayers, our political system, our humanity. Oh, and very likely the parents of the 11 year old boy once they're sued in civil court, in addition to any criminal indictments they face. The lives of all concerned will never be the same. Not a video game, no high or low score, just tragically wasted lives and trauma.
My mother taught me how to sew, which was a good chance to bond as well as a useful skill. Now, these mothers have their hands full and must know it—and probably think they’re doing a pretty good job under the circumstances, but I still recommend sewing.
3
The mother is to blame? Again? Haven't we progressed beyond Freud, in which mother attachment was the root of all insanity and violence? This article is incredibly misogynistic, and a continuation of the belief that staying home and forgoing a career to raise children is not prized or respected. In Sunday's NYT Book Review of Anne-Marie Slaughters book "Unfinished Business", she finally realized that women who stay home to raise children are looked upon as inferior, stupid, or sentimental. Until a mother's decision to raise her children is considered as intelligent and worthy as Steve Jobs or Carly Fiorina, and new mothers have access to instruction on how to parent (instead of having to figure it out alone, and by trial and error), don't blame the mothers.
9
Well, it's obvious that the two mothers who chose to surround their mentally ill sons with heavy weapons and encouraged their interest in such things exercised (criminally) negligent judgment. But they needn't have been mothers. Any parent, mother or father, with half a brain should have known better.
I have no idea how you completely missed the point of this article.
I think you're taking arms over the wrong cause and are provoked without basis. You would no sooner serve your child a non-organic chicken tender, so why not so no to guns? It's your job.
Make the parents criminally responsible for what they created.
5
The Supreme Court decision to uphold everyone's right to bear arms may well be the single most self destructive judicial act in the history of America.
14
That right was passed in the UK in 1689 then passed down to descendant countries of English common law, but did not survive the American Revolution. But blades or blunderbusses, not the mass killing weapons of to-day were being discussed, so other places with that that right had no problem regulating the types of weapons. When recovered, 80% of all guns used in crime in the Toronto area can be traced to the US, smuggled in for resale a great markups or rented out on an ad hoc basis with Georgia the no. 1 source. In 2011, 10 million guns (legal or otherwise) in the hands of about 33 million folks killed 158 people and that was mostly all gang and drug related.
1
First, thank you for helping to establish our democracy some 240 years ago.
Second, you are welcome for us helping your country some 70 years ago.
Finally, gun ownership is not the problem. Responsible gun ownership is the problem.
Second, you are welcome for us helping your country some 70 years ago.
Finally, gun ownership is not the problem. Responsible gun ownership is the problem.
"...Robert F. Kennedy, who was in Roseburg 47 year ago, warning about violent people buying guns through the mail."
RFK was roundly and loudly booed for his concerns and ideas about gun control in Roseburg in 1968. Were he to reprise his Roseburg speech today, he would be roundly and loudly booed in Roseburg and most of rural America...
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
And more people are shot to death.
RFK was roundly and loudly booed for his concerns and ideas about gun control in Roseburg in 1968. Were he to reprise his Roseburg speech today, he would be roundly and loudly booed in Roseburg and most of rural America...
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
And more people are shot to death.
13
I see. Mothers cause gun deaths. I guess when you come down to, women cause all criminal behavior by giving birth to criminals.
Has it ever struck anyone trying to determine these causes that the gun is the center of the issue? TAKE AWAY the guns and gun deaths go away. Others may not but for sure gun deaths will. Not addressing that is like deciding that small pox vaccinations are pointless because they don't prevent death from other causes.
Has it ever struck anyone trying to determine these causes that the gun is the center of the issue? TAKE AWAY the guns and gun deaths go away. Others may not but for sure gun deaths will. Not addressing that is like deciding that small pox vaccinations are pointless because they don't prevent death from other causes.
7
You missed the point about mothers. Of course a mother cannot foresee everything and is not always responsible for their child's criminal behavior. Egan was not saying that. He was saying that mothers (and the rest of us) do not need to ADD to the problem, encourage it, enable it. In some cases such as those mentioned it could easily be forecast as a problem. A responsible person would not offer guns and encourage a gun obsession to a child who is not capable of judgment. Frankly, I would say that applies to every child. Judgment is not formed for a very long time -- and even if the average age is 25, we all know many people beyond that age who don't get it -ever.
8
it was really careful and thoughtful article!
I was really enjoying to read it! thanks!
I was really enjoying to read it! thanks!
3
It will require more than a sudden,anguished outpouring of grief after each mass killing to put an end to the carnage.
It will require a long, conntinuous, coordinated effort on the part of the notoriously short-attention-spanned American voter to get rid of the ****** in Congress who take money from the gun lobby to avoid passing effective background check legislation as well as outlawing assault weapons.
Ask your friends how many know who is their Congress-criiter or Senator. You will be shocked.
The attitude is "let someone else do it" or even worse "I don't vote". So those who profit from gun sales -- a major reason, BTW, why the gun lovers keep hiding behind the 2nd Amendment.
I yield to no one in my contempt for those thugs who are supposed to be making laws for our whole society, but are actually working for Our Corporate Masters. At least let's try to research positions
and funding for candidates instead of blindly voting for whomever tells the biggest lies while brain-washing you with trigger words like "freedom" "liberty", and, of course, the 2nd Amendment.
It will take, time, education, and sustained effort. Is our democracy worth it?
It will require a long, conntinuous, coordinated effort on the part of the notoriously short-attention-spanned American voter to get rid of the ****** in Congress who take money from the gun lobby to avoid passing effective background check legislation as well as outlawing assault weapons.
Ask your friends how many know who is their Congress-criiter or Senator. You will be shocked.
The attitude is "let someone else do it" or even worse "I don't vote". So those who profit from gun sales -- a major reason, BTW, why the gun lovers keep hiding behind the 2nd Amendment.
I yield to no one in my contempt for those thugs who are supposed to be making laws for our whole society, but are actually working for Our Corporate Masters. At least let's try to research positions
and funding for candidates instead of blindly voting for whomever tells the biggest lies while brain-washing you with trigger words like "freedom" "liberty", and, of course, the 2nd Amendment.
It will take, time, education, and sustained effort. Is our democracy worth it?
14
"Freedom" & "liberty" are more than "trigger" words.
@Hypatia - As both you and the author of the article use the term "assault weapon(s)," would you please define what they are? At present, there is no consistent definition available, other than "black, scary-looking, and similar in appearance to a military firearm currently in use."
Once we all get with the same definition, only then can informed discourse among intelligent people proceed on the topic.
De Oppresso Liber
Once we all get with the same definition, only then can informed discourse among intelligent people proceed on the topic.
De Oppresso Liber
Sexist editorial littered with ignorance.
8
Guns are also used by criminals, the mafia, the Mexican Mafia, drug cartels, drug traffickers, street gangs, the "hell angel's" and other motorcycle gangs, rapists, aryan nation racist groups, skinhead racist groups, KKK, neo nazi groups, and other criminal groups. These criminals will always have weapons legally or illegally.
Possible solution: every year psychologically test, and re-test all school children from 1st grade till they reach high school to find those with the propensity to commit maniacal mass murders. Some of your 5-6 yr old school children of today will be your James Holmes or Adam Lanza of tomorrow.
Possible solution: have school teachers carry guns, a bad idea. Why? The weapon would need to be in a holster at the side of the teacher for quick access (like police and soldiers). If the teacher has to hide a gun in a closet then in an immediate crisis and need, the gun will be of no use to the teacher. And God forbid if one of the kids gets a hold of a loaded gun in the classroom.
Keep in mind that we can not cover every contingency in schools or anywhere else. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right? Homicidal maniacs will always find a weapon, be that a gun, a knife, a bomb, an airplane, biological, chemical, or whatever.
Possible solution: every year psychologically test, and re-test all school children from 1st grade till they reach high school to find those with the propensity to commit maniacal mass murders. Some of your 5-6 yr old school children of today will be your James Holmes or Adam Lanza of tomorrow.
Possible solution: have school teachers carry guns, a bad idea. Why? The weapon would need to be in a holster at the side of the teacher for quick access (like police and soldiers). If the teacher has to hide a gun in a closet then in an immediate crisis and need, the gun will be of no use to the teacher. And God forbid if one of the kids gets a hold of a loaded gun in the classroom.
Keep in mind that we can not cover every contingency in schools or anywhere else. A perfect example are terrorists. After 9/11 all airports, passengers, and luggage are searched, the pilots cabin is locked, and Osama Bin Laden is dead. This means no more terrorists attacks, right? Homicidal maniacs will always find a weapon, be that a gun, a knife, a bomb, an airplane, biological, chemical, or whatever.
2
Trump, Bush, Carson - Republicans all - think we are a nation of "Can't Do." When did we get to be this way, when did we decide that the nation of the Manhattan Project was the nation that can't fix its bridges or mend its roads - let alone curb the worst gun violence in the industrialized world? I suggest that this is the result of years of pandering only to Big Business and the Uber-Rich and forgetting the needs of the rest of the nation. Both parties have played a coward's part, but one party has also forgotten that his is OUR country, and it CAN DO!
15
Guns make for "American exceptionalism." Aren't we all so happy that we are so different and stand out from other countries that do not have to deal with mass killing via gun violence and " more than 33,000 deaths by gunfire every year"?
14
As if moms everywhere don't have enough to do. Yeah let's get 'the women' to mop up all of these horrible gun issues. C'mon it takes ALL of us. It's like asking all the moms to do all of the childcare, housework, PTA, scouting, shopping, taxi'ing, work full time, etc. Wait, already happening.
Grown adult men/children are their own persons. As messed up as some parents can be most of us do not grow up to become mass shooters of innocent people. Yeah, let's blame the moms. Good grief.
Grown adult men/children are their own persons. As messed up as some parents can be most of us do not grow up to become mass shooters of innocent people. Yeah, let's blame the moms. Good grief.
106
Any mother who buys her mentally ill child a gun is to blame.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
5
Oh please, this is not a gender issue. The shooter in Oregon and the shooter in Sandy Hook both lived with their mothers. If they had lived with their fathers, the issue would be with the fathers. the point is simple: If your child or adult child is mentally ill and spends time in your home, you shouldn't encourage them to use guns or make guns available to them. Both of these mothers knew their sons had serious illnesses and both encouraged gun use. Furthermore, if you have children and guns in your home, you should have the guns locked away. and, if you can't handle the responsibility, you shouldn't be a mother or father.
119
A very moving article, but it does not capture the larger culpability. Fom a recent NYT article the Roseburg, Ore. community has a such a distrust of its government and outsiders that it is buying more guns, and insulting the president to the point that the city had to formally state that the president is invited and will be treated respectfully. Is it not likely that this environment of distrust and hatred can push a well armed disturbed teenager into using his weapons for the purpose they were designed.
13
It is more likely that a disturbed teenager would not be well-armed if his parents were responsible gun owners.
What's the big deal about background checks for gun-toters? Checking into the psyches of the many weird people is impossible. With firearms filling closets and playrooms and shelves and drawers - in other words filling up spaces in countless homes across the country, why bother to reason with gun fanatics when simple hopes for change are laughable to them? Surely we know all the answers by now. The NRA knows that gullible people are beholden to its lobbies, and their leaders can walk all over the poor souls. Politicians, for instance, are very much aware of the "bow-down-to-us-or-lose" threats that are so much a part of the association's DNA. To the aggrandized person in public office, a looming possibility of losing one's standing in governments must be attended to. The slaughter of innocents temporarily become a minor nuisance to those wielding power, and one must begin again to drum up excuses for the perpetual numbers of massacres - or else!
Background checks are like a drop of antibacterial detergent in a stagnant lake. Any criminal with a known psychopathic past just has to be wide-eyed enough about firearms to get through the faded, distorted-by-design red tape to purchase big, powerful firearms. Besides, most owners of arsenals are not necessarily mentally retarded; they just have undeveloped character with low IQ's and dreams of being John Wayne - or Al Capone - playing with metal and explosives that go boom.
Background checks are like a drop of antibacterial detergent in a stagnant lake. Any criminal with a known psychopathic past just has to be wide-eyed enough about firearms to get through the faded, distorted-by-design red tape to purchase big, powerful firearms. Besides, most owners of arsenals are not necessarily mentally retarded; they just have undeveloped character with low IQ's and dreams of being John Wayne - or Al Capone - playing with metal and explosives that go boom.
Timothy is letting the Democrats off too easy. It's true the NRA is in the vast majority of Republicans shorts, but it's also true they are in a lot of Democrats shorts as well. For example, Senators Bernie Sanders, and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reed. At least former President HW Bush had the good sense and courage to publicly resign from the NRA.
4
Another verbal attack on the Black Dr. Carson and not one peep about it being racist. Just more commenters piling on. Yeah, yeah, I know. This is different. Uh huh.
2
I don't own a gun, but I live in a town where they are very common. No pediatrician has ever talked to me about basic gun safety (although they did warn me about kids eating Christmas ornaments!). The schools never talk to the kids about what to do if they find a gun, and they have never sent home a reminder for parents to talk to our kids about it. I'm sure the doctors and schools are afraid of backlash, but it's ridiculous that they can't even remind parents not to leave guns where kids can get them.
9
In the great state of Flori-duh, doctors are prohibited by law from discussing guns in the home with their patients and families.
Carson was not alone. Last weekend, Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina perpetuated that lie that the Umpqua Community College killing occured because it was a gun-free zone. No one dared challenge them on this issue.
Another lie that goes unchallenged is that these shootings occur because of strict gun regulation. In fact, most of them are happening in very gun-friendly states and/or in communities where firearms are a recreational sport (Newtown).
Another lie that goes unchallenged is that these shootings occur because of strict gun regulation. In fact, most of them are happening in very gun-friendly states and/or in communities where firearms are a recreational sport (Newtown).
7
It is very confusing to me. The GOP family values voters (I'm playing dumb here because this group obviously does not exist), aren't standing up and demanding the right of their families to be safe. The rights of their children to go to school without fear of gun deaths on their campus(s).
Where are they? Where are they? Are there no Republicans that are sick to death of the carnage? Are there no leaders of that party that have an ounce of common sense?
Where are they? Where are they? Are there no Republicans that are sick to death of the carnage? Are there no leaders of that party that have an ounce of common sense?
14
Nope... they dont exist... this kind of stuff is just not their problem... not a single republican that i know seems able to criticize their own party or to engage in chatter-over-beers. A far cry from the thoughtful new england republicans of 30 years ago that i spent a lot of time with - chatting-over-beers.
come to think of it they are all dems now...
The reps of today are all about shouting and insults and totally dont like to listen. so i dont bother.
come to think of it they are all dems now...
The reps of today are all about shouting and insults and totally dont like to listen. so i dont bother.
3
Whenever a man does something horrible, it takes about 10 seconds for our misogynistic society to find a woman to blame for his actions. This is deeply offensive on so many levels. I don't know why I'm surprised the NY Times publishes garbage like this anymore.
3
I was shocked when a million mothers did not rise up and March on Washington after those little children were gun down in their classrooms.
Your country is doomed.
Your country is doomed.
7
"We should look, instead, to the mothers of America."
When do "dads" of America get held accountable?
Everyone should be accountable, including the NYT, which placed an article about Elvis Costello top center and the news about this morning's school shooting in Arizona column inches below--in a place where most busy readers don't get to.
When do "dads" of America get held accountable?
Everyone should be accountable, including the NYT, which placed an article about Elvis Costello top center and the news about this morning's school shooting in Arizona column inches below--in a place where most busy readers don't get to.
3
Never forget there is big business behind unlimited, unrestricted gun sales. The gun and ammo manufacturers, through the NRA, keep the Second Amendment fires burning day and night because they are selling product day and night. Ka-chiiing! Guns are like crack cocaine to some sectors of the public. Don't take my drugs!
2
Would it be possible to get the 90% who want stricter control to vote???
2
While we are just reading Egan's column, next mass shooting already took place in Arizona.
You cannot even read one column between mass shootings, that fast.
You cannot even read one column between mass shootings, that fast.
6
Perhaps one small step to take, not the whole solution, is to treat guns as a public hazard requiring insurance? I know in some enlightened places, an owner of a pit bull or other breeds with a reputation for maulings is required to pay insurance before that dog can be kept. How about a ruinously high premium for anyone who wants to keep an assault weapon on the premises? A smaller, but still very large premium for *each* smaller gun? (First payment payable at time of gun purchase and must be collected by the gun dealer.) Make it expensive to maintain an arsenal, and illegal to maintain an uninsured arsenal. (At the very least, maybe the insurance companies could put their lobbyists on this one, since they'd gain?)
Second: how about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his gun and do damage? Who owned that shotgun that the 12 year-old used to shoot the 8 year-old? That person belongs in jail, with a sentence commensurate with the horror of that death.
Second: how about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his gun and do damage? Who owned that shotgun that the 12 year-old used to shoot the 8 year-old? That person belongs in jail, with a sentence commensurate with the horror of that death.
9
PNRN - "How about a ruinously high premium for anyone who wants to keep an assault weapon on the premises? A smaller, but still very large premium for *each* smaller gun?"
So you want only the rich to be able to afford their own protection?
"Second: how about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his gun and do damage?"
How about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his car and do damage? Does that sound about right as well?
So you want only the rich to be able to afford their own protection?
"Second: how about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his gun and do damage?"
How about jail terms for any parent whose negligence allows his/her child to lay hands on his car and do damage? Does that sound about right as well?
I propose the following. Citizens for common-sense gun rules (rigorous check ups on people before they are allowed to buy guns; 90-day waiting period for these check-ups; a limit on the number and type of weapons and ammo that can be bought to hunt or for self-defence) should organise rallies in front of gun shows and ask all citizens who want to stop this carnage to bring their weapons to the rallies, and such weapons will be destroyed. The gun laws in the USA are the sign of un uncivilised country! We have our two sons in US Universities, but we are seriously considering whether we should withdraw them. It has simply become too dangerous. Increasingly, international students may not want to join American Universities, because considered too dangerous. Down the line, this will diminish the quality of American Universities. The number of weapons circulating in the USA must be reduced and common-sense gun laws, with rational restrictions, must be applied, if the country is to survive beyond a state of civil war!
3
lathebiosas - "(rigorous check ups on people before they are allowed to buy guns; 90-day waiting period for these check-ups; a limit on the number and type of weapons and ammo that can be bought to hunt or for self-defence)"
I agree with the first two proposals, a rigorous check-up and a 90 day waiting period. This may actually prevent someone who shouldn't have guns legally from getting them legally. But why then limit a person who has passed a "check-up" and waited 90 days to
"the number and type of weapons and ammo that can be bought to hunt or for self-defence)" That sounds like sheer spite and will do nothing to make society safer. It's the proposal of very stupid laws like that that turn honest, legal gun owners against the anti-gun zealots.
I agree with the first two proposals, a rigorous check-up and a 90 day waiting period. This may actually prevent someone who shouldn't have guns legally from getting them legally. But why then limit a person who has passed a "check-up" and waited 90 days to
"the number and type of weapons and ammo that can be bought to hunt or for self-defence)" That sounds like sheer spite and will do nothing to make society safer. It's the proposal of very stupid laws like that that turn honest, legal gun owners against the anti-gun zealots.
Then I guess all European countries and Canada, and Australia, New Zealand, etc... are inhabited by anti-gun zealots...But that serves us very well, because we have VERY strict gun laws, VERY few guns circulating in the population, and one CANNOT buy guns at the supermarket (an appalling option in the USA), hence the number of people who are killed by guns in relation to population number is much lower than in the US. If one just compares the statistics between the US and Canada, a person has a MUCH higher probability of getting killed by guns in the US than in Canada (I think it is 7 times higher in the USA). These are data, not fabrications by zealots. Many countries in the world keep their citizens much safer than in the USA by using stricter gun laws. The mass killing caused Breivik in Norway a few years ago were a one-off exception, unlike in the USA, where these mass shootings happen every week!! When will gun lovers and NRA supporters start to feel that they have blood on their conscience? And by the way, the mothers of several of these mass killers had tons of weapons in their home house, for gosh sake! And they were strong gun supporters who went to shooting ranges with their sons! It's crazy!!! So, their deranged sons grew up in a culture of guns, and had plenty of guns readily available in the house when they wanted to use them to kill!!! Anybody who does not support reducing the number of guns in the USA has a ton of blood on his or her conscience.
1
I wonder if a spree shooter taking out half the Republican House would change the gun culture's tune? What on earth would? Certainly not a roomful of dead six-year-olds.
12
I'd heard Carson's remark blaming the victims for not rushing the gunman but not the outrageous statement that "absolutist gun rights are more important than human lives." The Onion headline quoted in the column really says it all, but in a rather tepid way. Carson's only the worst crackpot among the Republican candidates on this issue; they're all guilty of preserving America's lunatic culture of gun violence.
6
Expecting law enforcement to identify "dangerous" gun buyers, when we can't even keep track of 20,000,000 illegal aliens, is pretty unreasonable. And calling Ben Carson a "crackpot" stinks of racism. Carson in no way implied the victims were to blame. Rather, he suggested what he might have done in a similar situation, similar to what happened on Flight 93 on 9/11. We don't give up our rights, just because some people abuse them. If that were the case, the First Amendment would have been negated long ago. And with it, the NY Times....
1
Not to belittle the events in any way, but it is unfortunate that mass killings grab the headlines while most other gun deaths — 33,000 per year according to this article — aren't in the news at all. Gun advocates may actually have a point when they say that laws will not prevent an individual somewhere in the country from committing an atrocious act, but such laws can definitely reduce that 33,000 per year figure. Just look at every other developed country in the world. Especially, look at Australia. The number of gun deaths in America is a national disgrace. And how does the NRA think we can solve this problem? By having more people own guns, of course. And own them without any licensing or regulation. This is insane!
3
Gosh, you've already missed the boat on 'the latest' shooting even to make the front page of the Times. Another one dead, 3 injured at a college in Flagstaff, AZ.
2
The United States has more guns per capita than any country in the world, something like 100-120 guns per 100 people. Its per-capita murder rate puts it at #111 out of 218 nations reporting murder statistics with under 4.7 murders per 100,000. Socialist Honduras with strict gun-control laws ranks #1 with 57 murders per 100,000. Almost all of the countries with more murders per capita than the U.S. are socialist nations with strict gun controls. Detroit's murder rate per 100,000, with strict gun controls, has 54 murders, almost as many as the most deadly nation in the world. Plano, Texas with more guns and lax gun laws than almost anywhere in America had 0.4 murders per capita. If America's cities with tight gun controls and high murder rates were eliminated from the average, the U.S. would rank #217 out of 218 for murders per capita. Evidently, those who live among the most heavily armed people are the safest from murder. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
3
If that was true, then almost all of the states with the highest murder rates would not also appear on the list of the states with the highest rates of gun ownership. The one place among the highest gun ownership that is not on the list of the highest murder rates is South Dakota.
Also note the following murder rates per 100,000 people:
Whites: 2.5
Blacks: 19.2
The white murder rate is comparable to the murder rates in other developed countries. It's the black murder rate that makes the US an outlier. But it's racist to point that out.
Whites: 2.5
Blacks: 19.2
The white murder rate is comparable to the murder rates in other developed countries. It's the black murder rate that makes the US an outlier. But it's racist to point that out.
Please rethink your use of the word blind as a pejorative. "blinded by her own obsession," implies that blindness equates to ignorance.
Here is a very good blog post and discussion that speaks to this point:
http://www.deeplyproblematic.com/2009/08/blinded-by-privileged-ableist-l...
Here is a very good blog post and discussion that speaks to this point:
http://www.deeplyproblematic.com/2009/08/blinded-by-privileged-ableist-l...
What's surprised me is that no one's mentioned the comment Carson made about the guy who held a gun on him in the Popeye's. That's the one where he pointed at the guy behind the counter and said, to paraphrase: "point it at him not me."
Hmmmmm.
Hmmmmm.
7
Asked by the old sage how to distinguish between daytime and darkness, his students offered: 1) When the first rays of morning light appear. 2) When the last nighttime star disappears. 3) When the sun first edges above the horizon.
The old sage smiles, shakes his head and says, "When you look in the face of a stranger and don't see your brother or sister, you're still in the darkness."
With thanks to Daniel Ellsberg.
The old sage smiles, shakes his head and says, "When you look in the face of a stranger and don't see your brother or sister, you're still in the darkness."
With thanks to Daniel Ellsberg.
3
Not to distract from the main issue at hand which is how can we enact some reasonable control over who can access guns, but.......................
A very important issue was raised by Lisa Long of Boise, Idaho. She has a mentally ill son who terrifies her. I have a dear friend and business client who is in her late 70s, with a husband slipping further and further into dementia. They both live with a child who has serious mental health issues who refuses to help them in any meaningful way. They have no reasonable choices, they can not access services on his behalf, limited though they may be, they can accept that the situation is what it is or throw him out of the house and accept that he probably will not be safe. I can absolutely believe that Ms. Long is afraid of her child and if that child ordered her to get him a gun, well she might do so out of fear.
A very important issue was raised by Lisa Long of Boise, Idaho. She has a mentally ill son who terrifies her. I have a dear friend and business client who is in her late 70s, with a husband slipping further and further into dementia. They both live with a child who has serious mental health issues who refuses to help them in any meaningful way. They have no reasonable choices, they can not access services on his behalf, limited though they may be, they can accept that the situation is what it is or throw him out of the house and accept that he probably will not be safe. I can absolutely believe that Ms. Long is afraid of her child and if that child ordered her to get him a gun, well she might do so out of fear.
1
Well, we just had another one in Arizona. But don't worry, as two of the States heavyweights tweeted out their condolences to the families (press release #376B) and essentially stopped doing anything about it.
How is this possible? They are, after all, elected to serve the best interests of their constituents. You'd think they would want to do something more than a tweet like, maybe, a scream?
But not these guys, beholden to an association that doesn't even represent most gun owners. I agree with the President that executive power should be used in any way it can and damn the courts.
How is this possible? They are, after all, elected to serve the best interests of their constituents. You'd think they would want to do something more than a tweet like, maybe, a scream?
But not these guys, beholden to an association that doesn't even represent most gun owners. I agree with the President that executive power should be used in any way it can and damn the courts.
6
Rather than mother's, it's fair to say parents, and really any adult that is in the life of the potentially dangerous youth or young adult. However, as the article points out, many time the danger lies with the adult's own irresponsibility and therefore precarious role as negative mentor.
The best step in the right direction would be the passing of laws that make gun ownership extremely difficult to obtain. Strict guidelines with licensing makes common sense.
The best step in the right direction would be the passing of laws that make gun ownership extremely difficult to obtain. Strict guidelines with licensing makes common sense.
3
Well, John, you need two thirds of both houses of Congress and three-quarters of the states to agree with you. That should give you a hobby.
Still accepting and parroting the bogus 30,000 "gun deaths" number?
-1 point
Finally talking about the mental illness issue?
+1 point
Article Total = 0
-1 point
Finally talking about the mental illness issue?
+1 point
Article Total = 0
1
Where is Wyatt Earp when we need him.
Wyatt Earp wouldn't stand a chance against the NRA.
The deal is that in America guns are emotional, not rational, and Americans gave up rational for emotional with “Morning in America”…
The deal is that in America guns are emotional, not rational, and Americans gave up rational for emotional with “Morning in America”…
1
America has always been Wild West , is now also Wild West and for ever be Wild West , the frontier country with frontier mindset . Its the strength and weakness of America. Guns are both macho as well as feminine weapons for hunting and for survival . Now its for sport and destruction .
Everyone in America without age or gender or religion , social or color or race restrictions must be allowed to carry around with them at least one loaded gun or pistol or revolver as a personal weapon licenced to kill like a driving licence ( which of course has an age restriction ) . It doesnt mean that every driver can kill with impunity , on the other hand drivers are normally careful with their vehicles which can of course kill . similarly carrying a loaded weapon need not turn every one a killer but perahps make every one more responsible in using their weapons.
if every one posseses a loaded weapon , I am sure mass killings will not occur because some one can effectively retaliate in time to stop the crazy shooter without calling for police help .
during the good old days of Wild West , mass shootings were rarer than it is now. Anyhow insurance corporations will make sure that killing and maiming are kept to the minimum as otherwise they are the losers of their profit. Everyone's life and limbs must be group-insured against gun violence at a reasonable premium which the insurance corporations can afford because of 100% of the population being insured for their life .
Everyone in America without age or gender or religion , social or color or race restrictions must be allowed to carry around with them at least one loaded gun or pistol or revolver as a personal weapon licenced to kill like a driving licence ( which of course has an age restriction ) . It doesnt mean that every driver can kill with impunity , on the other hand drivers are normally careful with their vehicles which can of course kill . similarly carrying a loaded weapon need not turn every one a killer but perahps make every one more responsible in using their weapons.
if every one posseses a loaded weapon , I am sure mass killings will not occur because some one can effectively retaliate in time to stop the crazy shooter without calling for police help .
during the good old days of Wild West , mass shootings were rarer than it is now. Anyhow insurance corporations will make sure that killing and maiming are kept to the minimum as otherwise they are the losers of their profit. Everyone's life and limbs must be group-insured against gun violence at a reasonable premium which the insurance corporations can afford because of 100% of the population being insured for their life .
It may work to blame and at least hold more responsible mothers than fathers, or women than men for the violence meted out through gunsights, but guns are not tools that women commonly holster on or carry in their pants.
Gun violence is a fetish of a male cultural worship sect that holds "macho men" in awe whether on the football or the killing field.
Put the blame where it belongs on our shoulders and leave the women to cry at our intransigent stupidity and their children's deaths.
Gun violence is a fetish of a male cultural worship sect that holds "macho men" in awe whether on the football or the killing field.
Put the blame where it belongs on our shoulders and leave the women to cry at our intransigent stupidity and their children's deaths.
7
First of all I'm not a gun nut. I abhor the violence. I also am terribly dismayed at the slaughter that takes place on our highways year after year. Drunk, drugged and irresponsible drivers slaughter and maim far more people than firearms. Children are greater victims of car accidents than by gunfire. Children are murdered when they are left unattended in hot, closed autos when mom or dad goes shopping and "forgets". Children are also abused, starved and beaten by irresponsible and criminal parents more often than they are victims of gunfire.
The list goes on.
I am greatly concerned that if we are compelled to register firearms or ammunition purchases then the next time there is a crime committed with certain pistol, rifle or shotgun, then everyone in that zip-code will automatically be known and be considered a suspect. Nazi Germany outlawed gun ownership and registered all the Jews. We know what the outcome of that was. South America and Mexico have strict rules regarding guns and look at how the dictators and drug lords rule those communities and states. More than 50 Mexican students were slaughtered by drug lords, then incinerated and disappeared. You can't own guns in Mexico. But the drug lords and criminals sure do.
If you want to get the guns out of the hands of criminals that's good. If you want to make ordinary citizens defenseless or put them on a list of registered owners that is dangerous. If you want to end the slaughter on the highways that would be good too
The list goes on.
I am greatly concerned that if we are compelled to register firearms or ammunition purchases then the next time there is a crime committed with certain pistol, rifle or shotgun, then everyone in that zip-code will automatically be known and be considered a suspect. Nazi Germany outlawed gun ownership and registered all the Jews. We know what the outcome of that was. South America and Mexico have strict rules regarding guns and look at how the dictators and drug lords rule those communities and states. More than 50 Mexican students were slaughtered by drug lords, then incinerated and disappeared. You can't own guns in Mexico. But the drug lords and criminals sure do.
If you want to get the guns out of the hands of criminals that's good. If you want to make ordinary citizens defenseless or put them on a list of registered owners that is dangerous. If you want to end the slaughter on the highways that would be good too
Not a gun nut, huh???
1
WHY is it dangerous to want to make ordinary citizens defenseless or put them on a list of registered owners?
1
Gun violence is actually very, very easy to solve. If gun manufacturers with deep pockets were held liable for all deaths resulting from their products (as all other product manufacturers are), this problem would be fixed faster than you could say "annual earnings".
17
Tim, I think you are on to something.
We have young adult child with the challenges spoken of here. As mom, I'm close to this child, and it just depends on the family, it is an equal-opportunity situation for any parent to influence. Early our child lacked a conscience, and was violent and threatening, so we got in on the ground floor, so to speak. We're not drawn to guns, but for years I've put away kitchen knives and hardware tools. Getting harmful things out of the way is simple and helpful to do, and that alone is worth a public service campaign.
Then, there's talking. I talk with our child about feelings, social interactions, and triggers for violence in oneself and as reported in newspapers. We are fortunate in that the violent tendencies have subsided, with lack of conscience remaining yet manageable. But this is difficult stuff, and parents of troubled children need support. Parents, yes, encourage your children to engage with others who are different and isolated, this has helped our child. As adults we can also listen to troubled parents of trouble children.
Let's get all hands on deck to tackle gun-related homicide, we got a man to the moon. Find the right messaging about parenting (if you've got a troubled child mental health placement is nearly impossible given individual rights). AND hang in there for reasonable gun/bullet control. AND avoid killer name fame AND whatever else we can think of.
We have young adult child with the challenges spoken of here. As mom, I'm close to this child, and it just depends on the family, it is an equal-opportunity situation for any parent to influence. Early our child lacked a conscience, and was violent and threatening, so we got in on the ground floor, so to speak. We're not drawn to guns, but for years I've put away kitchen knives and hardware tools. Getting harmful things out of the way is simple and helpful to do, and that alone is worth a public service campaign.
Then, there's talking. I talk with our child about feelings, social interactions, and triggers for violence in oneself and as reported in newspapers. We are fortunate in that the violent tendencies have subsided, with lack of conscience remaining yet manageable. But this is difficult stuff, and parents of troubled children need support. Parents, yes, encourage your children to engage with others who are different and isolated, this has helped our child. As adults we can also listen to troubled parents of trouble children.
Let's get all hands on deck to tackle gun-related homicide, we got a man to the moon. Find the right messaging about parenting (if you've got a troubled child mental health placement is nearly impossible given individual rights). AND hang in there for reasonable gun/bullet control. AND avoid killer name fame AND whatever else we can think of.
3
I appreciate your confidence in reporting the plight of your son. It takes courage to “go public” about a family issue, since many families in America today face problems that never seem to be addressed either at the local or national level. I cannot express my emotions regarding the life you are leading, I can simply say that women take the brunt of the responsibility for child rearing. We could argue that men must put their paycheck on the table and take a stance against lethal weaponry in their home. One solution might be to have every household pay a tax on the number of males in a household multiplied by the number of lethal weapons owned or operated by that household. I pay a county tax for irresponsible arsonists who set fire to the local environment, even although I have a fire hydrant and a 5,000 gallon water tank on my property. Why do we protect gunmen and arsonists at the expense of hard working men and women who have no clout in Washington DC?
Did anyone notice the NRA ad on the bottom of the NYTimes Opinion pages? Offering a free NRA duffel back with a membership. Pretty audacious.
11
On one point, we must give the NRA its due. The issue the nation confronts with the numbingly routine occurrence goes way deeper than guns. It is about what we have become as a community of citizens. It is about the growing alienation of vast numbers of citizens who perceive themselves as irrelevant to the control of their own country.
It is about the fear, loathing and anger stage-managed by self-serving cynics to demonize people with divergent views, who look different, who talk “funny,” who worship (or not) differently, who love whomever they choose. It is about using the 2nd Amendment to legitimatize live-ammo target practice for angry white guys who perceive diversity as existential threat.
Yes, we need to tighten the flow of firearms to reduce purchase by abusers, criminals and mentally wounded people. While such measures may only dent the superficial shield of our morbid insanity, so much more is needed to make our country truly whole again.
The US Congress merely reflects our collective character and the electoral choices we make. More is required of Congress and whoever follows the much-maligned black leader we now have as President. More to the point, however, more is required of us ordinary folks who value the lives of our families and friends, especially children.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
It is about the fear, loathing and anger stage-managed by self-serving cynics to demonize people with divergent views, who look different, who talk “funny,” who worship (or not) differently, who love whomever they choose. It is about using the 2nd Amendment to legitimatize live-ammo target practice for angry white guys who perceive diversity as existential threat.
Yes, we need to tighten the flow of firearms to reduce purchase by abusers, criminals and mentally wounded people. While such measures may only dent the superficial shield of our morbid insanity, so much more is needed to make our country truly whole again.
The US Congress merely reflects our collective character and the electoral choices we make. More is required of Congress and whoever follows the much-maligned black leader we now have as President. More to the point, however, more is required of us ordinary folks who value the lives of our families and friends, especially children.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
7
In the time since Timothy Egan posted this piece, there have been at least 2 more school shootings reported in the Times--at Northern Arizona University and at Texas Southern University. This is insanity. Yes, mothers and fathers should keep guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed people who are a danger to themselves and to others, but we all have a responsibility to fashion reasonable regulations for such a deadly product.
11
You will see even more if the media continues to cover these killers as celebrities, and the president invites a personal visit with all of the victims' families.
Ben Carson is right. The 1st graders at Sandy Hook should have swarmed the shooter and stabbed him with their crayons.
36
Or perhaps their dull bladed "my fist scissors." Maybe the wooden knitting needles they were using to make a muffler for daddy for Christmas. Please God, grant these babies eternal peace.
33,000 per year or 10,000??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States
Do we have the facts?
Do we have the facts?
??? Ok, I read the article but I have no idea what your point is. Fact, 33,000 Americans are killed every year by firearms or more than 400,000 deaths since 9/11.
1
It's 10,000 gun-related homicides and 20,000 suicides by gun.
1
Includes suicides (more than 20,000)
1
How come the latest shooting, In Arizona, is waaay down on the page, and easy to miss?
Multiple shootings happen so frequently now that i just finished reading about the newest one (as I write this) in Arizona.
I am prepared to read the same things from both sides now, which to me equates to "blah, blah, blah". Nothing is going to change, except the frequency of these shootings. A few years ago, I asked what the national news media will do when two of these happen in different parts of the country within minutes of each other. Will they split their coverage? Will they go to the scene with the largest body count? It boggles the mind.
What has happened to this country?
A woman famously cried after Mr. Obama was elected and sobbed into the camera about how she "wanted her country back". Well, lady, I want MY country back, too".
I am prepared to read the same things from both sides now, which to me equates to "blah, blah, blah". Nothing is going to change, except the frequency of these shootings. A few years ago, I asked what the national news media will do when two of these happen in different parts of the country within minutes of each other. Will they split their coverage? Will they go to the scene with the largest body count? It boggles the mind.
What has happened to this country?
A woman famously cried after Mr. Obama was elected and sobbed into the camera about how she "wanted her country back". Well, lady, I want MY country back, too".
8
Can we blame the mothers of these mentally ill children, who teach them how to shoot guns and even buy them guns?
Yes.
'...To be clear, mental illness does not equal violence...'
The country is lucky to get through a month without yet another mentally ill person committing a horrific crime and repeating this patently untrue statement makes it much harder to deal with the real issue, which is that seriously mentally ill people are a danger to society.
Yes.
'...To be clear, mental illness does not equal violence...'
The country is lucky to get through a month without yet another mentally ill person committing a horrific crime and repeating this patently untrue statement makes it much harder to deal with the real issue, which is that seriously mentally ill people are a danger to society.
My brother is schizophrenic. He is kind and loving and has never owned any weapon, or used one, besides a bow and arrow at camp and a pellet gun in our uncle's garage. Statistics do not bear out your way-off thesis.
1
Many good points. History Lesson, among others, takes Jindal to task for blaming fathers. If I were going to take anyone to task, it might be Egan and those who share this aspect of his view:that mothers, who "know the names of their children's' teachers,"are responsible for mass shootings for not being tuned into their children enough to know when they are in trouble, and when they own guns.
I fact, both Jindal and Egan are right and wrong. When two people get together and bring children into this world, they are both responsible for those childrens' welfare. History lesson points that many women have demeaning,& exhausted lives. When on top of that, they have a seriously mentally ill child, sometimes they give up. Men have also been known to have tough times. But hardship is no excuse to abandon,emotionally or physically, the children.
And I am not a Goody Two Shoes, here, telling parents how to run their show when I don't know what it's like. You see, I do know what it's lo
I fact, both Jindal and Egan are right and wrong. When two people get together and bring children into this world, they are both responsible for those childrens' welfare. History lesson points that many women have demeaning,& exhausted lives. When on top of that, they have a seriously mentally ill child, sometimes they give up. Men have also been known to have tough times. But hardship is no excuse to abandon,emotionally or physically, the children.
And I am not a Goody Two Shoes, here, telling parents how to run their show when I don't know what it's like. You see, I do know what it's lo
Parents who arm a mentally and emotionally disturbed child, thus increasing the possibility that he may cause harm to himself or others, should be held legally accountable when the possibility becomes reality.
4
You are right. Parents who allow under age kids to drink in their homes can be held responsible for the inevitable car accidents. In some cases, even if the parents were unaware of the drinking. In this case, the still alive mom should be prosecuted as an accessory to murder.
1
"The system is not only broken, but rigged"
Well, of course it is. Anything liberals want but can't get is always due to the corruption of other rotten people.
From there, Mr. Egan veers his adolescence to attacking the mother of the Oregon shooter; outdoing Ben Carson himself right after pushing the dubious claim that Dr. Carson blamed the victims for the shooting.
From there the frosty Mr. Egan warms up, and warms our hearts by reporting on some “Moms-against-guns” group who hopefully can appeal to and enlighten the idiot-gun-Moms like the idiot mom of the Oregon shooter.
This reader’s conclusion: Nothing enhances a beautiful Friday autumn morning than regaling in the sniveling petulance and crabby condescension always found in the latest Timothy Egan essay. And this Friday morning most certainly no exception!
Thanks, Timothy!
Well, of course it is. Anything liberals want but can't get is always due to the corruption of other rotten people.
From there, Mr. Egan veers his adolescence to attacking the mother of the Oregon shooter; outdoing Ben Carson himself right after pushing the dubious claim that Dr. Carson blamed the victims for the shooting.
From there the frosty Mr. Egan warms up, and warms our hearts by reporting on some “Moms-against-guns” group who hopefully can appeal to and enlighten the idiot-gun-Moms like the idiot mom of the Oregon shooter.
This reader’s conclusion: Nothing enhances a beautiful Friday autumn morning than regaling in the sniveling petulance and crabby condescension always found in the latest Timothy Egan essay. And this Friday morning most certainly no exception!
Thanks, Timothy!
3
Ben Carson also shamelessly used the biggest industrialized mass murder in the history of mankind, by not just implying but insisting that had Hitler not 'disarmed' Germans by taking their guns away the Holocaust couldn't have happened.
Jews, according to his 'learned' opinion, could have fought the SS storm troopers knocking their doors down and hoarding them up to be shipped to the extermination camps.
Carson, just like the other wannabe presidents of the Republican field, needs a serious education in history before spewing such unmitigated dreck.
In the year of 1919, the newly established Weimar Republic enacted extremely strict gun laws.
The Austrian paper hanger mostly reversed those laws, but only for members of the NSDAP, while forbidding Jews and other ' undesirables' to arm themselves. And even if they had all been armed, a pistol in the hands of an elderly couple against a dozen of black boots would hardly protected them from their terrible destiny by the hands of a madman and his henchmen.
Jews, according to his 'learned' opinion, could have fought the SS storm troopers knocking their doors down and hoarding them up to be shipped to the extermination camps.
Carson, just like the other wannabe presidents of the Republican field, needs a serious education in history before spewing such unmitigated dreck.
In the year of 1919, the newly established Weimar Republic enacted extremely strict gun laws.
The Austrian paper hanger mostly reversed those laws, but only for members of the NSDAP, while forbidding Jews and other ' undesirables' to arm themselves. And even if they had all been armed, a pistol in the hands of an elderly couple against a dozen of black boots would hardly protected them from their terrible destiny by the hands of a madman and his henchmen.
9
Perhaps another informative historical reference regarding an armed populace fighting a military force would be the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943. Not exactly a successful outcome for the armed citizens.
5
The sad fact is that the two families you compare were not mothers "who let their children arm themselves..." they were mothers who avidly armed themselves and their disturbed children.
After the Sandy Hook shooting investigators found a check from Mary to her son, a birthday present specifically for (on the check!) a handgun he wanted. He was too young to legally possess a handgun -- she made the straw purchase for him.
After the Sandy Hook shooting investigators found a check from Mary to her son, a birthday present specifically for (on the check!) a handgun he wanted. He was too young to legally possess a handgun -- she made the straw purchase for him.
9
Please, make this a money issue. Sue the seller of the gun for all he's worth.
1
Unfortunately, I think that's against the law - I believe the GOP-controlled Congress either let that law lapse, or refused to pass it. Somebody tell me. I do think there's a law shielding the gun industry from lawsuits.
Can't sue the gun seller or manufacturer.
It was a law sponsored by the NRA and passed by Congress.
It was a law sponsored by the NRA and passed by Congress.
1
This article seems incoherent. Are "Moms" part of the problem or part of the solution? The examples of the Sandy Hook and Oregon "Moms" who armed their disturbed sons would suggest that "Moms" are part of the problem. As would the incident of the 11 year old whose "Mom" allowed access to the family 12 gauge or the terrible incident the other day where a 5 year old shot his 2 year old sister with the .22 his "Mom" took part in giving him. Clearly, being a "Mom" does not determine whether you are pro- unfetterd gun rights or anti- . Just as being a "Mom" doesn't determine whether you're pro- or anti- childhood vaccination. There are "Moms" on both sides of botb issues. Just as there are Independent "Moms" and Democrat "Moms" and Republican "Moms." The column is essentialist nonsense, almost literally.
7
Ms. Johnson: There is nothing incoherent about this dead on op ed. Rather it
is your response that is incoherent. Did you read the piece? It did not say that
all moms are the issue, but the two mentioned surely were. They enabled their
sons to murder those victims by sanctioning all the guns they acquired together -
mom and son. It has nothing to do with being political, it is insanity and a mis-
directional relationship that can occur in a family. It just so happens, it was between mothers and sons. Fathers were not involved here. Please get your head
on and re-read this op ed.
is your response that is incoherent. Did you read the piece? It did not say that
all moms are the issue, but the two mentioned surely were. They enabled their
sons to murder those victims by sanctioning all the guns they acquired together -
mom and son. It has nothing to do with being political, it is insanity and a mis-
directional relationship that can occur in a family. It just so happens, it was between mothers and sons. Fathers were not involved here. Please get your head
on and re-read this op ed.
This piece comes dangerously close to blaming the parents of young adults who commit horrible crimes. Raising a child with serious disabilities can be tremendously isolating, especially when that child's behavior is unwelcome in the homes of others and or in public places.
While in many cases, mothers may bear the strain of the daily tasks of caring for a child with disabilities, often fathers are working extra hours or more than one job to pay for medical or psychiatric care and to replace the lost income of mothers who stay at home. Such stresses can overwhelm a marriage.
While national gun control legislation is long overdue in the United States, support for psychiatric, medical and educational services for children with serious disabilities is also a critical need.
While in many cases, mothers may bear the strain of the daily tasks of caring for a child with disabilities, often fathers are working extra hours or more than one job to pay for medical or psychiatric care and to replace the lost income of mothers who stay at home. Such stresses can overwhelm a marriage.
While national gun control legislation is long overdue in the United States, support for psychiatric, medical and educational services for children with serious disabilities is also a critical need.
3
There is a difference between "blaming" and "holding accountable."
If the car I am driving skids on an icy street and kills a pedestrian, I may not be to blame but I should be held accountable for my choice to drive in the first place. Similarly, people who bear children must be held accountable for the outcomes. If they choose to arm offspring with known mental illnesses, and those offspring harm or kill others, than the parent should pay a price.
If the car I am driving skids on an icy street and kills a pedestrian, I may not be to blame but I should be held accountable for my choice to drive in the first place. Similarly, people who bear children must be held accountable for the outcomes. If they choose to arm offspring with known mental illnesses, and those offspring harm or kill others, than the parent should pay a price.
7
Robert, most of these over-burdened parents are not buying weapons of mass destruction for their disabled children. Don't be so defensive.
1
Make the gun manufacturers happy and make sure they sell a lot of weapons seems to be the priority for many politicians.
Simple answer that also serves the actual words of the Constitution:
Require every 18 year old to spend two years in National Service including weapons training and once released they remain on standby to be called up in national emergencies for 4 more years and must keep their weapon in their home in a locked vault as well as bring it and demonstrate it is maintained and their skill level for using it is up to snuff four times a year. That way gun makers make their profits and we create what is essentially a well regulated militia. By the end of the 4 years of standby they can keep their gun but at least they will be trained and monitored for a lengthy time.
Simple answer that also serves the actual words of the Constitution:
Require every 18 year old to spend two years in National Service including weapons training and once released they remain on standby to be called up in national emergencies for 4 more years and must keep their weapon in their home in a locked vault as well as bring it and demonstrate it is maintained and their skill level for using it is up to snuff four times a year. That way gun makers make their profits and we create what is essentially a well regulated militia. By the end of the 4 years of standby they can keep their gun but at least they will be trained and monitored for a lengthy time.
7
A number of those other nations that do not have many gun deaths allow their citizens very similar levels of access to firearms, and so do many regions in the USA that have very low murder rates. The real cause of all kinds of violence whether a gun is involved or not is as any sophomore student in a sociology class learns is the existence of extensive poverty, extreme inequality that breeds rage and humiliation and a culture of violence/crime/deception that glorifies conflict and crime as a means to gain wealth and power because that is how 1% role models become successful. And in the USA we increasingly see our 1% indoctrinating us to more and more emotion driven, irrational, extreme unthinking behavior in order to cause us to "impulse buy", brainwashing desensitizing of our youth with 24/7 violent video games and one explosion and shooting a minute films and TV. And last but not least the continual flooding of this nation with immigrants from failed medievalist states with murder rates 10 times higher than those in the USA. And then there is the sending of all manufacturing jobs to China/Mexico and flooding the US labor market with slave-wage immigrants that predictably cause a widespread state of alienation, hopelessness and humiliation that one who predict would lead all manner of suicidal jihadi like mass murders intended to get the shooters some measure of recognition and respect that our 1%'s manipulations riggings of our society and economy have denied them.
Europeans have experienced the horrors of war being fought where they live for decades. The experience has likely led to an abhorrance of firearms and to laws that regulate the ownership of firearms. In the US we have weapons manufactures who convice the gullible that owning firearms is their ticket to safety and independence. Throw in mentally ill people and you have the recipe for chaos.
The only way to stop this illness is to mandate that these people take their prozac. To worship firearms is a sure sign of mental illness.
The only way to stop this illness is to mandate that these people take their prozac. To worship firearms is a sure sign of mental illness.
3
Some perspective:
The nra claims 4 - 4.5 members. That translates to a little more than 1% of our citizens. Even if there are 10 people who don't join but believe the hype for every one member that is still a little more than 10% of US.
We are a nation being held hostage by the smallest minority of people who have caused a large majority of our legislators to throw their spines on the trash heap.
The same kind of perspective can be applied to the republican party as a whole. 40 member of the tea partista wing have brought our democracy to a standstill. They are holding their breaths until they turn blue and in the process destroy the Country they pledge to protect, and We the People are letting them all get away with it.
If the only thing that provokes you to vote for someone is the A+ rating from the nra (the world's largest and best funded terrorist organization) I just wish you would do the nation a favor and stay home.
The nra claims 4 - 4.5 members. That translates to a little more than 1% of our citizens. Even if there are 10 people who don't join but believe the hype for every one member that is still a little more than 10% of US.
We are a nation being held hostage by the smallest minority of people who have caused a large majority of our legislators to throw their spines on the trash heap.
The same kind of perspective can be applied to the republican party as a whole. 40 member of the tea partista wing have brought our democracy to a standstill. They are holding their breaths until they turn blue and in the process destroy the Country they pledge to protect, and We the People are letting them all get away with it.
If the only thing that provokes you to vote for someone is the A+ rating from the nra (the world's largest and best funded terrorist organization) I just wish you would do the nation a favor and stay home.
46
31% of households (less than a third) have one or more guns. Obviously many of those gun owners are very supportive of tightened gun regulation (which is borne out by polls) so we have situation where tens of thousands are being killed each year to satisfy the selfish desires of a fairly small percentages of the population. Amazing really. Those familiar with Occam's Razor know that the simplest answer is usually the correct one. So what's the explanation for the fact that gun homicides in the US are around 30 times what they are in the UK ? No member of the pro gun lobby has EVER given the simple and obvious answer to this question. They either ignore the evidence, invent their own evidence or lie about the evidence.
31
This is bizarrely argued. Absurd politicians are incapable of enacting change on gun control, so we must excuse them from blame? Instead, we must assess whether and how we can blame the mothers? And fathers bear a little responsibility, but not nearly as much as the mothers because the mothers know their children better?
We all, as citizens of this confusing country, have to take action here. Yes, certainly in our own homes as parents, but also in what we demand of our elected officials, and who we elect in the first place.
Let's help the mothers rather than blame them.
We all, as citizens of this confusing country, have to take action here. Yes, certainly in our own homes as parents, but also in what we demand of our elected officials, and who we elect in the first place.
Let's help the mothers rather than blame them.
17
Why isn't the insurance industry in this discussion, and the courts in terms of tort law? The parents of the child killed should sue the pants off the parents of the child who shot? Maybe they weren't insurance for liability. Can't get blood from a stone. But if everyone sued for wrongful death in every gun death, there would be enough homeowners' policies at risk so the insurance company would start asking about gun ownership and gun care the way they ask me if I own a dog, an off-road vehicle or a trampoline.
35
Let's be blunt. We don't have a mental health system any longer even though there are billions being spent. The ability of parents to deal with adult children with mental health problems is zero. The adult child has legal rights that supersede the safety of the family and the community. He/she cannot be committed and they don't have to see any doctors for treatment either. So we sit back and wait for them to explode and then we blame assault weapons/guns/firearms.
Regardless of how one feels about guns we cannot let the mental health system continue to fail so miserably. It dysfunction is destroying families and communities.
Furthermore we have mothers who are showing signs of mental illness in these latest incidents. This is not just about young frustrated males with mental issues any longer. A single mother living with an adult son is not a sign of health. One or both of them may have mental issues. Obviously bonding over guns is a very strange choice.
Most homicides come from handguns in spite of all the chatter about assault weapons which is more of a marketing term not a technical term. We will have gun deaths forever unless the government removes all handguns from private ownership. The chance of that happening is close to zero.
We can work on smarter gun distribution and management but in the meantime we desperately need to have a mental health system especially for the demographic groups that are showing the highest proclivity for violence.
Regardless of how one feels about guns we cannot let the mental health system continue to fail so miserably. It dysfunction is destroying families and communities.
Furthermore we have mothers who are showing signs of mental illness in these latest incidents. This is not just about young frustrated males with mental issues any longer. A single mother living with an adult son is not a sign of health. One or both of them may have mental issues. Obviously bonding over guns is a very strange choice.
Most homicides come from handguns in spite of all the chatter about assault weapons which is more of a marketing term not a technical term. We will have gun deaths forever unless the government removes all handguns from private ownership. The chance of that happening is close to zero.
We can work on smarter gun distribution and management but in the meantime we desperately need to have a mental health system especially for the demographic groups that are showing the highest proclivity for violence.
4
I agree that we need a functional mental health system, but not for the reasons you name. The overwhelming majority of the mentally ill are not violent, and the few that are don't hurt people because it's difficult to commit people (it is, by the way, not at all difficult to commit someone who is deemed a danger to themselves or others; it's actually required by law). The problem lies in the fact that mental health care is a luxury item, and mental health problems are generally chronic conditions requiring lifelong treatment. This is a major national health issue that goes well beyond our the rampant gun violence in this country - mental health would certainly help, but it'd be more helpful if it weren't quite so easy for people to get military weapons. Mental health care is a goal in itself, but it's not enough to stop the trend of gun violence.
11
While agreeing wholeheartedly with Mr. Egan that family members must be aware of the risks posed by guns available to the seriously mentally ill, the narrow focus on these high profile mass shootings misses the mark. Mass Shooting Tracker, which compiles news reports of mass shootings, defined as 4 or more people shot in one incident, now lists 298 mass shootings in 2015, not counting the shooting of 4 people at Northern Arizona University reported just today (9 Oct, the 282nd day of the year) in the Times and elsewhere. We have had more than 1 mass shooting PER DAY in 2015. As Mr. Egan pointed out, there are so many shootings that we never even hear about most of them - only the most egregious examples rise to the level of national news. But the fact remains that the vast majority of mass shootings do not involve someone who is mentally ill and has acquired an arsenal like the UCC shooter in Roseburg, OR. Gun rights advocates and organizations prefer that we talk about mental illness and mothers who indulge their son's obsessions. Anything to take the focus away from guns. But that really misses the forest for the trees. Gun rights advocates love to point out that the UCC shooter acquired his guns legally. The logical conclusion from that observation is that the gun laws need to be tightened. Sadly, logic rarely enters the discussion.
http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015
http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015
13
Mr. Egan, for once I have to disagree with you a little. True, Moms can be of great help especially when there is a mentally unstable child. But that does absolve the fathers ( even divorced ) of this responsibility to make guns inaccessible. The horrible tragedy in Roseburg has produced a response antithetical to what could prevent such tragedies in the future - they want more guns! Unbelievable! Ben Carson may feel vindicated! The Politicians have just become a bunch of cronies of the NRA. Common sense has become uncommon or non-existent. I do not have and will not have guns in my home. So I think I should start home-schooling my kids. but that is not a fail-safe solution. My kid's friend might bring in a gun during a sleepover. What's not to stop him ( or my kid )from firing that gun if they have a spat over the puppy?
2
Well, as long as we are being so gender specific, I have to say I am a little more concerned about the fact that all of these shootings are perpetrated by men (or boys). Perhaps a better question is, why is it that so many males seem to be angry and disturbed enough to violently take their issues out on strangers? How are we failing men in this country? Is it the mothers? Perhaps, but it's a societal problem and we need to look at many factors, not just the moms.
29
'...Is it the mothers?...'
It is the single mothers, as boys are not like girls, no matter how many people insist there is no difference in the sexes (or that there is no such thing as 'genders').
Boys need male role models and mothers are not capable of that, while the fathers cannot be bothered.
It is the single mothers, as boys are not like girls, no matter how many people insist there is no difference in the sexes (or that there is no such thing as 'genders').
Boys need male role models and mothers are not capable of that, while the fathers cannot be bothered.
There are some basic truths that are never included in the argument.
1. Nobody hunts with a pistol. Pistols are for killing people.
2. No self-respecting hunter goes after elk or deer using an assault rifle with a huge magazine. These weapons are for inflicting mayhem, scattering bullets toward the assumed direction of an enemy, as we see in much of the footage out or Syria showing fighters pulling the trigger with these weapons held over their heads. Such weapons are very handy, however, for killing lots of people in a crowded classroom.
3. If one really believes that more gun carrying would limit the damage in mass killing situations, they must concede that a six shot revolver or an automatic with a very small clip will do: the bad guy has a roomful of targets, the "good guy" has only one.
4. The real driver behind insistence on the right to own many weapons whose purpose is to kill people is love of the objects themselves, the rush people get from shooting them, and the feeling of empowerment they confer on the owner
1. Nobody hunts with a pistol. Pistols are for killing people.
2. No self-respecting hunter goes after elk or deer using an assault rifle with a huge magazine. These weapons are for inflicting mayhem, scattering bullets toward the assumed direction of an enemy, as we see in much of the footage out or Syria showing fighters pulling the trigger with these weapons held over their heads. Such weapons are very handy, however, for killing lots of people in a crowded classroom.
3. If one really believes that more gun carrying would limit the damage in mass killing situations, they must concede that a six shot revolver or an automatic with a very small clip will do: the bad guy has a roomful of targets, the "good guy" has only one.
4. The real driver behind insistence on the right to own many weapons whose purpose is to kill people is love of the objects themselves, the rush people get from shooting them, and the feeling of empowerment they confer on the owner
34
. "No self-respecting hunter goes after elk or deer using an assault rifle with a huge magazine.".....Haven't hunted in awhile, but many states used to have laws requiring that hunters guns in the field be limited to no more than three shots.
What's missing here is a lot of these guys likely have inadequate weiners. The guns make them feel more manly.
2
Mothers and guns has been on my mind for a while. The mother of a local man, who killed a police chief during a summons call at his home, was already well known to police for drug and physical abuse offenses. A couple of years ago his mother was found to have a legal arsenal at home. Enough of an arsenal to defend the Alamo, it included a machine gun. Police removed over forty weapons from her home because she allowed her son access to them. It wasn't enough. She managed to provide him with the weapons that killed the police chief, the man's girlfriend, and himself. How a suburban mother could ever legally own a collection of guns like that is completely beyond my comprehension. I emigrated from the UK forty years ago and simply cannot get my mind around the insanity around guns in the United States.
Postscript: Every article on this topic should mention somehow that over 60% of gun-related deaths every year are suicides (about 20,000).
Postscript: Every article on this topic should mention somehow that over 60% of gun-related deaths every year are suicides (about 20,000).
35
If there where even a modicum of effective parenting palpable in America this problem would quickly devolve.
Never have so many with so much been such lousy parents.
Kids are routinely mistreated and misguided and emotionally and physically malnourished on a scale that speaks volumes about ALL of us!
Never have so many with so much been such lousy parents.
Kids are routinely mistreated and misguided and emotionally and physically malnourished on a scale that speaks volumes about ALL of us!
9
I did not miss seeing this story, although I wish I had. Republicans and the NRA view such incidents as just the cost of doing business. Other people's children have no value, after all. They are dispensable.
18
While the mass shootings make the news, keeping guns away from the mentally ill is more likely to prevent suicide than murder.
6
so, we shouldn't do that? Really?
The reaction of Roseburg, Oregon residents, thinking 'more guns' are the answer to safety, reflects the rural - urban divide over the issue of gun control. The urgency of gun control varies by locale.
A sparsely populated state with relatively plentiful natural resources, wild life that can support a 'hunting culture' is a world away from the gun violence that plagues US cities and towns.
The impossibility of firing a gun on a crowded street in New York city without hitting a pedestrian, just isn't the same as target practice in the Oregon woods.
I always thought the most disfiguring aspect of Sarah Palin's life experience, and her recommendations for the US as a candidate and commentator, was how unaware she seemed to be of the balance of natural resources and space in which she lived, compared to the rest of the country in the "lower 48".
90 people or so are lost every day in the US to gun violence, as an article in the NY Times pointed out yesterday. The mass shootings make the news, but the death toll continues with little fanfare.
Gun control is urgently needed.
In Germany, you're responsible for a fire in your house, because its assumed you are careless at a minimum, and you owe your neighbors the duty of care. In the US, it's "just an accident", and "stuff happens".
A mature society recognizes the duty to care for our fellow citizens. Those who oppose needed gun regulation, simply don't.
A sparsely populated state with relatively plentiful natural resources, wild life that can support a 'hunting culture' is a world away from the gun violence that plagues US cities and towns.
The impossibility of firing a gun on a crowded street in New York city without hitting a pedestrian, just isn't the same as target practice in the Oregon woods.
I always thought the most disfiguring aspect of Sarah Palin's life experience, and her recommendations for the US as a candidate and commentator, was how unaware she seemed to be of the balance of natural resources and space in which she lived, compared to the rest of the country in the "lower 48".
90 people or so are lost every day in the US to gun violence, as an article in the NY Times pointed out yesterday. The mass shootings make the news, but the death toll continues with little fanfare.
Gun control is urgently needed.
In Germany, you're responsible for a fire in your house, because its assumed you are careless at a minimum, and you owe your neighbors the duty of care. In the US, it's "just an accident", and "stuff happens".
A mature society recognizes the duty to care for our fellow citizens. Those who oppose needed gun regulation, simply don't.
28
All these episodes are so sad, because they are often terribly ironic. Thus Adam Lanza's mother, who was drawn to guns as a means of security, was ultimately killed with one of her own weapons.
9
Lanza's mom got her just desserts. The roseburg mom roams freely, spouting off to all of us about her gun rights.
1
Face it: it's a religion. You the people are sacraficing your children on the altar of the second amendment. Ben Carson may be a crackpot, but at least he has the courage to speak out. And as in any religion, the second amendment is open for interpretation and may not be questioned in public.
In the USA (pop. 320 million) 33,000 people are killed by guns every year. For comparion: in the Nethlands (pop. 17 million) 144 people were killed in 2014 (not all gun related). In the USA (where there are more guns than people) you are 12 times more likely to be killed by guns than in the Netherlands (where nobody owns a gun). The NRA will probably claim that the Netherlands could be made a lot safer by handing out guns. You really have to be mental to believe this. So people who believe this are mental and shouldn't own guns. If you don't believe this you also shouldn't want to own guns. Don't blame the moms, blame the religious fanatics.
In the USA (pop. 320 million) 33,000 people are killed by guns every year. For comparion: in the Nethlands (pop. 17 million) 144 people were killed in 2014 (not all gun related). In the USA (where there are more guns than people) you are 12 times more likely to be killed by guns than in the Netherlands (where nobody owns a gun). The NRA will probably claim that the Netherlands could be made a lot safer by handing out guns. You really have to be mental to believe this. So people who believe this are mental and shouldn't own guns. If you don't believe this you also shouldn't want to own guns. Don't blame the moms, blame the religious fanatics.
28
The most odious part of Carson's stumblimg, bumbling rationalizations is that, as a pediatric neurosurgeon in Baltimore, it is utterly inconceivable that he has not been required to perform brain surgery on a child or children with devastating bullet wounds to the head.
Stuff happens? Then perhaps we should require that the Supreme Court and Congre$$ be turned into open carry zones and see what happens.
Stuff happens? Then perhaps we should require that the Supreme Court and Congre$$ be turned into open carry zones and see what happens.
29
One thing all of us who are parents can do is to never, ever let our kids play or visit at houses where guns are kept. It's time to make gun owners feel shunned.
31
I think the Republican response on guns and gun violence simply reflects the party's broader view on life. Anything that happens to person is simply that person's fault due to weakness. You got shot during a massacre, its your fault because you are weak. You got sick and the healthcare expenses pushed you into bankruptcy, you're weak for getting sick and weak for not having enough money to take care of yourself. You lost your job and then your house due to a fraudulent subprime mortgage, you're weak for losing your job and getting a subprime loan to begin with. All of us will deal with setbacks and things beyond our control during the pedency of our lives. At their base, the programs making the social safety net and regulations to protect individuals are designed to assist citizens when those setbacks and things beyond our control occur. Not all of us are as intelligent and have the same opportunities as Dr. Carson or born into a privileged family like Mr. Bush and Mr. Trump. The vast majority of Americans need the social safety net and regulations to help and protect us. Today's Republican Party wants to rid the United States of all of those programs and laws and turn America into Ayn Rand paradise. I'm sorry, but all Americans are not John Galt nor should would be forced into this perverse environment that Republicans seem to long for.
43
Absolutely spot on. Another thing that amazes me about the so-called "right" is the religion (in addition to the guns) that so many of them cling to. Decrying evolution while engaging in the most pervasive social Darwinism (described so well by Broadacre) is the height of hypocrisy. What an odd way to live, with one's moral and rational compass so asunder. How can these people live with themselves?
Just ran across some CDC numbers this A.M.
Roughly 90 gun deaths/day in the U.S. Roughly 60 are suicides. c. 2/3 of U.S. gun deaths are suicides.
Roughly 90 gun deaths/day in the U.S. Roughly 60 are suicides. c. 2/3 of U.S. gun deaths are suicides.
3
Yes. Another reason to ban guns. True enough, a man bent on killing himself will find another way, but a gun used in a moment of despair will certainly kill. At least hanging requires a little more effort to get the job done, an effort that gives time for the person to change his mind.
I don't know if you are intending to blunt the impact of the gun death rate by noting the percentage of suicides, but for me that statistic only makes the need for banning hand guns all the more necessary.
I don't know if you are intending to blunt the impact of the gun death rate by noting the percentage of suicides, but for me that statistic only makes the need for banning hand guns all the more necessary.
9
that's nothing new but what is your point?
Thank you, Tim, for this powerful column. I think about the hardest thing for a lot of mothers to do is to clearly understand what they must do in light of challenges their children may face. Then moms must rationally do what they need to to to protect these kids and perhaps other people too if their children have violent tendencies. Being clear eyed and rational still leaves lots of room for love and bonding. One just hopes these moms will get the support they need. However with our broken mental health systems this often doesn't happen especially in poor neighborhoods and communities. And families are often broken, too.
5
Mental illness is an issue apart from the mass shooting problem. One can argue that anyone who uses a weapon to harm or kill another is mentally ill. Certainly, it is some form of illness that drives the mass shooter. Nevertheless, most mentally ill people never come near a gun. And plenty of people who may not seem particularly mentally ill, but are in fact rather anti-social in some way, own guns. And it isn't the homeless who are the shooters. This is an attempt by the NRA and pro-gun lobby to divert attention from the real issue, which is the proliferation of guns in our country. That alone seems to the rest of the world, and a large percentage of our own citizens, to be a group mental illness. And one could easily argue that the paranoid notion that the government is coming for you is delusional, or that Obama is trying to take away all the guns, also delusional.
Better to focus on the actual problem, which is the purchasing of our representatives in Congress by the gun lobby and the ridiculous interpretations of the 2nd amendment. Read Socrates' comment below. It seems it's not a problem we can lay at the feet of mothers, Tim. It's a problem grown out of our violent, racist history, propagated primarily by men, who need to take responsibility today for changing the culture that demands a delusional level of machismo. Real men aren't violent. Real men are nonviolent. That's the deeper, more personal issue.
Better to focus on the actual problem, which is the purchasing of our representatives in Congress by the gun lobby and the ridiculous interpretations of the 2nd amendment. Read Socrates' comment below. It seems it's not a problem we can lay at the feet of mothers, Tim. It's a problem grown out of our violent, racist history, propagated primarily by men, who need to take responsibility today for changing the culture that demands a delusional level of machismo. Real men aren't violent. Real men are nonviolent. That's the deeper, more personal issue.
14
". . . solutions from the political system" is an oxymoron and response "to mass killings with incoherent statements" is not only typical but common place and don't dare or bother to bring up logical ways of mother-child bonding.
"Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children."
Exactly, only in America.
Keep the articles coming, Mr. Egan. Please.
"Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children."
Exactly, only in America.
Keep the articles coming, Mr. Egan. Please.
24
For far too long, I've felt that dad's especially (and I'm a dad myself) have been let off the hook too easily when their boys go on shooting rampages. Even when the child is legally an adult, it is often apparent that the dad was barely involved, if ever, in his son's life. Whether through divorce, separation, or apathy, America's dads too often simply wash their hands of their kids at too early an age, then act blind-sided by the too-often violent end-result. When inner-city teens riot, one of the first things out of the mouths of conservatives is always "where are the dads?" Funny how few of them say the same thing when white middle class kids go on these shooting rampages. But I guess when the first divorced President (Reagan) is a conservative, and Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh have had six or seven marriages between them, it is taboo to bring this up on these occasions.
33
I appreciate the "mea culpa" but I had read that Nancy Lanza drove her husband away from her son. If that's the case and if the son rejects the father, how can the father be involved. An overly involved mother with a mentally ill son can be a deadly combination. Years ago, I worked at a psychiatric hospital and there was a mother there who literally drove her son to violence. He would explode every time she was allowed to visit him on the inpatient unit. Couple that with the availability of weapons...I am grateful every day that Russell didn't have access to guns.
6
I appreciate the thoughtful reply. I'm not arguing that moms don't have an important role as well, though I do have to say that if a father allows himself to be "driven out of" his son's life, he wasn't much of a man to begin with. What I have seen far more often than that in my life, and the lives of many people I've been associated with over the years, are dads that are quite happy to move on and virtually abandon their kids when the going got too tough at home.
It's not the dad. It's not the mom. It's the guns.
1
Tim every gun control nut quotes your stupid statistic that 90% of citizens support background checks. Stupid because last time I checked, 90% support can pass any legislation over a governor's veto, a president's veto, and even the constitution. What you should be saying is everyone likes the idea but they can't agree on what the idea actually means. Its like saying 90% of the country likes ice cream. News flash, they don't all like pistachio and in fact if your pollsters asked the right questions they wouldn't all like background checks either.
6
News flash: if a state doesn't have a mechanism to put it up for a vote, and if all states don't enact the same restrictions, it doesn't matter what people want or believe. The gun industry wants to make maximum profits possible. Any restrictions will reduce profits. Therefore, they fight to prevent any federal meaningful restrictions because it would cut into their bottom line. The gun lobby is more damaging and unAmerican than the Weathermen ever were. And they were hunted down and prosecuted.
8
Ummm, do you understand the difference between 90% of the population and 90% of legislators?
2
Tell you what, let's have the GOP-led Congress bring up this issue for public debate, and we can all publicly hash out the details, you know, like an actual civilized democracy would do. Oh, I nearly forgot. The NRA doesn't want that to happen, and Congress isn't being led by anyone at all right now due to the mindless intransigence of their most conservative faction.
3
Well, if Timmy can use the careless term "Crackpot" to describe one of the leading GOP candidates for president, I'm inclined to invoke the "takes one to know one" adage. Doubt this will be published, given the extreme left-wing sensitivity to gun control, but worth a shot. Finally for those advocating that we revoke the constitutional rights of those deemed mentally ill (which I support with the caveat below) - what happens to those CITIZENS if they are later found to be competent and not pose a threat to others? Are there rights restored? If the answer is no, you start to understand the intransigence of the anti gun-control crowd. Would you feel the same denying abortion rights to the mentally ill? Just curious...
1
The nice thing about licensing is that you can set it up to give applicants a second chance--kind of like the kid who fails his first three driver's tests. So if a person with a confirmed diagnosis of mental illness recovers, comes up clean on the national database, can pass all the tests and produce references from employers, neighbors and, most important, at least two mental health professionals attesting to his or her competence, he or she can have a gun.
Does that guarantee that no person with an active mental illness will ever be able to get a gun? There are no guarantees in real life. But you would be able to stop most of them.
Does that guarantee that no person with an active mental illness will ever be able to get a gun? There are no guarantees in real life. But you would be able to stop most of them.
5
When you have the right to endanger yourself and your own family, you may be quite stupid to exercise it.
Um, last time I checked, you couldn't take out 30 people with families by having an abortion. Weapons that shoot multiple bullets in seconds have no place in civilian society.
1
We live in a time of madness, and some of us pretend there are no answers. We must preach the message you're preaching, Mr. Egan -- that we can build connections between parents and the community so that we work together to keep guns away from mentally ill kids and all kids. There is no single solutions, but there are answers!
12
Wait, what?
You don't agree with blaming the victims for getting shot---so you're blaming the shooters' mothers?
Did I miss something here? Like maybe blaming the shooter?
You don't agree with blaming the victims for getting shot---so you're blaming the shooters' mothers?
Did I miss something here? Like maybe blaming the shooter?
13
There's nothing new about that. Everything but the shooter is blamed in every incident.
Surely, you are being facetious? Blame women and exonerate men from responsibility. Asinine. And, so boyish.
11
Amen to that! Apparently the mothers of America, many of whom are raising children on their own, didn't realize they're responsible for the breakdown of civilization. Next, Tim will blame mothers for domestic abuse because, ya know, they should know they're husbands best, understand their deepest fears, blah, blah, blah. Fathers are apparently a side not, supposedly equally responsible but not expected to know their children's teachers or have unique relationships with their children. That would just be asking too much. Most often, it is the men who bring guns into the home. 80% of NRA members are men. Egan uses a couple recent examples of mothers with arsenals - anomalies - to turn the whole issue on women. Talk about reaching.... But that's okay, Tim, you finish....
1
"To be clear, mental illness does not equal violence. But having guns around people who are likely to do harm to themselves or others is madness. And it can be stopped."
How?
Doctors do not discuss their patients with the FBI NICS system so how do we know who is "likely to do harm"?
How?
Doctors do not discuss their patients with the FBI NICS system so how do we know who is "likely to do harm"?
1
As a dedicated divorced father of three children, I find the sexism of this article deeply offensive.
10
Mr Egan does threw in one line about fathers having an equal responsibility but his overwhelming message IS not only sexist but virtually anti-father.
1
Can liberals stop pretending that background checks and waiting periods will curb this problem? Such policies are always held as a way to "do something" about our monthly gun massacres, but the reality is that most of the recent mass shooters could've passed a background check, and didn't go out and buy their arsenal on a whim.
If you want real measures, you're going to have to start taking guns out of circulation. It's that simple. I imagine no one is proposing that because that will likely lead to serious civil unrest.
If you want real measures, you're going to have to start taking guns out of circulation. It's that simple. I imagine no one is proposing that because that will likely lead to serious civil unrest.
13
Can conservatives stop pretending that background checks and waiting periods are useless? Someone once said, "The world is full of good ideas. The real stuff is in the execution." We have a weak background checking system, as evidenced by the fact that some perpetrators pass even though they shouldn't (cf Dylan Roof). Even so, it prevents a lot of bad sales. We could make it stronger and prevent even more. But that might take a bite out of the gun industry's profit margin--and conservatives are willing to accept anything--even dead children--to protect profits.
3
"most of the recent mass shooters could've passed a background check, and didn't go out and buy their arsenal on a whim"
Because the background check system we have sucks. There are terrabytes of critical data out there that aren't shared via the patched-together network and the cat's cradle of state and local laws covering what they will and will not share. This is the reason why Dylan Roof, to take one example, was able to purchase a gun even though he had a criminal record.
Because the background check system we have sucks. There are terrabytes of critical data out there that aren't shared via the patched-together network and the cat's cradle of state and local laws covering what they will and will not share. This is the reason why Dylan Roof, to take one example, was able to purchase a gun even though he had a criminal record.
Both England and Australia outlawed semi-automatic weapons, have comprehensive background checks and registration, and instituted massive "buy back" programs to reduce the number of guns in circulation. What do they know that we don't?
Here's the link: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/how-australia-and-britain-t...
Here's the link: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/how-australia-and-britain-t...
While it is the school and movie theatre shootings that grab the headlines, most of the gun deaths in this country happen in the inner cities --almost daily. For those shooters, I wonder just how many of their mothers "know the names of their children's teachers"? Frankly, how many of these mothers are actually raising their kids. Perhaps this piece should have been "Grandmothers and Guns."
3
Actually, studies have shown that children in rural areas are as likely to die by gunshot as kids in urban areas.
1
FYI, ML: Mass shooters tend to be white males who don't live in the inner cities. If you can, please post a case, or more than one, of a black kid shooting a bunch of people in a movie theater, or at the mall. How many black men have shot up schools and murdered children? I can't think of any. I can, however, think of white men, mostly young, who have done all of the above.
1
The culture of this country was built on the idea of "us vs them". "We" are the good guys, and "they", whoever "they" may be, are the bad guys. The country was settled by rugged individualists who were at constant war with the environment, the previous owners and anyone who threatened them. The myth of the armed good guy, rising in righteous rebellion against the oppressors, is pervasive, untrue and dangerous to us now. Ben Carson's idiotic expressions regarding what HE would have done are an illustration of this.
There is still a widely held belief that guns offer protection, safety and strength, and help to solve disputes. They don't. They give the weak the illusion of strength, and as we have seen this produces ongoing carnage and an epidemic of random lethal violence.
There is still a widely held belief that guns offer protection, safety and strength, and help to solve disputes. They don't. They give the weak the illusion of strength, and as we have seen this produces ongoing carnage and an epidemic of random lethal violence.
15
Guns do not give the illusion of strength, they are in fact a strength equalizer. Unfortunately the wisdom to use the strength doesn't come with the gun. It is purchased separately and not with the coin of the realm.
My brother committed suicide at the age of 26 with a .44. During days of grieving, my stepfather repeatedly said: "I'm glad he didn't take anyone with him." Mentally distraught for most of his life, I believe he could have committed murder, which certainly would have been followed by suicide.
As a family, we loved my brother unconditionally. I am not sure this was the right tactic, given the outcome. When my brother told me he was joining the Marines, I should have said, "You are going to be bored, drinking a lot, and around guns all the time. I'll help you figure out another plan for this destitute time in your life." I chose to say nothing.
I am the mother of two teenagers. I talk about everything with them and I have gone into great debt to ensure they went to progressive schools where teachers would tell me if my child is having an off day, or more. Ours is a family culture that does not exist on silence/passivity=support.
From what I have read about Adam Lanza, both his mother and father did not insist he communicate with them, face-to-face, for months. I am using the example and my own to encourage family members of the mentally ill to overcome worrying you are going to upset your child by calling him/her on behavior that is damaging to the child or someone else. I know how hard it is doing so because I failed doing so with my brother. Though incredibly difficult, you could be saving your child's life, and, potentially, the lives of others.
As a family, we loved my brother unconditionally. I am not sure this was the right tactic, given the outcome. When my brother told me he was joining the Marines, I should have said, "You are going to be bored, drinking a lot, and around guns all the time. I'll help you figure out another plan for this destitute time in your life." I chose to say nothing.
I am the mother of two teenagers. I talk about everything with them and I have gone into great debt to ensure they went to progressive schools where teachers would tell me if my child is having an off day, or more. Ours is a family culture that does not exist on silence/passivity=support.
From what I have read about Adam Lanza, both his mother and father did not insist he communicate with them, face-to-face, for months. I am using the example and my own to encourage family members of the mentally ill to overcome worrying you are going to upset your child by calling him/her on behavior that is damaging to the child or someone else. I know how hard it is doing so because I failed doing so with my brother. Though incredibly difficult, you could be saving your child's life, and, potentially, the lives of others.
12
The Roseberg shooter's mother and Adam Lanza's mother were not the best people to gauge the sanity of their sons. They were far too close to them and blinded by mother love. Their seizing upon guns as a way to bond with their sons calls their own sanity into question. Lanza's mother paid with her life for protecting her son from the very institutions that might have helped him. The Roseberg shooter's mother should be held accountable for enabling the actions of her chronologically adult but clearly very dependent, immature and very troubled son.
7
I would like to know why there is not more development of non-lethal self-protection methods that could be available to the public--at least to the portion of the public legally attempting to use guns for personal protection. It would not be as lucrative as the gun industry, I know, but I still think there would be a market for such things--like creating a smokescreen so the gunman can't aim at you. Even a child's toy that pops out of a can might create a distraction to the gunman and an opportunity to disarm them. What if the sprinkler system of the building could be turned on by phone signals from teachers and others deemed trustworthy? Or a special alarm different from the one used for fires? Or a device that can produce an unbearable sound in the room under attack? Just wild ideas, but why aren't alternatives being tried?
10
Nice idea! If we were all armed with flash bangs?
1
Oy vey! Are you purposely trying to draw eyeballs, Egan?
I think the Times' lack of diverse women writers is telling here.
(You would not have let this run, unaccompanied by a piece blaming the absentee fathers who biologically shot off their seed and created these killers, if you hadn't fired that top woman editor, I bet.)
I think the Times' lack of diverse women writers is telling here.
(You would not have let this run, unaccompanied by a piece blaming the absentee fathers who biologically shot off their seed and created these killers, if you hadn't fired that top woman editor, I bet.)
12
Not long ago my father who is 94 began imagining that people were standing on his front lawn and laughing at him. This went on for over a week, and he got angrier and angrier.
Finally, he told me he was going to find his old service revolver and shoot them if they got any closer because "a man has a right to defend his own property." My reaction was to get the revolver out of the house as quickly as possible.
I suppose the NRA would tell me I was wrong to remove the gun. I should have put it right by his place at the kitchen table so he would have felt empowered rather than fearful. Silly me, I believe, as Mr. Egan does, that "having guns around people who are likely to do harm to themselves or others is madness."
I guess I shouldn't have been worried about him taking out the mail man, the yard guy or a Girl Scout selling cookies. His feeling "safe" would have outweighed all that.
Finally, he told me he was going to find his old service revolver and shoot them if they got any closer because "a man has a right to defend his own property." My reaction was to get the revolver out of the house as quickly as possible.
I suppose the NRA would tell me I was wrong to remove the gun. I should have put it right by his place at the kitchen table so he would have felt empowered rather than fearful. Silly me, I believe, as Mr. Egan does, that "having guns around people who are likely to do harm to themselves or others is madness."
I guess I shouldn't have been worried about him taking out the mail man, the yard guy or a Girl Scout selling cookies. His feeling "safe" would have outweighed all that.
65
When my father's dementia reached the point where he felt totally out of control, the first thing he wanted to do is find his old revolver and kill himself. Fortunately, it was long gone. I still can't imagine anyone thinking he or she has enough control over the universe--internally or externally--such than owning a handgun is more likely to do good than harm.
I realize this article points to one aspect of the gun problem. And yes, the two mothers mentioned bear some responsibility--the Roseburg mother boasted that her ARs and AKs are loaded and ready--that is a form of madness. But this is too complex an issue for an easy solution.
Many guns used in crime in NYC and elsewhere are trafficked from states with pathetically weak gun laws. Let’s target that, the source of about one-third of gun deaths in America. If criminals can traffic guns, so too can terrorists.
We need to listen to responsible gun owners. They have a right to own guns for legitimate and traditional reasons. But they tend to say that the problem is the criminal element. Can we get those who think of themselves as responsible to realize that criminal gangs cause no more than one third of our gun deaths? What of the other two thirds? What do responsible gun owners say about controlling that? Mass mental health screening? (More government intrusion!) Mass snooping of neighbors on neighbors? (Macabre!)
Come on, guys and gals! Help us have a more civilized and more civil society. Don’t just hunker down because you think Obama is coming for your guns. He isn’t.
Many guns used in crime in NYC and elsewhere are trafficked from states with pathetically weak gun laws. Let’s target that, the source of about one-third of gun deaths in America. If criminals can traffic guns, so too can terrorists.
We need to listen to responsible gun owners. They have a right to own guns for legitimate and traditional reasons. But they tend to say that the problem is the criminal element. Can we get those who think of themselves as responsible to realize that criminal gangs cause no more than one third of our gun deaths? What of the other two thirds? What do responsible gun owners say about controlling that? Mass mental health screening? (More government intrusion!) Mass snooping of neighbors on neighbors? (Macabre!)
Come on, guys and gals! Help us have a more civilized and more civil society. Don’t just hunker down because you think Obama is coming for your guns. He isn’t.
15
"Responsible gun owners," you write. Well, all gun owners are "responsible" until they are not.
In a society as savage and bloodthirsty as America, most gun ownership is per se irresponsible. Fortunately, though, gun ownership also is most risky for the gun owners themselves and the people close to them who tend to share their perverted values.
In a society as savage and bloodthirsty as America, most gun ownership is per se irresponsible. Fortunately, though, gun ownership also is most risky for the gun owners themselves and the people close to them who tend to share their perverted values.
Well, moms are women. Why should people listen to women about guns, which is a man business.
2
Pardon me, but both young males cited had fathers who were MIA. If men don't man up, women have to step in.
Another shooting last night at Northern Arizona University. Mothers Against Drunk Driving has made a dent in murder by cars; what can made a dent in murder by NRA?
21
MADD has succeeded in over-regulating DWI laws, which have been swiftly monetized by law enforcement. Another case of profiting off persecuting people for minor mistakes.
To the point. We tend to dismiss parental responsibilities, as if the would-be killer, deranged or not, were living in a vacuum. In Bolivia, when a youngster kills, by gun or car or whatever, the law has began to find fault in their parents and seeking punishment as well (pecuniary and even jail, if found negligent or, heaven forbid, complicit. A simple question, with all its complexity in our minds, has to do with our willingness to keep electing to power politicians that do not represent us, and contrary to the 90% demanding action to control the carnage by guns. Crazy? You bet. Irresponsible? Indeed. As they say, you can't obtain needed changes by doing nothing...while the gun lobby and the N.R.A. go on with their murderous path, all in the name of greed.
9
I have a friend who keeps hunting guns in his house (no hand guns). They are locked away with trigger locks and ammo is kept separate. What he does do for his own safety is keep a baseball bat in every room.
3
Perhaps he should try out for the Red Sox, instead of pretending he is going to fight someone off with a baseball bat.
An arsenal of baseball bats. Perhaps somewhat disquieting but a big step up from a houseful of loaded guns.
Terminology, what are involved are "weapons", not "guns". And there is no 2nd Amendment right to have weapons with multiple ammunition. Where is the Supreme Court on its originalism journey? When the 2nd Amendment was adopted there were no multiple magazine weapons, so let's go back to the original meaning.
9
I agree. If the Supreme Court cannot see beyond original intent, then "the right to bear arms" should apply only to muskets. Otherwise, "arms," in present-day parlance, could mean all manner of weaponry, including heat-seeking missiles.
3
If technological increases should not be engaged in the 2nd Amendment then the first should limit newspapers to using manual presses with molded lead type and operated manually.
Enjoy writing your letters with a quill pen and ink pot and putting them into the snail mail.
Enjoy writing your letters with a quill pen and ink pot and putting them into the snail mail.
Sadly, the US Supreme Court in D.C. v. Heller (June 26, 2008) ruled, by a vote of 5-4, that the 2nd Amendment granted the right of individual gun ownership independent of service in a militia ("A well-regulated militia, ...").
However, in the same ruling the Court said the following:
"The Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manner and for any purpose. The Court has upheld gun control legislation including prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. The historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons supports the holding in United States v. Miller that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time."
However, in the same ruling the Court said the following:
"The Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manner and for any purpose. The Court has upheld gun control legislation including prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. The historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons supports the holding in United States v. Miller that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time."
Given that overpopulation is THE greatest threat to human life on the planet, I suppose we should all embrace the NRA and the pro-death movement it leads, instead of the pro-life movement, led by people like Pope Francis, which is leading to overpopulation, the greatest threat to human life on the planet.
6
Ironically, the Pope was protected by scores of people...with guns.
I've often wondered why we get so agitated about trying to save lives. The evidence is global: we are constantly and gladly trying to kill off the species [any species]. How far will gun law debates go when we're in perpetual wars? We're afraid of death but inflict it at every opportunity.
Quiet sanity gets you nowhere in this loud, narcissistic-enthralled world.
Quiet sanity gets you nowhere in this loud, narcissistic-enthralled world.
No thanks pro lifers, we like condoms better than guns.
1
Are you seriously going to blame and/or assign responsibility to mothers of mass murderers in 2015??? First, these jerks are adults. Egan clearly does not have adult children or he would know that you can't "make" an adult child do anything. Well, maybe if you held a gun to their heads...
Just because Mom likes guns (some women feel safer by gun ownership - rape, battering, etc), doesn't make her loony tunes. This is also an insult to our armed forces women, veterans and active duty! They shouldn't have guns? Seriously?
Battered women can't get police to act when there is definitive proof of past violence and active threats of impending violence. The police CANNOT arrest someone or detain them for any length of time based on a fear/threat of potential violence. So, how is that going to work when it comes to their sons' sketchy behavior or mom's intuition?
Moms do not always know their children well. Some moms think their children /could never do such a thing. You want us to be the first line of defense against mass shootings? Dads should be involved with their kids. How does that work when they are the gun nut in the family? But, the mothers know children better...
Lastly, the perpetrators are males. Males steeped in their culture where violence is the solution to practically everything. If we want to stop mass shootings and other violent crimes maybe we need to change the way our culture raises boys into men. Check out Jackson Katz's Tough Guise.
Just because Mom likes guns (some women feel safer by gun ownership - rape, battering, etc), doesn't make her loony tunes. This is also an insult to our armed forces women, veterans and active duty! They shouldn't have guns? Seriously?
Battered women can't get police to act when there is definitive proof of past violence and active threats of impending violence. The police CANNOT arrest someone or detain them for any length of time based on a fear/threat of potential violence. So, how is that going to work when it comes to their sons' sketchy behavior or mom's intuition?
Moms do not always know their children well. Some moms think their children /could never do such a thing. You want us to be the first line of defense against mass shootings? Dads should be involved with their kids. How does that work when they are the gun nut in the family? But, the mothers know children better...
Lastly, the perpetrators are males. Males steeped in their culture where violence is the solution to practically everything. If we want to stop mass shootings and other violent crimes maybe we need to change the way our culture raises boys into men. Check out Jackson Katz's Tough Guise.
6
"Are you seriously going to blame and/or assign responsibility to mothers of mass murderers in 2015???".....Yes. And mothers and fathers and every other person who has refused to take action, and blocked the attempts of those who would try.
8
These killers may be legally adults when they pull the trigger, but the process of them turning into deadly sociopaths begins at home. They don't just fall out of the sky. Both moms and dads have a role in this, and too often the dads just aren't around, especially when the boys are young enough to be effectively nurtured and raised appropriately.
Please link to Moms Demand Action's website in this article. Your column is a call to action - linking to this organization might encourage readers to take that next step and connect with a group that is an ever-growing voice of sanity in this conversation.
8
Is it predominantly mothers who would silence those advocating gun control measures? Is the NRA predominantly made up of mothers? Or are these vocal and adamant gun promoters mostly men?
How many women would want their husband's guns to be locked up, but due to his rage and control issues, can't get that accomplished?
How many women and mothers of shooters are pro-NRA themselves? How many men and fathers?
You make a point that mothers are the ones with the inside information and therefore should be more involved in stopping often grown sons in perpetrating a mass shooting. The Roseburg and Sandy Hook shootings involved men whose mothers had arsenals, but not Aurora or many other incidents. Parents with arsenals are probably not going to train a son to avoid guns, whether they are mothers or fathers. There's something wrong about your op-ed piece, that looks to women to prevent lethal activities of their sons. I honestly think it is everyone's responsibility to be aware and to take steps to prevent tragedy before it occurs. Mothers, fathers, siblings, friends, neighbors. Or has the NRA silenced that level of conversation, as well?
How many women would want their husband's guns to be locked up, but due to his rage and control issues, can't get that accomplished?
How many women and mothers of shooters are pro-NRA themselves? How many men and fathers?
You make a point that mothers are the ones with the inside information and therefore should be more involved in stopping often grown sons in perpetrating a mass shooting. The Roseburg and Sandy Hook shootings involved men whose mothers had arsenals, but not Aurora or many other incidents. Parents with arsenals are probably not going to train a son to avoid guns, whether they are mothers or fathers. There's something wrong about your op-ed piece, that looks to women to prevent lethal activities of their sons. I honestly think it is everyone's responsibility to be aware and to take steps to prevent tragedy before it occurs. Mothers, fathers, siblings, friends, neighbors. Or has the NRA silenced that level of conversation, as well?
4
I grew up with a gun - a .22 caliber rifle which I used for plinking and hunting the likes of rabbit and partridge. My friends had guns, too. Once, a classmate brought his Christmas-gift shotgun to school, proudly showing it off. We all touched it, 'sighted it,' and when the bell rang for the next class, into the locker it went. His plan was to go into the woods after school was dismissed. Today, if he was even able to get it into the building, he would be banished from attending school. So, have things changed. Today I have five guns. They are dust collectors, but they are mine. I have no intention of displaying them to my children or grandchildren; or, selling them, and whether I use them again, remains to be seen (one is a handgun). My point is that I have a certain deep-seated feeling about my guns, something that gives me a feeling of having almost pleasurable power that I can flex when I want to. It's a perverse dichotomy that remains in the recesses of my mind and soul when I pray for the victims of gun violence, especially those of massacres in schools, theaters, and churches. And it's because I believe I am a responsible gun owner, just like most other gun owners think they are. Some things are not easy to sort-out.
5
Peter C.,
Inadvertently or not, I think you put your finger on it. The problem we have in this country with guns is a lot of frightened people who get a sense of "pleasurable power" from their gun ownership. It's a sick, sick society.
Inadvertently or not, I think you put your finger on it. The problem we have in this country with guns is a lot of frightened people who get a sense of "pleasurable power" from their gun ownership. It's a sick, sick society.
I appreciate your honesty. I suppose guns do speak to a male instinct to "hunt and protect," that might go back thousands of years or more. Perhaps the best way to reconcile that yearning for a weapon with public safety, is to follow the Swiss path? Anyone who wants a gun to get his warm fuzzies, must join a well-regulated militia and serve in it regularly. Must be trained in gun safety and right actions/decisions. And he only gets one gun for life. A rifle, not a handgun, not an assault weapon.
1
In The United States there has become a different kind of separation between religion and the state: it is the separation of the state from the citizens. In this toppsy turvy country the Supreme Court ruled states can opt out of the Obama Care Medicaid Plans. In a simple understanding of the Constutional Right to all having equal protection under the law, except life sustaining and maintainance medical care: we Americans have a right to be sperarate from out government and the constitution, according to the Supreme Court. Sometimes the simple interpretation is the correct one, not the convoluted rationalizations of precadence. What part of equal protection don't the Judges understand. In a simple straight forward rational understanding of equal protection, the Judges, the govenors, state legislatures that opted out of increasing Medicaid coverage ought to and should be charged with some form of homicide; people are dying for lack of medical care for all the wrong reasons.
So, I see, do you see that in a country that denies equal medical protection under the law, can, and does deny the right to equal protection from being killed by a gun.
The politicians and the Judges agree in the insanity that ALL AMERICANS have the equal right to be killed by a gun.
How far gone do we have to go before the caring, empathetic, loving and sane citizens go to the streets to demand freedom to live without the tyranny of the equal right to be killed by a gun.
So, I see, do you see that in a country that denies equal medical protection under the law, can, and does deny the right to equal protection from being killed by a gun.
The politicians and the Judges agree in the insanity that ALL AMERICANS have the equal right to be killed by a gun.
How far gone do we have to go before the caring, empathetic, loving and sane citizens go to the streets to demand freedom to live without the tyranny of the equal right to be killed by a gun.
6
The Connecticut mother should be held culpable.
The Oregon shooter's mother should be held culpable.
Both enabled the shootings.
Both should be drained of every cent in civil suits and under criminal indictment for aiding and abetting murder.
The Oregon shooter's mother should be held culpable.
Both enabled the shootings.
Both should be drained of every cent in civil suits and under criminal indictment for aiding and abetting murder.
8
Uh, Nancy Lanza is dead, victim of a shooting.
1
We must realize that we have lost this fight. The only thing we can do is acknowledge a passive acceptance and prepare for more of the same. With that said, we may as well start educating our children in preschool about gun safety. We have so many thousands of unemployed veterans who I'm sure would have no problem delivering this message to our youth. It's sounds defeatist but it's the only pragmatic solution. Guns aren't going away, we may as well know how to use them.
1
This piece flirts with mother blaming, even with the nod to fathers. You say that "Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children." There is no "pathological refusal". The fact is that you have a political system that allows a very narrow special interest - gun manufacturers - to hijack the national debate about a major public health issue. That small group has outsized influence over votes, over debates and even over the research that is allowed to take place on this issue. Quit blaming moms.
10
Great piece from Egan, as always. It's truly amazing the extent to which the previously "can do" spirit of this country of years past has become the "can't do" society of today. We can't provide universal health coverage even though everybody else in the advanced world does. We can't transform our K-12 education system into a world-beater. And we can't tackle astronomical rates of gun violence that dwarfs those in other advanced countries.
How very unexceptional we've become.
How very unexceptional we've become.
13
I'm beginning to think that those of us who support reasonable gun control measures are attacking the problem from the wrong side. The Second Amendment protects the rights of gun ownership. We usually put forward proposals the attempt to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them. Guns themselves cannot have rights. Restricting guns, types of guns, etc. might be a more legally sound way to approach the issue. There are lots of arms that a citizen cannot own -- nuclear weapons as an extreme example. The example of automobiles is instructive. We have progressively made cars safer, seat belts, anti-lock brakes, impact absorbing body structures. We require licensing and liability insurance of drivers and auto owners. Appying design changes such as "smart gun" technologies to be phased ingradually plus the development of additional safety features does not restrict the rights of gun owners. Nor does reinstituting product liability responsibility to gun manufacturers.
11
" Nor does reinstituting product liability responsibility to gun manufacturers."
If so then would it be right to do the same to any manufacturer whose products are misused by the buyer? Carving knives, Baseball bats, automobiles, etc.
Cars and guns are not sold to end users by the manufacturers but through distributors. Should they be sued as well?
If so then would it be right to do the same to any manufacturer whose products are misused by the buyer? Carving knives, Baseball bats, automobiles, etc.
Cars and guns are not sold to end users by the manufacturers but through distributors. Should they be sued as well?
I agree with your observations and suggestions.
Unfortunately, "automobiles", cars", "carriages" or "wagons" or other means
of conveyance, to the best of my knowledge, are not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution - but "arms" are in the 2nd Amendment.
Hence, the NRA, Gun Owners of American, et al, always fall back, at any hint of gun regulation, on the "slippery slope" argument: if we yield so much as an inch on any proposal to regulate guns, it is assuredly the first step down the slippery slope to total confiscation of all guns. Never mind that
the proposed changed might increase the safety of the general population by reducing the number of people who kill themselves with guns or who kill others in rampages like we are now accustomed to you.
The NRA and others have worked to prevent organizations like the CDC from even studying gun violence and perhaps developing recommendations for attacking the epidemic of violence in our country. And, of course, their threats to politically destroy elected officials who do not agree with their
extreme positions are well documented and have, sadly, proven effective.
People, this is our problem. Until we US citizens are willing to stand up and
vote politicians out of office at all levels who support the NRA and their
fellow travelers, the death toll caused by easy access to guns will continue unabated.
All the rest is talk.
Unfortunately, "automobiles", cars", "carriages" or "wagons" or other means
of conveyance, to the best of my knowledge, are not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution - but "arms" are in the 2nd Amendment.
Hence, the NRA, Gun Owners of American, et al, always fall back, at any hint of gun regulation, on the "slippery slope" argument: if we yield so much as an inch on any proposal to regulate guns, it is assuredly the first step down the slippery slope to total confiscation of all guns. Never mind that
the proposed changed might increase the safety of the general population by reducing the number of people who kill themselves with guns or who kill others in rampages like we are now accustomed to you.
The NRA and others have worked to prevent organizations like the CDC from even studying gun violence and perhaps developing recommendations for attacking the epidemic of violence in our country. And, of course, their threats to politically destroy elected officials who do not agree with their
extreme positions are well documented and have, sadly, proven effective.
People, this is our problem. Until we US citizens are willing to stand up and
vote politicians out of office at all levels who support the NRA and their
fellow travelers, the death toll caused by easy access to guns will continue unabated.
All the rest is talk.
The point is that none of the other industries you cite have protection from product liability lawsuits -- only gun manufacturers.
FDR said it: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself," and fear is now what is rampant in this country--along with violence, isolation, insecurity, anger, and the break down of society.
And using basic principles of advertising, fear-mongering is what the NRA and Republicans do, with both groups touting individualism, survival of the fittest, and the supremacy of business/market sector. Corporations are people, after all.
So, the gun lovers go into panic attacks because the NRA, GOP, and right-wing media have conditioned Americans that gun "control" means the government will storm their castles and take away all their guns--castration by government, leaving the each lone citizen defenseless against what? Each other? It's a Mad Max society, and nothing should stand between a frightened, isolated individual and his/her gun. It is the scared individual's Second Amendment right to bear arms (no matter how paranoid or deranged that individual), and the bad government wants to take away that "right." Never mind that the GOP is busily taking away the right to vote other than Republican.
Much talk about money and individual rights. Okay, but what about society and social responsibility? The social contract is based on rights and RESPONSIBILITIES.
The gun lovers have their rights but what about their responsibilities? It's really not gun control--its really about gun safety and the responsible ownership of guns. Irresponsible people with guns are killing us & our children.
And using basic principles of advertising, fear-mongering is what the NRA and Republicans do, with both groups touting individualism, survival of the fittest, and the supremacy of business/market sector. Corporations are people, after all.
So, the gun lovers go into panic attacks because the NRA, GOP, and right-wing media have conditioned Americans that gun "control" means the government will storm their castles and take away all their guns--castration by government, leaving the each lone citizen defenseless against what? Each other? It's a Mad Max society, and nothing should stand between a frightened, isolated individual and his/her gun. It is the scared individual's Second Amendment right to bear arms (no matter how paranoid or deranged that individual), and the bad government wants to take away that "right." Never mind that the GOP is busily taking away the right to vote other than Republican.
Much talk about money and individual rights. Okay, but what about society and social responsibility? The social contract is based on rights and RESPONSIBILITIES.
The gun lovers have their rights but what about their responsibilities? It's really not gun control--its really about gun safety and the responsible ownership of guns. Irresponsible people with guns are killing us & our children.
7
"Carson was ignorant of the actions of an Army veteran, Chris Mintz, who tried to stop the Roseburg killer and was shot seven times."
"Carson was ignorant . . ."
"Carson was ignorant . . ."
3
I'm afraid it's even simpler than this. For gun manufacturers, massacres are good for business.
The prevalence of guns facilitates regular massacres.
In the wake of the carnage, people buy more guns out of (a) fear of their fellow citizens (as was reported for Roseburg in this week's NYT) or (b) fear that Obama is coming for all your guns.
Gun sales increase.
This puts more guns into circulation, which facilitates more massacres.
In the wake of the carnage, guns sales increase.
And so on.
So if you are a very well-compensated exec at, say, Smith and Wesson, what is your view of massacres? As events that increase your bottom line, are they really a bad thing?
All you have to do is buy enough stooges in Congress (and your huge profits allow you to do this) and fund your NRA mouthpiece to keep the fear alive, sit back, and wait for more massacres.
It's all good.
Except for the massacre victims, of course.
But, as an exec or a member of Congress or a Supreme Court Justice, you know you will never be one such victim, since guns are banned in your workplace.
The word "psychopathy" doesn't even begin to cover it.
The prevalence of guns facilitates regular massacres.
In the wake of the carnage, people buy more guns out of (a) fear of their fellow citizens (as was reported for Roseburg in this week's NYT) or (b) fear that Obama is coming for all your guns.
Gun sales increase.
This puts more guns into circulation, which facilitates more massacres.
In the wake of the carnage, guns sales increase.
And so on.
So if you are a very well-compensated exec at, say, Smith and Wesson, what is your view of massacres? As events that increase your bottom line, are they really a bad thing?
All you have to do is buy enough stooges in Congress (and your huge profits allow you to do this) and fund your NRA mouthpiece to keep the fear alive, sit back, and wait for more massacres.
It's all good.
Except for the massacre victims, of course.
But, as an exec or a member of Congress or a Supreme Court Justice, you know you will never be one such victim, since guns are banned in your workplace.
The word "psychopathy" doesn't even begin to cover it.
11
"A group, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, was formed after the Newtown carnage. It’s a good counter to the creepy cultists of the gun culture."
Indeed, this is a very active group and working hard, especially at the state level. If you really want action and new policies, join them!
Indeed, this is a very active group and working hard, especially at the state level. If you really want action and new policies, join them!
4
Mr. Egan, if there is anyone who is a crackpot on political issues, it is you, not Dr. Carson.
Dr. Carson did not "imply the nine victims...to blame." You made this up, as did other leftist media outlets. Dr. Carson spoke of the charging the shooter when there is no escape route, as is recommended by the Dept of Homeland Security. Heard of them? Further, as one poster has already commented, the liberal mindset (of which you are a prime example) has Americans prevented from playing dodge ball, warns of football dangers, and generally makes Americans less prepared for danger. Lots different in Israel.
Was Dr. Carson ignorant of the actions of Chris Mintz? The only evidence I saw was that he did not recognize that name when asked. And, specifically, he spoke to the charging the shooter.
We have plenty of background checks. On occasion, someone slips through the cracks. But the majority of murders by guns (don't add suicides to the number to inflate the numbers) are done by people who have illegal possession of a gun. And of course the shooter is committing a crime...not the gun.
We have a president who politicizes anything that is convenient for his liberal agenda...never let a crisis go to waste. He called for more gun control essentially at the first news of the shooting. Yet he has failed to get rid of the armed guard that surrounds his every move.
Not a one of these shooters was a member of the NRA, yet you choose to attack and blame them.
Dr. Carson did not "imply the nine victims...to blame." You made this up, as did other leftist media outlets. Dr. Carson spoke of the charging the shooter when there is no escape route, as is recommended by the Dept of Homeland Security. Heard of them? Further, as one poster has already commented, the liberal mindset (of which you are a prime example) has Americans prevented from playing dodge ball, warns of football dangers, and generally makes Americans less prepared for danger. Lots different in Israel.
Was Dr. Carson ignorant of the actions of Chris Mintz? The only evidence I saw was that he did not recognize that name when asked. And, specifically, he spoke to the charging the shooter.
We have plenty of background checks. On occasion, someone slips through the cracks. But the majority of murders by guns (don't add suicides to the number to inflate the numbers) are done by people who have illegal possession of a gun. And of course the shooter is committing a crime...not the gun.
We have a president who politicizes anything that is convenient for his liberal agenda...never let a crisis go to waste. He called for more gun control essentially at the first news of the shooting. Yet he has failed to get rid of the armed guard that surrounds his every move.
Not a one of these shooters was a member of the NRA, yet you choose to attack and blame them.
The NRA has been the biggest obstacle to the regulation of firearms in this Country, and although these shooters may not have been members they were clearly enabled by the NRA's efforts. In defending Ben Carson you failed to mention his callous statement indicating his true belief that gun rights are more important than people's lives (we assume that is except un-born lives) “I never saw a body with bullet holes that was more devastating than taking the right to arm ourselves away.”
Interesting that you mention--"Lots different in Israel." In Israel it is difficult for an citizen to get arms for personal use. It not only takes quite a bit of time and effort to obtain a gun in Israel but issuing a firearms license for private use to other persons requires proof of the existence of a cause that justifies the license. In addition to specific training and mental health requirements, applicants must prove that possession of a firearm is needed based on the location of their residence or employment, the type of occupation they are engaged in, or service in elite Israel Defense Force (IDF) reserve units. A woman recently commented that she needed letters from her doctor, personal interviews and interviews with acquaintances. It took many weeks for this woman just to renew her license.
I'm happy to adopt Israel's model.
Interesting that you mention--"Lots different in Israel." In Israel it is difficult for an citizen to get arms for personal use. It not only takes quite a bit of time and effort to obtain a gun in Israel but issuing a firearms license for private use to other persons requires proof of the existence of a cause that justifies the license. In addition to specific training and mental health requirements, applicants must prove that possession of a firearm is needed based on the location of their residence or employment, the type of occupation they are engaged in, or service in elite Israel Defense Force (IDF) reserve units. A woman recently commented that she needed letters from her doctor, personal interviews and interviews with acquaintances. It took many weeks for this woman just to renew her license.
I'm happy to adopt Israel's model.
"But having guns around people who are likely to do harm to themselves or others is madness. And it can be stopped."
Okay, Mr. Egan, I'm listening and very interested. Where's/What's your solution? You write a whole column about the problem, but not one specific, detailed solution...except "the mothers". Nothing but the typical rhetoric. Every gun used by the killers was purchased legally. Yes, gun laws in place. I ask again, Mr. Egan, what's your solution??!! And be very specific. Gun homicides have decreased by nearly 50% in the US since 1993. Laws have changed. Again, what's your solution, Mr. Egan?? Provide the evidence. I'll be all in.
Okay, Mr. Egan, I'm listening and very interested. Where's/What's your solution? You write a whole column about the problem, but not one specific, detailed solution...except "the mothers". Nothing but the typical rhetoric. Every gun used by the killers was purchased legally. Yes, gun laws in place. I ask again, Mr. Egan, what's your solution??!! And be very specific. Gun homicides have decreased by nearly 50% in the US since 1993. Laws have changed. Again, what's your solution, Mr. Egan?? Provide the evidence. I'll be all in.
Right On!
Neither The Donald nor Jeb! said either “It’s the mind that does the shooting” or “Stuff happens” in specific response to the tragic death of the eight-year-old at the hands of the eleven-year-old. To imply that they did is outrageous.
And calling presidential candidates “crackpots” simply because one disagrees with their politics is transparently interested and offensive.
What I’d LIKE to hear is that sensible gun regulation, such as requiring guns to be locked up in homes that have children, might have a chance of overwhelming passage if only some didn’t insist on inaccurately attributing inflammatory remarks to tragic incidents, which simply adds to a general argument that has shown far more heat than light on BOTH sides for a very long time.
I’m tempted to ask how many occasions of mothers successfully and uneventfully bonding with sons, even disturbed sons, over guns are overlooked in the desire to point to a few that resulted in mayhem. And to follow that question by another – at what point do we ban behavior that might be overwhelmingly positive to prevent a few instances when it was not? But, then, that’s the response of so many liberals, isn’t it? The cost to society of regulation is immaterial so long as we can reduce the concentration of ground-level ozone by 1%.
One thing’s for sure. A column that demonizes only one side of an argument that claims millions and millions of adherents on EACH side gets us absolutely nowhere.
And calling presidential candidates “crackpots” simply because one disagrees with their politics is transparently interested and offensive.
What I’d LIKE to hear is that sensible gun regulation, such as requiring guns to be locked up in homes that have children, might have a chance of overwhelming passage if only some didn’t insist on inaccurately attributing inflammatory remarks to tragic incidents, which simply adds to a general argument that has shown far more heat than light on BOTH sides for a very long time.
I’m tempted to ask how many occasions of mothers successfully and uneventfully bonding with sons, even disturbed sons, over guns are overlooked in the desire to point to a few that resulted in mayhem. And to follow that question by another – at what point do we ban behavior that might be overwhelmingly positive to prevent a few instances when it was not? But, then, that’s the response of so many liberals, isn’t it? The cost to society of regulation is immaterial so long as we can reduce the concentration of ground-level ozone by 1%.
One thing’s for sure. A column that demonizes only one side of an argument that claims millions and millions of adherents on EACH side gets us absolutely nowhere.
2
Mr. Luettgen, you are always the most predictable and dependable apologist for Republicans. It doesn't matter what any of them say, you can always be depended upon to repeat your mantra of telling us "what they meant or didn't mean to say." Words matter and they have consequences, and if you, Trump, Carson, Jeb and other fellow travelers do not understand or appreciate that point, well that's too bad but your apologies are not convincing
Another one of so many straw man arguments, and hypocritical to boot. OK, so "Neither The Donald nor Jeb! said either “It’s the mind that does the shooting” or “Stuff happens” in specific response to the tragic death of the eight-year-old."
Further along of course is the same style of generalization applied to so-called liberal advocates of gun control: "at what point do we ban behavior that might be overwhelmingly positive to prevent a few instances when it was not? But, then, that’s the response of so many liberals, isn’t it? The cost to society of regulation is immaterial so long as we can reduce the concentration of ground-level ozone by 1%."
It's a gross straw man leap from gun control to every other issue as well as ozone deletion. It's also intellectually lazy.
To somehow rationalize the idea that mothers supposedly bonding with their sons over weapons, instruments of death, is a good thing is ludicrous. Motherhood and guns? Nurturing and weaponry? God help us.
There are plenty of good reasons for calling the holders of certain types of opinions for what they are: opinions that are uninformed, misleading and meant to be inflammatory, that deny facts, that are fixed, unevolving, and unbalanced, and that serve an ulterior purpose, one other than intelligent debate. Yes, they are crackpots, and probably most easily recognized by psychologists as disturbed or exhibiting symptoms of denial of reality, or make straw man arguments to maintain a sense of smugness.
Further along of course is the same style of generalization applied to so-called liberal advocates of gun control: "at what point do we ban behavior that might be overwhelmingly positive to prevent a few instances when it was not? But, then, that’s the response of so many liberals, isn’t it? The cost to society of regulation is immaterial so long as we can reduce the concentration of ground-level ozone by 1%."
It's a gross straw man leap from gun control to every other issue as well as ozone deletion. It's also intellectually lazy.
To somehow rationalize the idea that mothers supposedly bonding with their sons over weapons, instruments of death, is a good thing is ludicrous. Motherhood and guns? Nurturing and weaponry? God help us.
There are plenty of good reasons for calling the holders of certain types of opinions for what they are: opinions that are uninformed, misleading and meant to be inflammatory, that deny facts, that are fixed, unevolving, and unbalanced, and that serve an ulterior purpose, one other than intelligent debate. Yes, they are crackpots, and probably most easily recognized by psychologists as disturbed or exhibiting symptoms of denial of reality, or make straw man arguments to maintain a sense of smugness.
Mothers?
I'm sorry is it 1965?
Our culture is awash with violence, the overwhelmingly male and Republican congress is owned by the gun lobby and you are asking if we should blame Mothers?
(Oh and...well...you know...fathers too)
Lanza and the shooter in Oregon were troubled and difficult children whose Fathers abandoned them to mothers who were clearly unable to cope. Why are the unstable mothers any more culpable in this case than the unavailable fathers? Why didn't either of these men see their troubled children for YEARS before these attacks occurred? Why didn't they know that the home was an arsenal?
I hope the FAMILIES of America can find a way to escape this sickness of loving guns more than people. I hope that by reaching out to PARENTS we may have a path to a better dialog,
Good grief,
I'm sorry is it 1965?
Our culture is awash with violence, the overwhelmingly male and Republican congress is owned by the gun lobby and you are asking if we should blame Mothers?
(Oh and...well...you know...fathers too)
Lanza and the shooter in Oregon were troubled and difficult children whose Fathers abandoned them to mothers who were clearly unable to cope. Why are the unstable mothers any more culpable in this case than the unavailable fathers? Why didn't either of these men see their troubled children for YEARS before these attacks occurred? Why didn't they know that the home was an arsenal?
I hope the FAMILIES of America can find a way to escape this sickness of loving guns more than people. I hope that by reaching out to PARENTS we may have a path to a better dialog,
Good grief,
20
Yup. Interesting that Egan takes the Republicans to task, which he should, but then sounds an awful lot like them in his "blame mom, exonerate dad" spiel. What a load of malarkey! Egan should be ashamed of this, as should the NYT. I would love to see an editorial in response, written from a mother's perspective.
1
Perhaps it is small wonder given the state of our collective 'mental health' that already unstable young men who sit at home and watch ISIS violence on social media somehow see ISIS like behavior as a solution to their loss of identity. This may very well be one of the most insidious effects of the ISIS expertise with social media; that expertise may be one of their most effective recruitment tools.
Mental health programs are needed no doubt. But local outreach programs at our schools may be the best means of identifying individuals at risk so that they can receive the support that they need before it is too late for our children.
Mental health programs are needed no doubt. But local outreach programs at our schools may be the best means of identifying individuals at risk so that they can receive the support that they need before it is too late for our children.
1
Bobby Jindal and all the GOP who are running for President, and all the bought and paid for by the NRA in congress owe us an apology.
4
I heard Tim Fischer, an Australian Politician interviewed about his countries Gun ownership and personal responsibility policies. Very sensible. Australia seems to have made it work and they have not had a mass shooting in 20 years.
9
We need a leader on the opposite side of the NRA that can communicate effectively. The message must focus on COMPETENT Americans' right to bear arms. That means Americans that have passed a background check that includes mental illness. And also requiring owners to have completed a basic firearms safety course. I will give credit to the NRA as they do provide a comprehensive course that emphasizes safety above all else.
4
The physical evidence for the latest "massacre" is the same for the devil in Salem. Repeating a narrative even ten thousand times does not make it a proven corroborated fact.
It is not the gun lobby that is crippling all efforts to keep guns out of the hands of murderers. Even if every member of the NRA supported no limits of any kind on any kind of gun by anyone--and not all NRA members support its extreme positions--that's about 1.4% of the population. Frankly, numbers that low should have no influence whosoever.
So it's not the NRA, it's the money behind the NRA that buys politicians and influence and funds the "get even" attacks by the NRA on anyone who dares to propose anything related to guns. That's why we need to nullify the Citizens United decision and adopt other measures that limit the influence of money in politics.
We also need to interpret the 2nd amendment they way its was intended in the 18th century, as a guarantee that states could maintain their own militias even after a national army was in place.
Both of those changes will require either getting constitutional amendments passed or getting a sane majority back on the Supreme Court. And, of course, voting the paid hacks who are blocking any change out of Congress.
So it's not the NRA, it's the money behind the NRA that buys politicians and influence and funds the "get even" attacks by the NRA on anyone who dares to propose anything related to guns. That's why we need to nullify the Citizens United decision and adopt other measures that limit the influence of money in politics.
We also need to interpret the 2nd amendment they way its was intended in the 18th century, as a guarantee that states could maintain their own militias even after a national army was in place.
Both of those changes will require either getting constitutional amendments passed or getting a sane majority back on the Supreme Court. And, of course, voting the paid hacks who are blocking any change out of Congress.
10
Justices like Roberts make one wonder why the law is even written down, since word meanings are so malleable.
The Republican Party started turning mental patients out of mental hospitals in the early 1970s. The idea was to save money by not housin the patients and have them treated by local community clinics that were to be st up across the country. But the powers that be never funded the clinics and the number need were never founded.
Then came Reagan to finish the job in the 1980s. The unintended results of all this is a giant increase in the homeless and the mentally unstable who can get there hands on weapons.
As far as I am concerned, the Republican Party is primarily responsible for the current mess. They have refused to fulfill their responsibility to what they started.
Then came Reagan to finish the job in the 1980s. The unintended results of all this is a giant increase in the homeless and the mentally unstable who can get there hands on weapons.
As far as I am concerned, the Republican Party is primarily responsible for the current mess. They have refused to fulfill their responsibility to what they started.
4
Gun madness has consumed and is continuing to consume America. The money and power in our legislative halls belongs to those who espouse fewer and fewer gun restrictions to the point that gun massacres represent only collateral damage in our quest to
ensure that there are no or few restrictions to gun ownership or use thereof
It is a sickness, a madness from which there seems to be no escape. In Ohio we allow guns in bars. If that isn't madness I don't know what is. Even the President is a victim when he is resented by thousands in the Roseburg area for wanting to meet with families of the victims of the massacre. We seem to have become a giant asylum.
ensure that there are no or few restrictions to gun ownership or use thereof
It is a sickness, a madness from which there seems to be no escape. In Ohio we allow guns in bars. If that isn't madness I don't know what is. Even the President is a victim when he is resented by thousands in the Roseburg area for wanting to meet with families of the victims of the massacre. We seem to have become a giant asylum.
9
Since 9/11 400,000 Americans have been killed by firearms. That is not a typo, the number of dead is more than 400,000. It is immoral not to take action, Period. The burden lies with every Conservative and every gun advocate. I can not tell them what they should do, and I cannot tell them what will work, but they have a moral responsibility to try; and if what they try doesn't work, they have a moral obligation to try again and again until they find something that does work. I am sorry, but they have failed their duty as citizens and they cannot claim to be moral decent people until they take action.
14
The pro gun people keep talking about gun rights.
The opponents never mention gun obligations or responsibilities. Until they start using that plain language, they won't get anywhere.
The opponents never mention gun obligations or responsibilities. Until they start using that plain language, they won't get anywhere.
6
Yes, we appear to be suffering from an overly broad definition of exercising second amendment rights that appears include to mass shootings.
I can't really tell you what the opponents mean by responsible gun ownership so I have no trouble making the statement that led this comment.
I can't really tell you what the opponents mean by responsible gun ownership so I have no trouble making the statement that led this comment.
Since Ronald Reagan ushered in the Age of Willful Ignorance some Americans have enjoyed years of deluded belief completely free of rational or factual basis. The 1% crowd needs to keep it's Tea Party Banana Republican followers supplied with conspiracies and non-existent threats to their religious "freedom" in order to keep them voting for policies that continue to enrich the mega-rich. As expensive as it is to mount a continuous misinformation campaign, the rich can afford it. But this does not excuse those who prefer to be told what to think as opposed to those who prefer belief supported by reality.
11
In December 2012, virtually simultaneously with the Sandy Hook shootings that killed 20 children in Connecticut, a mentally disturbed man wounded 24 people, including 23 children, at a primary school in Chenpeng China. The key difference was that all of the victims in the Chenpeng incident survived, because the assailant was armed only with a knife. China has very tight gun controls. We in America have decided long ago that we are OK with sacrificing our children to the greater good of owning guns. Ben Carson has articulated that very clearly. When will we ask - what do adults need with guns if they are not in law enforcement or the military? We are not making ourselves safer - the US already has by far the highest rate of gun deaths in the world. Does anyone really expect that to get better with MORE guns?
31
I agree with every word in this piece but I'd just add a note of caution against conflation of guns with violent video games or movies. Studies have shown that the influence of the violent media on behavior is small, and where it does occur, it is an indication of the inability to distinguish reality from fiction, itself a pathological condition (seemingly affecting a number of our lawmakers). I watch horror movies and play video games but I would not touch a gun or allow one in my home. Guns kill people. We have to keep our eyes firmly on this fact and not allow ourselves be distracted by a moral panic against disturbing art.
3
'Responsible' gun owners will accept reasonable legal responsibility for gun safety.
Treat guns like cars in regulating safety. Certificates of title, and licenses; liability insurance; and 'rules of the road' for safe use and storage.
Gun violence sparked by impulse and opportunity will be greatly reduced.
Again, 'responsible' gun owners will accept reasonable responsibility for gun safety. (All Constitutional rights are subject to limits, and responsibilities.)
Treat guns like cars in regulating safety. Certificates of title, and licenses; liability insurance; and 'rules of the road' for safe use and storage.
Gun violence sparked by impulse and opportunity will be greatly reduced.
Again, 'responsible' gun owners will accept reasonable responsibility for gun safety. (All Constitutional rights are subject to limits, and responsibilities.)
8
I'm glad you put "responsible" in quotes. Are there any "responsible" gun owners?
It's not "mental illness" that kills with guns.
Axiom: You cannot kill with a gun if you don't have one!
Rarely do the shooters have a major psychiatric diagnosable disease. Much more likely are personality disorders, oddness, eccentricity, social awkwardness, isolation, obsession with violence, alcohol and marijuana in the home and so on all of which are perfectly obbious to those close to those people, like parents. I have no doubt that the creators of the Second Amendment would not have wanted such people to have arsenals or concealed weapon without very careful regulation Why do the GOP-ers think they should? I think it is in great part because so many parochial, provincial, and minimally informed Americans have been misled by news media, politicians, and ad campaigns.
Axiom: You cannot kill with a gun if you don't have one!
Rarely do the shooters have a major psychiatric diagnosable disease. Much more likely are personality disorders, oddness, eccentricity, social awkwardness, isolation, obsession with violence, alcohol and marijuana in the home and so on all of which are perfectly obbious to those close to those people, like parents. I have no doubt that the creators of the Second Amendment would not have wanted such people to have arsenals or concealed weapon without very careful regulation Why do the GOP-ers think they should? I think it is in great part because so many parochial, provincial, and minimally informed Americans have been misled by news media, politicians, and ad campaigns.
3
I think that there is another role for mothers - we can teach our children to reach out to and include the "odd" or the isolated children. When our children say, oh, I don't want to invite that weird kid to my party (or go to his party) we can insist that connecting and including people, rather than excludin, is more important than the perfect party. So many of these shooters seem to have had painful social backgrounds and I have to wonder how much difference it would make if we adults set a standard of reaching out to the margins - to supporting families that are struggling with a difficult child, or to just including those children when we can. Social exclusion is painful - and if it occurs repeatedly over years, potentially dangerous.
16
In 1955, there were 10 times more bed for mental health patients, today, there are only 48,000 nationwide. The reality is that even if a mom realizes her son is abnormal mentally, she has no place to go. Medicaid does not provide mental health services. The democrats who in their zeal see everything in terms of civil rights forced the closure of massive numbers of state run mental health hospitals in the 1950-60's. Democrats felt it was better for the nuts to run loose on the streets than to be stored in a safe place from others. America is now reaping the consequences of the failed mental health strategy implemented by the democrats. So, the next time there is a mass shooting, you know who is at fault.
Vote for NO democrats in 2016!
Vote for NO democrats in 2016!
2
Your history wobbles, grizzld. The massive deinstitutionalization commenced in the 70s, a combination of Geraldo Rivera's career-making expose of Willowbrook State School on Staten Island in 1972 with sudden and extreme municipal and state budget deficits around the same time. It was subsequent to that that the US first developed a serious problem with homelessness.
To blame this only on Democrats is to be willfully dishonest. But while the Republicants sing a chorus of "it's a mental health problem" whenever there's a mass shooting, the Republicants remain adamently opposed to both spending more resources to address mental health problems and also to require background checks that would keep the mentally ill from obtaining guns "legally" at gun shows or off the internet.
Tim, sadly, Roseburg is no longer the most recent mass shooting. Last night, at the University of Nirthern Arizona, in Flagstaff.
To blame this only on Democrats is to be willfully dishonest. But while the Republicants sing a chorus of "it's a mental health problem" whenever there's a mass shooting, the Republicants remain adamently opposed to both spending more resources to address mental health problems and also to require background checks that would keep the mentally ill from obtaining guns "legally" at gun shows or off the internet.
Tim, sadly, Roseburg is no longer the most recent mass shooting. Last night, at the University of Nirthern Arizona, in Flagstaff.
4
This is an inaccurate history of deinstitutionalization. It was the advent of psychiatric medications which emptied the hospitals and reduced the number of hospital beds. More recent reductions in community hospital mental health units have to do with corporate finances (insurance companies squeezing the profits of hospitals) rather than political decisions. Some of the deinstitutionalization measures were failures because the community services which were part of the plan to replace state hospitals were never funded adequately.
2
Psychiatric care and specially the development of new drugs have progressed enormously since the 50ies, making outpatient care possible in ways that could not be imagined back then. Of course, outpatient care is something different than "letting nuts run loose" and often more costly than institutional care. Who seems more likely to provide enough funding for mental healthcare, outpatient or institutional, a republican or a democrat?
1
Most of the discussions on the need to improve gun control are a debate on the margins. By that I mean that any new legislation for strengthening gun controls requiring, for example, to improve background checks, will affect only new purchases of guns. But any such new legislation will leave the remainder, all of the guns already owned, unaffected. It is as if existing gun owners have been grandfathered by old laws. This is not a solution.
The reality is that there are an estimated 310 million guns in a population of about 320 million. That amounts to almost one gun per person. But the issue is that there are an estimated 44 million gun owners in the US amounting to about seven guns per gun owner. With 14% of the total population owing guns, the high incidence of deaths by firearms in the US is a “Tyranny of the Minority” by gun owners on innocents. The key issue here is the proliferation of guns and the easy access to guns.
Tinkering on the margins has not and never will work to get rid of this social cancer. There is only one solution:
America: Demand Congress to repeal the Second Amendment.
While the supporters of the Second Amendment are stronger and more powerful than the supporters of the First Amendment who speak on their rights for the safety and security of persons, until this happens, there will continue to be broken and destroyed families.
The new law to repeal the Second Amendment should be called: “The Innocents’ Law.”
The reality is that there are an estimated 310 million guns in a population of about 320 million. That amounts to almost one gun per person. But the issue is that there are an estimated 44 million gun owners in the US amounting to about seven guns per gun owner. With 14% of the total population owing guns, the high incidence of deaths by firearms in the US is a “Tyranny of the Minority” by gun owners on innocents. The key issue here is the proliferation of guns and the easy access to guns.
Tinkering on the margins has not and never will work to get rid of this social cancer. There is only one solution:
America: Demand Congress to repeal the Second Amendment.
While the supporters of the Second Amendment are stronger and more powerful than the supporters of the First Amendment who speak on their rights for the safety and security of persons, until this happens, there will continue to be broken and destroyed families.
The new law to repeal the Second Amendment should be called: “The Innocents’ Law.”
29
The argument to repeal the 2nd amendment should be strong since it was originally conceived to allow the creation of local state militias as a counter force to an oppressive federal government. This may have been a reasonable perspective after being ruled by the British crown, but totally unreasonable in a modern democratic republic where the federal government is elected by and represents all citizens.
1
I have nothing substantively cogent to add to this column except to note the mental illness of a whole nation that, opposition notwithstanding, perpetuates the sick fiction that regulation aimed at preventing people, especially small children, from killing other people represents constitutional tyranny. How sick and stupid is that?
The gun lobby outspends groups advocating gun sanity by a ratio of 7:1. These groups need our support. I invite readers to my blog, "End the Madness" (www.endthemadnessnow.org) which, among other things, pleads and enables support for some of those groups.
ETM seeks no support for itself beyond readers' attention. The current issue of the blog lays out the currently viable presidential candidates' positions on gun sanity in America. I would love to see you visit and to hear what you have to say.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
The gun lobby outspends groups advocating gun sanity by a ratio of 7:1. These groups need our support. I invite readers to my blog, "End the Madness" (www.endthemadnessnow.org) which, among other things, pleads and enables support for some of those groups.
ETM seeks no support for itself beyond readers' attention. The current issue of the blog lays out the currently viable presidential candidates' positions on gun sanity in America. I would love to see you visit and to hear what you have to say.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
17
Let us not forget the Idaho nuclear scientist who went on a post Christmas shopping spree with her children and nieces and a brand new fancy concealed carry purse, that she negligently left within reach of her 2 yr. old in the shopping cart. Only one shot that day in Walmart was mother, but there are now several traumatized children and a toddler that will have to live with a terrible issue. God help that child. His mother failed him.
381
And if you feel it necessary to carry your guy to Walmart, should you be taking your children along too?
2
I urge law makers to prove that laws restricting the sale of guns will not reduce gun violence in the U.S. by passing legislation demanding background checks. If, the amount of deaths remains the same, ( or God forbid) increases, those laws can be repealed or overturned. No harm-no foul and the gun lobby then for ever more can repeat the Bush mantra "stuff happens".
4
The Tennessee case with the two children and the puppy was pretty close to my final straw. The issue is, was, and will always be the easy availability of deadly firearms. If our society is unable or unwilling to do anything about that issue - and in 2015 the prospects are hovering around zero - then each individual must decide to either strap on a Glock and be ready to kill, or find some little corner of the world, in the U,S,. Canada, Australia, wherever, that feels safe. This is getting harder and harder to do and if current trends continue unabated, and why should anyone believe they won't, then within a few decades the makers of the original "Mad Max: movie will look like prophets.
8
People with murderous intentions are the result of poor parenting and need to be put away for the safety of the rest of society.
1
It says a lot about America that THE most inspirational voice in the country is the National Rifle Association.
Rampant gun violence in churches, movie theaters, schools and shopping malls is a choice.
Driving home drunk from a party and crashing and burning in one's vehicle, while killing the unlucky people who happened to be in one's path, is a choice.
Invading foreign countries for no particularly good reason...leaving the streets of our cities "littered" with the lives of homeless vets have been choice.
Rampant gun violence in churches, movie theaters, schools and shopping malls is a choice.
Driving home drunk from a party and crashing and burning in one's vehicle, while killing the unlucky people who happened to be in one's path, is a choice.
Invading foreign countries for no particularly good reason...leaving the streets of our cities "littered" with the lives of homeless vets have been choice.
6
As Mr. Egan says, it is time to take our country back from the lobbyists and gutless politicians. It is time to attack the NRA with full force. About 5 million NRA members are running roughshod over a country of 300 million. Yes, they are deceived by the right wing media, but we still should be able to overcome that propaganda and lies. It is all about money. Simply the NRA (using funds from gun manufacturers) buys politicians, just as tobacco companies did for decades. In the short-run we need to overwhelm them with advertising and information. We have to scare the politicians into voting the right way.
8
So what happened to Bloomberg , his money and his "grass roots" organization that were going to punish the politicians the way the NRA does?
If only the 8-year-old girl had charged at the boy and attempted to disarm him, as Ben Carson suggested the Roseburg victims should have done.
Or, failing that, if the girl had been armed too, as the NRA preaches we all should be, she and the boy could have had a good ol' fashioned shoot-out.
Or, failing that, if the girl had been armed too, as the NRA preaches we all should be, she and the boy could have had a good ol' fashioned shoot-out.
23
Yeah, it's almost as if they believe if we all had guns we'd never fire them.
The NRA's version of politically correct speech.
The NRA's version of politically correct speech.
Our government is failing us. The most fundamental purpose of government is to keep citizens safe, yet we are no longer safe with the gun laws we have. But guns aren't going anywhere until we abandon the electoral college and winner take all voting system. Right now all the gun advocates have to do is focus their effort on swing states and the 5% of swing votes in those states. Oddly, fear of "tyranny of the majority" has been replaced by fear of "tyranny by the gun owners".
10
It seems many Americans think they live in a video game or a movie. These people are unable to distinguish fantasy from reality.
How does a country drift so far downward in the space of a single generation?
How does a country drift so far downward in the space of a single generation?
312
How? By becoming separated from other human beings and losing our sense of empathy. TV, computer, phone screens talk to us incessantly about war, heroes, villains and horror, much of it fantasized. 30% of Americans believe in conspiracy theories. If gun violence is a mental health issue, then our entire culture is sick. Ben Carson's reactions to the Roseburg shootings is Exhibit A: paranoid (about the government taking people's guns) and delusional ("They should have rushed the gunman."). Saying that mothers can somehow fix an entire country's fixation with violence, conspiracies and guns is sad and pathetic.
3
It is not that difficult for a generation to drift downward, given that human beings remain significantly the same as they were over 30,000 to 50,000 years ago. This is why a culture of real education and critical thinking, a culture that questions everything, is critical to maintaining a thriving civilization.
The polarization that we see today is not really between political parties, but is largely one between those of us who continually seek knowledge and those of us who continually default to our tribal "traditions" as the final arbiter of social policy. The result is a dumbing down and lack of attention to our social responsibility to educate and raise our next generation, as we retrench and believe that our traditions are all that we need.
The result is predictable, where our weaknesses as a society grow more apparent. Ultimately, this is the reason that formerly civilized societies sometimes collapse into chaos. This risk is not absent from our own Western society, even here in the U.S.
So, where efforts to educate our children are hijacked by traditional interests who only seek to indoctrinate them in one ideology or another, we risk far worse than a few children shooting their parents and siblings.
The polarization that we see today is not really between political parties, but is largely one between those of us who continually seek knowledge and those of us who continually default to our tribal "traditions" as the final arbiter of social policy. The result is a dumbing down and lack of attention to our social responsibility to educate and raise our next generation, as we retrench and believe that our traditions are all that we need.
The result is predictable, where our weaknesses as a society grow more apparent. Ultimately, this is the reason that formerly civilized societies sometimes collapse into chaos. This risk is not absent from our own Western society, even here in the U.S.
So, where efforts to educate our children are hijacked by traditional interests who only seek to indoctrinate them in one ideology or another, we risk far worse than a few children shooting their parents and siblings.
And you received your degree in psychology where? You seem to fall for the old "blame it all on video games" mantra. Why not the music? After all "rap" seems to glorify killing and crimes against women and cops (and older Americans remember how bad jazz was going to screw up the country). Why don't "these people" believe themselves to be acting out a song they heard?
Gun Derangement Syndrome is uniquely American.
It hails from the roots of the Old Confederacy and its refusal to accept basic civilization and the rule of law and compromise and a lack of basic human compassion.
The Old South couldn't accept that blacks were human beings and they were willing to die for it and kill everyone who objected to the human dignity of blacks.
Guns have always been the South's and Red America's favorite form of free speech, even more important that actual speech because you don't need to explain your point when your dumb gun will do all your talking for you.
Guns and the 2nd Amendment are actually the 1st Amendment to a certain portion of Americans, generally less educated, more angry and much more reactionary and anti-progressive than other Americans.
2nd Amendment Americans are America's violent, sadistic and fatal guns-bullets-and-war streak that has helped make American history a vast portrait of violence soaked in the blood of the Native Americans, the Civil War dead and the bloody, pointless nation-destroying horrors of Vietnam and Iraq.
These violent Guns R Us Americans are the ones who helped slaughter America's greatest stars of progressive thought and diplomacy and verbal expression - Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. - so their Confederacy of anger, hate, paranoia and irrational violence could flourish and reign supreme.
Guns are speech to America's violent backwater of a civilization.
It hails from the roots of the Old Confederacy and its refusal to accept basic civilization and the rule of law and compromise and a lack of basic human compassion.
The Old South couldn't accept that blacks were human beings and they were willing to die for it and kill everyone who objected to the human dignity of blacks.
Guns have always been the South's and Red America's favorite form of free speech, even more important that actual speech because you don't need to explain your point when your dumb gun will do all your talking for you.
Guns and the 2nd Amendment are actually the 1st Amendment to a certain portion of Americans, generally less educated, more angry and much more reactionary and anti-progressive than other Americans.
2nd Amendment Americans are America's violent, sadistic and fatal guns-bullets-and-war streak that has helped make American history a vast portrait of violence soaked in the blood of the Native Americans, the Civil War dead and the bloody, pointless nation-destroying horrors of Vietnam and Iraq.
These violent Guns R Us Americans are the ones who helped slaughter America's greatest stars of progressive thought and diplomacy and verbal expression - Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. - so their Confederacy of anger, hate, paranoia and irrational violence could flourish and reign supreme.
Guns are speech to America's violent backwater of a civilization.
276
I can't remember when I read a more idiotic post. One Kennedy was shot by a communist, the other a Muslim. But to you.....oh never mind.
Some have pointed out that the 2nd Amendment, with its nod to militias, was actually a way to give ground to the slave holders.
Militias were originally used in the south to find and confiscated firearms being hidden by slaves.
Can't have the help rising up and demanding to be paid, can we now?
Militias were originally used in the south to find and confiscated firearms being hidden by slaves.
Can't have the help rising up and demanding to be paid, can we now?
1
I have watched your posts with some interest over the months. Always interesting...sometimes I agree...sometimes I don't. This is the most cogent and insightful post from any commentator I've seen in some time. Thank you.
1
Your column is beautiful and eloquent, as always, Timothy. But my problem is this: After every mass shooting, we hear the same arguments, and nothing changes. Nothing. I have a friend who's sending her daughter to college overseas to make sure she's not in the midst of a U.S. mass college shooting. This is what frightened, sensible parents do. They protect their children by banishing them from the country.
We have lost our way. With every shooting, I think we'll draw the line -- but it never happens.We are not a serious people. We are pawns of the NRA, which is bought and sold by the gun industry. We should be ashamed.
We have lost our way. With every shooting, I think we'll draw the line -- but it never happens.We are not a serious people. We are pawns of the NRA, which is bought and sold by the gun industry. We should be ashamed.
25
My granddaughter will not attend college in the USA. We're even trying to think of a way to move to Europe -- to protect her life.
I think it is very possible that some mothers in Roseburg Oregon love their guns more than they love their children. And I am not speaking just of the killer's mother.
32
Even Nick Kristof who is from rural Oregon, loves his guns.
Basically what you are saying that it is a cultural gun illness suffered by most Americans in some way shape or form either directly with misuse of the gun or supported by non gun owners with co dependency or enabling tactics.
Agreed.
Agreed.
12
I cannot for the life of me understand a political party which claims, oh so sanctimoniously, to be pro- life that it allows this kind of carnage to go unchecked. Somehow they believe something can be done to protect unviable fetuses but not not those actual human beings with real lives and families.
52
According to the wing-nuts, we are not killing the Right People, at least not enough of them.
Until, and unless, gun-owners are charged for the crimes of their children who murder with those guns, we will be having the same dialogue 100 years from now.
Gun fanatics will not respond to empathy, or safety concerns because they are not empathic, but paranoid and hostile; they stockpile weapons, just waiting for the excuse to murder someone, as did the Roseberg shooter's mother. Maybe the threat of jail time would help. Maybe.
Gun fanatics will not respond to empathy, or safety concerns because they are not empathic, but paranoid and hostile; they stockpile weapons, just waiting for the excuse to murder someone, as did the Roseberg shooter's mother. Maybe the threat of jail time would help. Maybe.
22
Shortly after the Umpqua shooting the NRA posted a "helpful" video of a smiling mom recommending that you talk to your young children about guns-- comparing the "talk" to showing your child a hot oven and telling them to not touch. There was no recommendation that guns be safely secured. What was also absent was any discussion of the natural curiosity of children--especially toward items that they are told are dangerous--a magnet to some kids. Kids do not have an accurate concept of the finality of death- and these people think that by telling your kids that guns are dangerous, it is enough.
But what we really can not account for are the sick mothers' themselves whose gun obsession is passed to their mentally challenged children. Nancy Lanza and Laurel Harper's sons, boys with cognitive troubles didn't stand a chance, with their mother's obsessive hoarding of weapons.
At what point do we start questioning relatives, friends, and acquaintances and really start looking into the background of those seeking to obtain an arsenal? In the case of the Roseburg shooter, I understand that he was in the military and thrown out after a suicide attempt. Shouldn't we, at a minimum have a background check that could have picked that up? If we are serious about changing this dynamic, background checks --without really checking won't do a darn thing. Background checks won't be enough unless they include personal and family interviews, doctor's evaluations and a thorough look.
But what we really can not account for are the sick mothers' themselves whose gun obsession is passed to their mentally challenged children. Nancy Lanza and Laurel Harper's sons, boys with cognitive troubles didn't stand a chance, with their mother's obsessive hoarding of weapons.
At what point do we start questioning relatives, friends, and acquaintances and really start looking into the background of those seeking to obtain an arsenal? In the case of the Roseburg shooter, I understand that he was in the military and thrown out after a suicide attempt. Shouldn't we, at a minimum have a background check that could have picked that up? If we are serious about changing this dynamic, background checks --without really checking won't do a darn thing. Background checks won't be enough unless they include personal and family interviews, doctor's evaluations and a thorough look.
20
We need to stop spreading the idea that ALL mothers have their children's best interests at heart. Some of them should be required to have a permit to have a child.
People routinely kill people with guns. That should be the phrase that reflects reality. If we believed that phrase maybe something can be done about individuals arming themselves with arsenals they will never need.
9
Yes, and there was another multiple-victim shooting at an Arizona college this morning. The media dug around and managed to find a few Roseburg, Oregon freaks who do not want gun control, including their esteemed sheriff, even after their neighbors were gunned down at the local community college. It's as if the nra, fox so-called news and other radical spokespeople have hypnotized the dumbest among us and, like robots, they spout the same nonsense every time there are mass shootings. NOW is the time for all the groups who want serious murder-by-gun-control to get together and pass this legislation: "Bullet-Riddled Bodies Do Not Lie. GUNS KILL. Get them off the streets of America. Every gun in America must be registered on a national database, licensed and fully insured for liability."
20
That research has been prevented nationwide, and conversations between doctors and patients muzzled in some states is very telling. If a nation awash in firearms is so great, and guns such a wonderful boon to our society, what are the pro-gun politicians AFRAID of, hmm? Why not get all the information out there? This revive me of the anti-choice debate. Those people cannot talk about abortion without lying, either.
262
"conversations between doctors and patients muzzled in some states"
And yet conversations about ending the life of a fetus and
ultra-sounds are required in most likely the same states.
And yet conversations about ending the life of a fetus and
ultra-sounds are required in most likely the same states.
Egan points out the situation of a Mother/son relationship as part of the gun carnage in this country. It occurs to me that everyone has that "crazy" Uncle around that is often one of these sons who just never gets out of adolescence, takes forever to leave home, remains financially dependent on family, has no friends, and is considered to be weird. I have known people like that who are gun collectors and surround themselves with weapons of all kinds. Many times family members see them a harmless until they blow away 20-30 people because no one "understands:" them. We need to target these people and keep guns out of their hands. Most of the time the family knows who they are and needs to act on behalf of society to protect us -- innocent victims -- from them. Some of them might even be in Congress.
4
What it will take to reverse course is. when all is said and done, a Supreme Court majority that overrides the Heller decision and rules that the 2nd Amendment does not grant or imply a right of citizens to be armed. That will, in turn, set off a firestorm of protest, undoubtedly, but if the Court shapes it decision to focus on narrowing the scope of gun enforcement, it might pass muster with the majority of Americans; e.g., creation of a gun ownership database, outlawing assault weapons, etc.
But all of the above depends upon who the next President is. Based upon their public comments, none of the Republicans would nominate a Court appointee with any sort of record favoring gun limits. Conversely, HRC would, as would Sanders most likely any other Democrat.
None of this will be say, and the path is fraught with seemingly insurmountable obstacles, starting with GOP control of Congress. So, essentially, it is up to Democratic voters if the nation wants to change course on guns.
But all of the above depends upon who the next President is. Based upon their public comments, none of the Republicans would nominate a Court appointee with any sort of record favoring gun limits. Conversely, HRC would, as would Sanders most likely any other Democrat.
None of this will be say, and the path is fraught with seemingly insurmountable obstacles, starting with GOP control of Congress. So, essentially, it is up to Democratic voters if the nation wants to change course on guns.
7
It's not only moms and guns but dads and knives too. I worry when I see sharp knives and tools left about willy-nilly when children of any age are about. It's seems so easy for even an angry or jealous child to grab a knife and do harm to himself or others. Of course my concern is far greater when a child with special issues is about. However, it seems the more serious the "issue", the more defensive the parent about the dangers of his or her behavior. Unfortunately too these same parents often have guns in the house as well. Mental health professionals who deal with children with mental or behavioral issues must also deal with parental denial.
3
As we read Egan's column, another shooting has taken place. We exonerate soldiers in war for killing, and somehow have become lost in the rhetoric of Second Amendment rights. The argument is completely unbalanced as exhibited by the many killings occurring on college campuses, in cities, in homes, and in the so-called casual or collateral damage of those in the line of fire in all areas. This really is a travesty. More attention and concern about the ebola faux epidemic. Gun violence is a public health matter. And yes, mothers and fathers who have children who may not be socially adjusted, who spend time on the many technological toys that include violent video games are culpable, as are those who allow guns in homes to not be properly stored. Are we this unable to come together in the name of all that is right? Congressional stalemates on so much leaves me w/o much hope in this area of public safety, public morality, public sanity.
5
I'm unsure about the implications of this piece - just because a son lives with a mother doesn't guarantee that the two have a "special relationship." It could merely indicate that the son is unable to function efficiently in the adult world of obtaining a job, finding a new place in society as an independent adult with self confidence and sufficient mental stability. Perhaps the mother/son relationship is superficial; perhaps the son acts very sullen and withdrawn, and the two do not communicate - or perhaps, for myriad reasons, the two do not communicate well. Perhaps the mother herself needs someone in the community to reach out to her, to help her with the stranger who lives in her house.
9
Susan,
In your description of this hypothetical son, you inadvertently describe a household where there should be no guns.
In your description of this hypothetical son, you inadvertently describe a household where there should be no guns.
You think perhaps the mothers' (Nancy Lanza and Laurel Harper) arsenal and obsession with guns could perhaps have influenced their mentally unstable sons?
The gun lobby will eventually face their worst nightmare by blocking every common sense control of firearms: repeal of the Second Amendment. Yes, it can be done. As a long time owner of guns, raised in the mid-west that's not what I'd want personally but the NRA may get their wish of having their precious fetish objects pried from cold dead hands.
11
doug: what, really, should be done?
Like so many other political issues, whether it be the Vietnam War or Roe v. Wade, nothing will change until Americans take to the streets.
Unfortunately there is a perfect political storm of a highly successful lobbying effort, a fear-at-all-costs propaganda machine that churns 24/7, and an American population that can't understand what has happened to the country their parents knew and they grew up in.
The fact is unless an alternative and positive option gets presented by a compelling politician, the status quo will remain.
It can't be about "gun control," it has to be about the community's well-being. Pushing against the gun advocates head on only gets them pushing back harder. We need to push against them from all sides with an idea that everyone has to be for.
How can safe communities not be a cry that brings with it a no-guns society in which all can prosper? The prosper part is key.
Many, many more will die before this happens, but happen it must.
Unfortunately there is a perfect political storm of a highly successful lobbying effort, a fear-at-all-costs propaganda machine that churns 24/7, and an American population that can't understand what has happened to the country their parents knew and they grew up in.
The fact is unless an alternative and positive option gets presented by a compelling politician, the status quo will remain.
It can't be about "gun control," it has to be about the community's well-being. Pushing against the gun advocates head on only gets them pushing back harder. We need to push against them from all sides with an idea that everyone has to be for.
How can safe communities not be a cry that brings with it a no-guns society in which all can prosper? The prosper part is key.
Many, many more will die before this happens, but happen it must.
5
I'm not surprised at the derision Dr. Carson is facing for his opinion that mass murderers could be stopped by aggressive rather than passive action. But think about it:
1. Three men attack a gunman on a French train. The result: no deaths and a few injuries.
2. Three staff members in a Lacey, WA school tackle and hold down a student shooting a gun. Result: no deaths or injuries.
3. A teacher in MD, assisted by another staff member, subdue a student gunman. Result: One student seriously injured.
4. A teaching assistant at a Seattle college and several other people knock down a gunman and hold him for police. Result: One dead and 3 injured.
Compare those incidents to other circumstances where the victims tried to run and hide. Yes, in the Roseburg shooting the one person who charged the gunman didn't succeed, but that's because he was alone. One man with a gun will always beat one man without a gun. The key is that there has to be concerted mass effort.
The likelihood that anyone will be faced with a mass murderer is extremely small, but if you are you might want to think about what the most effective action might be.
1. Three men attack a gunman on a French train. The result: no deaths and a few injuries.
2. Three staff members in a Lacey, WA school tackle and hold down a student shooting a gun. Result: no deaths or injuries.
3. A teacher in MD, assisted by another staff member, subdue a student gunman. Result: One student seriously injured.
4. A teaching assistant at a Seattle college and several other people knock down a gunman and hold him for police. Result: One dead and 3 injured.
Compare those incidents to other circumstances where the victims tried to run and hide. Yes, in the Roseburg shooting the one person who charged the gunman didn't succeed, but that's because he was alone. One man with a gun will always beat one man without a gun. The key is that there has to be concerted mass effort.
The likelihood that anyone will be faced with a mass murderer is extremely small, but if you are you might want to think about what the most effective action might be.
4
Charles Mintz charges the Rosemont attacker, is shot 7 times and breaks both legs, and does absolutely nothing to stop the rampage.
A man pulls a gun and charges in to stop the mass shooting at which Ms. Giffords was injured. He very nearly shoots the people restraining the gunman because it just isn't that obvious always in a melee who is/are the perpetrator(s).
The CIA, FBI, and other acronym agencies make it very clear that when faced with a gunman, you should 1) evacuate, 2) hide, and 3) confront only if faced with no other option. Concerted mass effort by untrained civilians is generally just not going to happen; most people don't work like that, and if people do work like that, they mess up most of the time and go after the wrong people. Don't put the burden of stopping mass shootings on anyone but the shooters and the society that allows them to be armed.
A man pulls a gun and charges in to stop the mass shooting at which Ms. Giffords was injured. He very nearly shoots the people restraining the gunman because it just isn't that obvious always in a melee who is/are the perpetrator(s).
The CIA, FBI, and other acronym agencies make it very clear that when faced with a gunman, you should 1) evacuate, 2) hide, and 3) confront only if faced with no other option. Concerted mass effort by untrained civilians is generally just not going to happen; most people don't work like that, and if people do work like that, they mess up most of the time and go after the wrong people. Don't put the burden of stopping mass shootings on anyone but the shooters and the society that allows them to be armed.
I believe you are correct about that. It is your best option if you are fit enough. Certainly you can't wait for the police to help. For all their bluster and high tech equipment, the police will only wait outside for the gunman to run out of ammo or shoot himself.
I, for one, would be unable to attack a gunman. I am not trained to do so.
Common sense would mean that parents who own multiple guns and have young immature children should disassemble all of their guns at home. They only need one gun to defend themselves and having multiple around increase the risks that most likely the weapons will be used against their wishes that will certainly ruin their lives, sometime by strangers and sometime by their own family members. With their skill and experience, they can always assemble as needed the numbers of guns they need few minutes before they plan to use it. When a person has to assemble a weapon before usage, it is an individual ritual that will certainly reduce the number of opportunistic mass killings just because mom or dad have plenty of guns in the house.
Seeing a baby born is a life changing moment. Children are miracles from God and Life representatives where guns are bringers of Death. I cannot understand how any parents would have multiple ready to use guns in their home and not expect those to be deployed.
Seeing a baby born is a life changing moment. Children are miracles from God and Life representatives where guns are bringers of Death. I cannot understand how any parents would have multiple ready to use guns in their home and not expect those to be deployed.
5
It only takes one carelessly stored for a tragedy like that one to happen. Let's acknowledge the truth: having even one gun around the house increases the chances you or someone in your family will be killed or injured in gun violence or will harm another person unnecessarily. If you must have guns, keep them all locked and away from children.
" They only need one gun to defend themselves"
Not True. If you are facing multiple assailants you need all the magazine capacity you can get. Even combat shotguns only hold 8 rounds and are slow to reload so one or more pistols for backup is a good idea.
Not True. If you are facing multiple assailants you need all the magazine capacity you can get. Even combat shotguns only hold 8 rounds and are slow to reload so one or more pistols for backup is a good idea.
Well, disassembly is impractical, but a gun safe or trigger lock is not. There is no excuse for children accessing weapons. It is pure negligence.
I have multiple guns in the house, but then I have a gun safe, as well.
I have multiple guns in the house, but then I have a gun safe, as well.
1
The shooting in Tennessee is so heartbreaking that it is hard to contemplate. The excitement of a little girl to get a puppy that becomes the great joy in her life but loses her life because she refused to show it to an older child is horrible. Maybe she had some instinctive feeling that the puppy needed protection from the other child--sadly affirmed, it seems, by the boy's violence. The puppy now must stand in the family's mind as the reminder and recrimination towards the girl's parents.
Adults with young children who keep guns, loaded or where the ammunition can be accessed, are reprehensible. The boy's parents should be prosecuted.
Adults with young children who keep guns, loaded or where the ammunition can be accessed, are reprehensible. The boy's parents should be prosecuted.
157
And what would we be saying if he had stabbed her with a kitchen knife or killed her with a hammer? Why do we treat these tragedies differently just because a gun is involved? Why do we insist on calling it gun violence instead of violence? The evil intent behind the act is what matters, not the instrumentality - we as a society need to respond to the evil intent behind the mass shootings and awful acts of violence such as this.
Let me make this point another way. The "gun fatality" statistic that is so frequently cited includes suicides. Consider in MA, when gun control laws were enacted in 1998 and gun ownership dropped to just 10% of the population, suicides by gun went down - and the overall suicide rate went up. Focusing on guns did not solve the suicide problem - focusing on guns will not solve the violence problem in this country.
Let me make this point another way. The "gun fatality" statistic that is so frequently cited includes suicides. Consider in MA, when gun control laws were enacted in 1998 and gun ownership dropped to just 10% of the population, suicides by gun went down - and the overall suicide rate went up. Focusing on guns did not solve the suicide problem - focusing on guns will not solve the violence problem in this country.
1
People like Kim Davis and that Baptist Church in Kansas probably think that God is punishing America for not persecuting gays.
If you rob a convenience store and the guy in the getaway car shoots someone, you are an accessory to murder and can be charged with murder. The parents of the boy should be charged with murder. They are murderers.
4
The Roseburg shooter's upbringing is relevant, but at what point does a person assume responsibility for his or her own actions? The Roseburg shooter was something of a man/child from all accounts; a 26-year-old living with his momma, but 26 nonetheless. His dad wasn't even in his life for the last couple of years. That in itself may be relevant, but at some point, we have to make people accountable for themselves.
9
He has been held accountable: he's dead. The question is, what do we do to help prevent his like from killing again? Apparently, according to the NRA and Republican candidates for President, we provide more guns.
12
The gun nuts are very organized. You have a minority of very fanatical people forcing an unbearable problem on the many who don't want it.
We are not organized. We need to change that now. We need PACs. We need major donors. We need organizations dedicated to spending countless hours researching where the pressure points are in their system. We need electoral strategies for making politicians pay when the choose the NRA over our children.
We are not organized. We need to change that now. We need PACs. We need major donors. We need organizations dedicated to spending countless hours researching where the pressure points are in their system. We need electoral strategies for making politicians pay when the choose the NRA over our children.
52
One can only hope that 200 years from now, our prodgeny will look back at these times with the same revulsion and disgust that we now hold for slavery. Depressingly, many more people will have to die before the overall weight of gun deaths and mayhem breaks the bonds of ignorance and political cravenness. Unfortunately, the fulcrum supporting the lever of national debate on this issue is built and will continue to be constructed upon the bodies of our fellow citizens. The only question that remains is how high will it ascend before the tipping point is reached?
8
Wow. I am really shocked by this op-ed piece. It is mom's fault? Well, the shooter's mom in Roseburg Oregon lives in a village where some citizens have stated that our President's visit to their town is not entirely welcome because of our President's views on gun control. And Roseburg itself is a village reflecting the entrepreneurial oriented predatory culture reflected by the words of Ben Carson, Donald Trump and Jeb Bush. It seems that in Roseburg, the very culture that spawned the shooter created the shooting and that is the story, just as the story about youth violence in my city is the story of violent youths shooting each other. The story is not mental illness and never has been unless, of course, our larger culture is willing to levy the charge that certain political mindsets might reflect delusional, sociopathic or psychopathic behavior. Some "moms" are pit bulls with lipstick. And most violent extreme right type groups are big on traditional family. Tell it like it is. It's not the moms.
24
Don't blame Roseburg; the mom and son only recently moved there (even though the owner of the gun store looked downright gleeful about the fact that she assumes increased sales now). But questioning the role of parents is not wrong--not in the Jindahl sense--but in the sense that if you have a mentally fragile child obsessed with death you should not be encouraging guns. You should be doing everything on your part to keep guns out of that child's hands.
'...Tell it like it is. It's not the moms...'
It most certainly was this mother's fault.
It most certainly was this mother's fault.
Smart, rational, comprehensive federal gun control legislation is also needed. The Obama administration should quickly commission a blue ribbon panel to study and develop recommended comprehensive federal gun control legislation and charge that commission to develop its recommendations in 3 months. President Obama should then deliver that legislation to the Hill so that it is included in the regulatory agenda.
Once President Obama delivers such legislation to the House and Senate, the President should exert maximum pressure on the Hill’s leadership to make sure the legislation is quickly acted upon and put to vote. The leadership should be held accountable by the public if they do not act quickly on the legislation. And all Senators and Representatives must have a voting record on this topic so that their position is known on the legislation.
NRA (who is heavily supported by gun manufacturers) pays big dollars to boot out elected federal officials who allow votes to occur on reasonable, comprehensive gun control legislation. The House and Senate leadership are to blame, for bowing to NRA wishes and for not having the strength to put forth such legislation.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/jun/11/despite-harry-reids-growing-... This 6/11/14 article notes that Reid brought legislation for background checks to the Senate floor which failed. Since then, there have been 28 mass shootings and only one other vote in Congress on gun legislation.
Once President Obama delivers such legislation to the House and Senate, the President should exert maximum pressure on the Hill’s leadership to make sure the legislation is quickly acted upon and put to vote. The leadership should be held accountable by the public if they do not act quickly on the legislation. And all Senators and Representatives must have a voting record on this topic so that their position is known on the legislation.
NRA (who is heavily supported by gun manufacturers) pays big dollars to boot out elected federal officials who allow votes to occur on reasonable, comprehensive gun control legislation. The House and Senate leadership are to blame, for bowing to NRA wishes and for not having the strength to put forth such legislation.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/jun/11/despite-harry-reids-growing-... This 6/11/14 article notes that Reid brought legislation for background checks to the Senate floor which failed. Since then, there have been 28 mass shootings and only one other vote in Congress on gun legislation.
14
Care to define "smart, reasonable, domprehensive gun control"?
Didn't think so.
And, by the way, how do you propose to get criminals to comply?
Didn't think so.
And, by the way, how do you propose to get criminals to comply?
Michael McBride, a pastor from Berkeley, Ca. had the most cogent words about our problem with gun violence in America. He points out that we are a culture of violence. Our interaction with native Americans, the revolution, slavery, the civil war, all are episodes of violence. It's in our DNA as Americans. The slaughters will end only when our culture changes and that is not going to happen for generations. Depressing, but I think he's right.
16
The commenters who take umbrage that this column is too hard on mothers are missing the point. It was the mothers of the Sandy Hook and Roseburg shooters who were the enablers. Similarly, moms have a unique opportunity to lead the war on gun violence. Last fall I joined a group of mostly mothers and some men to call undecided voters on behalf of a our gun safety candidate in a very close election. He won. Because of us? We'll never really know but I would love to see this kind of effort in other states. I write this with tremendous sadness after reading of yet another school shooting in Arizona.
52
"The commenters who take umbrage that this column is too hard on mothers are missing the point. "
No. No, we're not.
I'm sick and tired of blame being placed on the most convenient scapegoat, who often happens to be female. And the justification is that she failed to live up to some idealized notion of what women "ought" to be doing: "She was asking for it". "She was a terrible mom--why didn't she take (future mass murderer) out on a hike, or give him a camera?"
If you want to inveigh against gun laws, fine.
But let's not ignore the fact that 90%+ of the mass shooting sprees are carried out by MEN.
Where is the outrage about young MEN feeling entitled to air their grievances via murderous rampages?
And if you want to blame parents for their sons' behavior--let's start with blaming the dads.
No. No, we're not.
I'm sick and tired of blame being placed on the most convenient scapegoat, who often happens to be female. And the justification is that she failed to live up to some idealized notion of what women "ought" to be doing: "She was asking for it". "She was a terrible mom--why didn't she take (future mass murderer) out on a hike, or give him a camera?"
If you want to inveigh against gun laws, fine.
But let's not ignore the fact that 90%+ of the mass shooting sprees are carried out by MEN.
Where is the outrage about young MEN feeling entitled to air their grievances via murderous rampages?
And if you want to blame parents for their sons' behavior--let's start with blaming the dads.
I have tried to understand the POV of Americans who have a deep need to have unfettered access to guns. With every article and every angry post on social media, I try to flip the idea around in my head and see it from their perspective. But I remain mystified as to how any adult could sincerely believe that even something as minor and strongly supported as background checks would be infringing on the right to own a firearm, in the face of tragedy after tragedy. They truly are a different species.
122
They are not a different species. They are people who know that someone might rightly question their fitness to own guns. Talk to some of them some time; a lot of them are clinically paranoid.
"I have tried to understand the POV of Americans who have a deep need to have unfettered access to guns."
And we, in turn, have tried to understand the POV of Americans who have a deep need to place fetters on their fellow citizens.
And we, in turn, have tried to understand the POV of Americans who have a deep need to place fetters on their fellow citizens.
Why do we insist on avoiding the truth about these nut cases who get their jollies by committing mass murders? All of them are young males who are obviously obsessed by the phallic symbolism of guns. All are sexually repressed brooding loners (at least two left written testaments complaining about their inability to get girl friends). Alone among advanced nations the United States rejects legalized prostitution. If these homicidal dingbats had recourse to the comforts afforded by discreet, well-regulated hook shops this epidemic of unspeakable slaughter would subside.
5
So women's lives should be sacrificed to give these scum sexual satisfaction? Buy them some inflatables.
I remember when drinking and driving was a much more serious issue. Then mothers across the country finally organized and put political pressure on to change DWI laws to apply stricter penalties. And things began to happen. The incidence of drunk driving dropped dramatically. The passion and fervor such a group could put on politicians representing the good old boy gun culture would become intense. These people would be shamed because protecting children strikes a cord in every parents heart.
25
I think I read that the Roseburg shooter had gone to a special ed high school in California. That seems to me to have been an opportunity to have helped the student learn to manage his issues. I don't disagree that facilitating access to guns through the home exacerbated a problem, but I dislike the idea of blaming mothers for seeing their kids as more normal than they are in the face of no particularly effective alternative -- I am reminded of a technique I used to notice in NYC -- people just ignoring some problematic scene going on around them by continuing to read the newspaper while waiting for the subway, would be an example (this was many years ago), I assume because they didn't know what else to do. My thought is that if mothers of struggling youths are given a good alternative, better than the choices they have currently, maybe there will be better outcomes. It takes a village to raise a child -- if the mother needed more support in helping her son and the son needed better social integration, for example, where was the rest of the village?
9
I understand you were going for a theme and a headline, starting with the fact that the mothers of two of the more notorious recent mass murders were active participants in procuring weapons for their mentally ill children, but you go a step too far in placing primary responsibility for children on "mothers." Get with the century. It's insulting to my husband, who is every inch my equal in caregiving for our two children, to overlook the importance of his role in their lives.
14
Gun control advocates have to turn the argument around and sell people on the idea that only COMPETENT citizens should be allowed to purchase and possess firearms. Not only excluding those with mental illness but require those that currently own firearms to complete a background check, provide references and complete a basic firearms course. The NRA provides a very rigorous safe firearms training and that should be mandatory for any gun owner. It's a step in the right direction.
7
Andrew, I agree with everything you said. Although there is no way around it, I do worry who will be the ones to determine who is competent, especially when the Obama administration deems returning veterans as terrorist risks.
When politicians assure me that the problem isn't guns but mental health, I have to agree. Anyone who is willing to let tens of thousands of his fellow citizens die each year just so he can own a gun is mentally ill.
337
That same batch of politicians have eviscerated mental health funding in this country. Which leaves us where?
1
I cannot believe I am reading this in 2015. Let's blame mothers for mass shooters? Shades of "refrigerator moms" causing autism. This is a whole-society problem and there is just no credible way the guys (quick, name one female mass shooter...) can start blaming women for it.
20
Not all moms. It's just odd that these two moms shared, maybe enabled their children's use of guns in such a horrific way. As interesting is the Oregon sheriff who thought Sandy Hook was made up. Does he feel that way now about the Oregon shooting? So many gun owners have bought into the idea that these mass killings are not real, in some part, I think, because their reality was so challenged by the election of a black man as president. Gun sales sky rocketed with Obama's election. Ironically Obama's election was the best thing that could have happened to the gun industry and the NRA.
Lt
Lt
8
"But just as we can fault mothers in many cases, we can look to them for our salvation."
This argument is paternalistic and the remedy odd, to say the least.
This argument is paternalistic and the remedy odd, to say the least.
I don't think it's about blaming women, but as a mother, I find it difficult to believe that these two mothers were unaware of the depth of their sons' illness. While mothers cannot magically cure mental illness, it's hard to comprehend how they justified allowing their sons to keep an arsenal in the house. Did they somehow believe it was a healthy hobby?
4
One aspect of the shootings, and other senseless crimes in which the suicide and/or homicide are inexplicable - in that the person doing the crime did not seem to his or her friends to have been capable of such a thing - is to examine more closely the impact on the personality of prescription drugs. Perhaps the biggest "offenders" (drugs that can cause a person to become aggressive, violent, suicidal/homicidal) are the SSRI/SNRI antidepressants, which are promoted directly to us on television and given out like candy by primary care doctors as well as psychiatrists. Though these drugs carry a warning on the label to this effect, no one seems to consider the role they may play in some of the most dramatic and horrible crimes committed.
As for a solution to this - a person does not have to be truly "mentally ill" to have this effect happen to them, a person taking any of the medications that can cause this reaction does not have to register. In short, there is no easy solution to this potential causative factor. Read "SSRI Stories" to see how often this class of medications is in the mix of these tragedies. This effect is not widely publicized in the media, nor examined by politicians of any stripe. And the pharmaceutical industry prefers it that way.
As for a solution to this - a person does not have to be truly "mentally ill" to have this effect happen to them, a person taking any of the medications that can cause this reaction does not have to register. In short, there is no easy solution to this potential causative factor. Read "SSRI Stories" to see how often this class of medications is in the mix of these tragedies. This effect is not widely publicized in the media, nor examined by politicians of any stripe. And the pharmaceutical industry prefers it that way.
4
The writer does not take into consideration the possibility that perhaps a mother might also be suffering from mental illness and might not be getting or even seeking personal treatment. What affect does that possibility have on situations like the ones we are seeing on a regular basis? If unwell and in denial, is her mental illness projected onto the child? Are roles reversed? This issue is so complex and so intricate that it defies quick answers, and there are more constructive questions than asking who are to blame. A system that does not directly deal with the notion that the most mentally ill people are those who might not readily seek treatment is a system that is also denying reality.
13
Sorry - "effect."
From the article: "Shootings rank near the top as a leading cause of death among children and teens."
That's a statistical artifact. Very little else beside murder and accidents are going to kill a healthy child or adolescent. Few of them die from illness. Would you rather see them dying like flies from infectious or chronic disease?
That's a statistical artifact. Very little else beside murder and accidents are going to kill a healthy child or adolescent. Few of them die from illness. Would you rather see them dying like flies from infectious or chronic disease?
7
I don't have the statistics handy but I recall looking at this a few years ago and the CDC data shows motor vehicle accidents as the primary cause of death for this age group. Suicide and homicide (by all means, not just guns) were a distant second and third. Deaths due to accidental shootings were way down the list.
1
I would rather not see them die at all.
You're happy that they die from guns?
NRA has about 3.5 million members, most of them have no problem with background checks and other controls on who gets to buy guns. Seems to me if a few million more folks, who are pro gun control, join the NRA, the organization would become an advocate of gun regulation. Sure Wayne and his pals would have a fit and to leave and start a new organization ... oh well stuff happens.
13
The murder rate today is half what it was in 1990. America is safer, overall, than it has been any time since the 1960s. Yet we are told we live in a shooting gallery. The NRA tells us so, so that we will buy more guns and ammo, and send them more money to preserve our right to buy guns and ammo (a right that is not threatened). The Anti-Gun people tell us so, so that we will join their quixotic effort to ban guns.
They both live by selling fear.
It isn't the guns that are the problem, it is the fear of violence, fear of our fellow man, fear of our neighbors, that is the problem. A fear that is conscious, subconscious, and unconscious. A fear that is purposefully cultivated and encouraged.
I know people who couldn't sleep if there were a gun in the house; I know people who couldn't sleep if they did not have a gun at their bedside.
Finally, more Americans oppose gun limits now than 50 years ago. Guns are not going way.
People who like guns are not all evil and/or dangerous, most are neither.
People who dislike guns are not all bent on mass confiscation, disarmament, and (thus) emasculation. Most are perfectly willing to let their neighbors have guns -- if they can at least be assured that the guns will be kept out of the hands (to the extent possible) of careless, immature, dangerous, or criminal people. In fact, many of the people who want that assurance are gun owners themselves and like guns!
So: How do we achieve that end?
They both live by selling fear.
It isn't the guns that are the problem, it is the fear of violence, fear of our fellow man, fear of our neighbors, that is the problem. A fear that is conscious, subconscious, and unconscious. A fear that is purposefully cultivated and encouraged.
I know people who couldn't sleep if there were a gun in the house; I know people who couldn't sleep if they did not have a gun at their bedside.
Finally, more Americans oppose gun limits now than 50 years ago. Guns are not going way.
People who like guns are not all evil and/or dangerous, most are neither.
People who dislike guns are not all bent on mass confiscation, disarmament, and (thus) emasculation. Most are perfectly willing to let their neighbors have guns -- if they can at least be assured that the guns will be kept out of the hands (to the extent possible) of careless, immature, dangerous, or criminal people. In fact, many of the people who want that assurance are gun owners themselves and like guns!
So: How do we achieve that end?
8
Europe thinks (correctly) that we're nuts. They don't have these continual, unending streams of atrocities because they don't allow their countries to
be owned by such a single minded, greedy, and irresponsible group of death merchants .
be owned by such a single minded, greedy, and irresponsible group of death merchants .
The sexist essentialism of this piece is not constructive. When you make statements like "Fathers certainly have an equal responsibility. But it’s the mothers, in most cases, who know the names of their children’s teachers, who understand their deepest fears, who have a unique relationship," you are absolving fathers of their responsibilities as parents. They too should be fully connected to their children's deepest fears. They should be as emotionally connected to their children as the author suggests mothers are.
23
I agree. I found it completely distracting to the overall issue of general parental responsibility.
It's only moms, not dads, who know their children's teachers' names, and their children's deepest thoughts? Please. Are you suggesting that's some kind of biological imperative? So I guess you would say that the children of two gay dads are out of luck.
13
Guns are for cowards. Gun sales do not go up after mass killings because of bravery. Guns sales go up because frightened people are goaded into thinking guns will protect them rather than actually increase their chances of death or injury. The US is a violent nation that has accepted the use of torture and constant war. How much of this is just reaping what we have sown?
143
Gun sales go up after mass killings because some politicians propose to restrict the availability of guns. (Get it now before it becomes illegal!) Barack Obama has been the best salesman the gun industry could ever have hoped for.
The NRA and gun industry love it when politicians propose new gun restrictions. Nothing else sells more guns. The worst outcome for the NRA would be an absence of controversy over guns.
The NRA and gun industry love it when politicians propose new gun restrictions. Nothing else sells more guns. The worst outcome for the NRA would be an absence of controversy over guns.
Gun sales do not go up after mass killings. Gun sales go up after the president uses a mass killing as the reason to call for more gun control.
@Hal Donahue - Re "Guns are for cowards." Do you really mean to state that all of our admittedly generally ill-trained law enforcement personnel and those in military service (including Special Operations personnel) are cowards? Or do you mean only those who have formerly served you in those capacities?
De Oppresso Liber
De Oppresso Liber
1
>
I'm for strict gun control, but it is a political loser for the Democrats. And if they are not careful it could cost them PA and FL.... and then we lose the WH, the only piece of Gov't we control. We lose the WH, the GOP seals the SCOTUS for years.
Exactly what State would we win with this gun issue that we already would not win?
You can all laugh at the GOP until you turn blue in the face, but the joke is on the liberals. The press is telling us that the GOP is in chaos. This brings to mind the story of the Union Generals, upon Grant's victories in the West, telling Lincoln that Grant was a drunk. Lincoln's reply was: find out what he is drinking and send a case of it to all my Generals.
Let us take a serious look at the political reality:
The GOP controls the vast majority of Governorships, State Assemblies and Local Municipalities.
The GOP controls the US Senate.
The GOP holds the majority on the SCOTUS.
Regardless and because of the Gerrymandering that they successfully carried out the GOP has a stranglehold on the House for decades !
Americans are a ridiculous people, which should be obvious and self-evident to anybody remotely paying attention to politics in this country.
Please keep in mind that when you leave the liberal bastions of the West and East coasts there is human life in numbers. These are the ignorant people that actually believe Trump, Carson etc... should be POTUS and we need more guns not less.
So please think before you jump.
I'm for strict gun control, but it is a political loser for the Democrats. And if they are not careful it could cost them PA and FL.... and then we lose the WH, the only piece of Gov't we control. We lose the WH, the GOP seals the SCOTUS for years.
Exactly what State would we win with this gun issue that we already would not win?
You can all laugh at the GOP until you turn blue in the face, but the joke is on the liberals. The press is telling us that the GOP is in chaos. This brings to mind the story of the Union Generals, upon Grant's victories in the West, telling Lincoln that Grant was a drunk. Lincoln's reply was: find out what he is drinking and send a case of it to all my Generals.
Let us take a serious look at the political reality:
The GOP controls the vast majority of Governorships, State Assemblies and Local Municipalities.
The GOP controls the US Senate.
The GOP holds the majority on the SCOTUS.
Regardless and because of the Gerrymandering that they successfully carried out the GOP has a stranglehold on the House for decades !
Americans are a ridiculous people, which should be obvious and self-evident to anybody remotely paying attention to politics in this country.
Please keep in mind that when you leave the liberal bastions of the West and East coasts there is human life in numbers. These are the ignorant people that actually believe Trump, Carson etc... should be POTUS and we need more guns not less.
So please think before you jump.
9
Too late. Democrats are doubling down on this strategy
I am so tired of the mother-blaming over these issues, I could scream. Yes, those two moms were gun nuts. But far more dads are, and far more gun violence takes place in our cities than in these mass shootings. The support for mothers, especially single mothers, of dysfunctional children in this country is practically non-existent. The blaming and shaming is everywhere. It does take a village. Stop blaming single mothers, many of whom are victims of violence. Their burden is already huge.
25
I agree. And, it diverts attention from the fact that these shooters are male, often of majority, adult age, and obtained their weapons legally. This is a huge part of male culture here in America. That some women participate in it doesn't justify focusing blame on them. This is a male situation, where men believe themselves to be victims in some way, and murder to punish others for their own feelings of insecurity. Olga Silverstein wrote a book 25 years ago, "The Courage to Raise Good Men." Women, mothers, are so often prevented from raising their sons to be unafraid, nonviolent, communicative people. It's considered "sissy" by their husbands and the male members of their families.
I fundamentally share Egan's frustration, but he is really stretching credibility to believe that the mothers of mentally ill adult males will have any practical leverage to keep guns away from their adult-age boys. Egan cites "... he terrifies me" from one mother. That holds for fathers too, and is the most apt description for the family that houses a mentally ill adult-age boy.
The family has about as much chance of keeping a gun away from that son as the country has had of keeping power away from a mentally ill political party.
The family has about as much chance of keeping a gun away from that son as the country has had of keeping power away from a mentally ill political party.
25
Conservatives are all about protecting fetal tissue and life, but don't seem to be too bothered by the needless deaths of innocent living, breathing humans, especially children. Legislation that imposes strict criminal and civil penalties on reckless adults who leave loaded weapons out, that are then used by children, resulting in harm to themselves or others should be a no-brainer. It would in no way impinge on the Second Amendment, but might give reckless, irresponsible adults pause before they leave loaded weapons laying around the house or their cars. I am tired of local prosecutors or people who excuse such behavior on the theory that the irresponsible adult "suffers" enough knowing about the carnage they caused. If the NRA and the Republican Party are not morally bankrupt, measures that specifically protect children from the gross negligence and recklessness of adults should be acceptable.
110
Conservatives only pretend to be all about protecting fetal life. It's proven to be a wonderful distraction for the great many un-thinking people who can't tell the difference between talk and action. Every shrug at each new massacre reinforces our point.
The mystery to me lies not in legislation but in enforcement. Why is the mother of the Oregon shooter not under investigation for reckless endangerment or conspiracy or other criminal act under Oregon law?
She is a nurse held to a higher medical professional standard than laymen who knew and discussed her son's mental illness for decades, taught him to shoot not just a pistol but deadlier weapons, built an arsenal, moved to Oregon specifically because of less stringent gun laws, and sought out practice ranges where she and her son could shoot without supervision. Those are reported facts sufficient for probable cause to arrest and try her. She would have all the defenses available to her that come to mind (she couldn't foresee, she didn't know about the IRA obsession, Asperger's Syndrome, if indeed that is what he had, is not usually linked with violence).
We think we know what she did and didn't do. We certainly don't know what she said. For all we know, she could have loaded his guns, given him body armour, and pointed him to the school with instructions.
A trial would shine light on her role. This is one of the rare times when the shooter has left someone who knew him well alive.
She is a nurse held to a higher medical professional standard than laymen who knew and discussed her son's mental illness for decades, taught him to shoot not just a pistol but deadlier weapons, built an arsenal, moved to Oregon specifically because of less stringent gun laws, and sought out practice ranges where she and her son could shoot without supervision. Those are reported facts sufficient for probable cause to arrest and try her. She would have all the defenses available to her that come to mind (she couldn't foresee, she didn't know about the IRA obsession, Asperger's Syndrome, if indeed that is what he had, is not usually linked with violence).
We think we know what she did and didn't do. We certainly don't know what she said. For all we know, she could have loaded his guns, given him body armour, and pointed him to the school with instructions.
A trial would shine light on her role. This is one of the rare times when the shooter has left someone who knew him well alive.
118
In all of the accounts of the shooting that I've read prior to this one, the press (NYT included) indicated that much of the shooter's gun arsenal had been purchased by "a relative," not mentioning that it was the mother. Why was the press shielding this mother? She obviously needs to be investigated as an accessory to her son's murders. In addition, we all (journalists included) need to take a look at how our actions and inactions may be further supporting this horrendous trend.
An excellent article, Mr. Egan! Thanks for speaking out so clearly regarding this issue.
An excellent article, Mr. Egan! Thanks for speaking out so clearly regarding this issue.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm
There are many falsehoods concerning Bernie Sanders position that should be presented because it is important not to put forward falsehoods that divide us. Our fight sensible gun control is absolutely necessary.
There are many falsehoods concerning Bernie Sanders position that should be presented because it is important not to put forward falsehoods that divide us. Our fight sensible gun control is absolutely necessary.
1
Have had occasion to call the police twice in my life: once when my office was burgled and once when a homeless person claimed my seldom used parked car as his home. In both cases the police responded with alacrity, jumped from their squad cars, saw me and assumed I was the perpetrator. In the first instance, the office break-in, the officers charged in with their weapons drawn and pointed as they yelled at me to show my hands and get on my knees. In the second instance the officer had his hand on his holstered weapon and ordered me to stand back and not move. Fortunately the homeless man decided to vacate my car at that moment and -- fitting the homeless profile more than I did -- redirected police attention. That and my wife running out of the house screaming hysterically I was her husband. If I had a gun in either instance I think I would have sustained a warning shot or two through my lungs. The "Good man with a gun" -- the open carry vet on campus in Roseburg as the shooting was underway -- was smart enough to know that if he had drawn his gun and intervened responding law officers would probably have shot him dead. "A "Good man with a gun" is more accurately a "Dead man with a gun."
680
And what I find curious about the Carson quote (a bullet riddled body never worse than loss of gun rights) is that gun controls far more restrictive than those we have now were embraced by the GOP into the 80's (Ronald Reagan was all for gun control in CA) - as long as one understood that we were keeping guns out of the hands of blacks. Now the implication is that we need guns to keep us safe from threats (read: blacks, muslims, and the mentally ill). Gun control (in the US) can be (and is) used to manipulate and divide the voting public - for political advantage. But for the naive 2nd amendment "literalists" this argument is all about power and money. Carson is oblivious. The NRA is after $ from its members. And the gun industry has stoked fears (of bad guys and Obama) to sell weapons and ammo. Why do we allow ourselves to be so effectively controlled? This is "what's the matter with Kansas?" writ national and large.
34
The thinking of those most resistant to any and all changes in gun safety laws (and who are not in the industry profiting) is that any gun law is a slippery slope leading to an inevitable ban and confiscation of guns. So, no action is acceptable.
The logical corollary, and if you listen to Ben Carson, you can hear it, is that violence that comes as the side effect of our guns laws is an acceptable trade-off.
If we want a grass roots movement for sensible gun laws, we need to channel the outrage that should arise from the idea that people are "taking one for the team" to assure the broadest gun rights. Who, exactly, is expendable?
We have to communicate that the goal is to make sure that people are not simplyt expendable; to reduce gun deaths - rampages, violence in cities, suicides - with a concerted effort, the way we attacked the intractable problem of automotive deaths, and reduced it by about 20,000 per year between the 70s and now, even as we put more cars on the road.
We need to be able to articulate that regulation is not confiscation, and the goal is simply to save lives.
The logical corollary, and if you listen to Ben Carson, you can hear it, is that violence that comes as the side effect of our guns laws is an acceptable trade-off.
If we want a grass roots movement for sensible gun laws, we need to channel the outrage that should arise from the idea that people are "taking one for the team" to assure the broadest gun rights. Who, exactly, is expendable?
We have to communicate that the goal is to make sure that people are not simplyt expendable; to reduce gun deaths - rampages, violence in cities, suicides - with a concerted effort, the way we attacked the intractable problem of automotive deaths, and reduced it by about 20,000 per year between the 70s and now, even as we put more cars on the road.
We need to be able to articulate that regulation is not confiscation, and the goal is simply to save lives.
13
Confiscation is a good idea, however, and is not against the second amendment which provides for the formation of militias.
The 2nd Amendment is flagrantly misinterpreted by Republicans on our highest court.
Republicans are owned by the NRA.
The NRA is a voice for gun manufacturers and the promotion of domestic terrorism.
Republicans and the NRA have promote a culture of fear, gun worship and acceptance of loss of life from gun violence.
Republicans don't fear backlash from the public which overwhelmingly wants meaningful gun regulations; they've gerrymandered their districts to secure lifelong positions in Congress - supported by a small population of gun-loving, NRA true believers.
Republicans are owned by the NRA.
The NRA is a voice for gun manufacturers and the promotion of domestic terrorism.
Republicans and the NRA have promote a culture of fear, gun worship and acceptance of loss of life from gun violence.
Republicans don't fear backlash from the public which overwhelmingly wants meaningful gun regulations; they've gerrymandered their districts to secure lifelong positions in Congress - supported by a small population of gun-loving, NRA true believers.
139
Remove and replace the Second Amendment.
As far as I can tell the NRA and those that support them are a cult.
".. a religious or social group with socially deviant or novel beliefs and practices..." (Wiki)
The members who support the NRA are as vociferously faithful as any member of a fundamentalist religion, the results of their beliefs are socially deviant in that they result in the needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people, including infants and children every year.
".. a religious or social group with socially deviant or novel beliefs and practices..." (Wiki)
The members who support the NRA are as vociferously faithful as any member of a fundamentalist religion, the results of their beliefs are socially deviant in that they result in the needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people, including infants and children every year.
1
More words of wisdom from Donald Trump-'the mind does the shooting." I wish that were true:we'd have about 30,000 less deaths by firearm each year.
12
I suggest we gut the power of the NRA and pro gun lobbies by asking politicians to sign a pledge to take no money from the NRA or gun lobbies. It worked when Grover Norquist asked them for a no new tax pledge. If they are free of fear of being primaried they might actually do the right thing.
25
Missing from this argument is the responsibility of the rest of us. We need to make this an election issue and support reform minded candidates. After Newtown, Colorado passed strong reforms whose proponents quickly faced a recall election and were voted out of office. Although a majority of that state’s residents supported the reforms, many couldn’t be bothered to make it to the polls. This apathy cannot continue. Why would any politician stand against the gun lobby if their supporters won’t stand with him or her? We need a national wake-up call to prevent gun violence and not continue to wait for the next tragedy of which anyone of us or those we love could be the victim.
19
Insanity and anarchy is found in a state like Georgia where it is legal to carry an assault weapon through the airport outside the gates and it is illegal for a police officer to ask to see your gun license.What sane legislator would pass such a law?Only in a state controlled ny the NRA and gun huggers. Where is the "security of a free state" in that law which is a requirement that is part of the second amendment?
Oh I forgot, a justice on the Supreme Court said that preamble is nonsense. And he calls himself a strict constructionist.
Oh I forgot, a justice on the Supreme Court said that preamble is nonsense. And he calls himself a strict constructionist.
34
At least one of the parents of a surviving victim in Roseburg refuses to meet with President Obama because of his 'moderate' stance on gun control and that most likely reflects the sentiment of that town and the surrounding area in southern Oregon.
People cling to their guns and sales always increase after a mass killing out of fear that the government will enact gun laws.
It's sheer madness but that's the reality of America at present.
People cling to their guns and sales always increase after a mass killing out of fear that the government will enact gun laws.
It's sheer madness but that's the reality of America at present.
22
Each day one despairs a little more. The Republicans have the biggest representation in Congress since the 1920s, and a majority in both houses, of course, so their support is prodigious. It is shocking to think that people with the views of Huckabee, Trump, Carson, the Tea Party, Cruz, et al., are being cheered on. The cynicism of the candidates is met by the fanaticism of the voter. I see no hope: the chasm that divides the right and the 'slightly left of middle' - one can't call it left - is unbridgeable, on guns, abortion, the 'debt', religion, women ... A US relative is resigned; 'bring it on, for the system, all of it, will crumble into chaos.' All very well, but this brings down the rest of the world. I used to be angry, then sad; now I'm fearful.
24
It is exhausting to read these tired polemics being trotted out after each and every shooting. 1000 people dies falling down stairs every year, should we ban stairs? 550 people are shot and killed by police every year, should we ban the police? 3300 people drown every year, should we ban swimming pools? Guns are inanimate objects that have no moral implications whatsoever. Those who ask for "gun control" are actually asking for "people control".
4
1. There are regulations on how stairs are built.
2. There are regulations and oversight on the police.
3. There are regulations on access to swimming pools.
None of those regulations prevent use of stairs, or police operations or swimming in swimming pools. But those regulations DO make them safer and prevent even more deaths.
Guns should be regulated in the same manner as other things in our lives. No more. No less.
2. There are regulations and oversight on the police.
3. There are regulations on access to swimming pools.
None of those regulations prevent use of stairs, or police operations or swimming in swimming pools. But those regulations DO make them safer and prevent even more deaths.
Guns should be regulated in the same manner as other things in our lives. No more. No less.
558
We have building codes to make stairs safer and (wise) homeowners carry insurance for unlikely events like someone injured on their property. Pool must have fences for the sake of a toddler who might wander there, and I bet homes with pools have to carry extra insurance as well. Cars are dangerous and one has to be educated and pass a test to operate one, and prove that they have insurance. We have laws which regulate how cars are driven on the roads. A car is an inanimate object with no moral implication whatsoever. Police shootings, (young black men), apparently OK with you, ARE problematic, an issue which has been getting more attention lately with some changes being made.
People face controls in many areas of life. It is part of living in society.
Lastly, guns are designed to kill. Animals or people, that is immoral to me.
People face controls in many areas of life. It is part of living in society.
Lastly, guns are designed to kill. Animals or people, that is immoral to me.
77
How foolish. "Control" (the way the nation "controls" drivers of vehicles, for instance) is not a ban. Get a clue.
78
Growing up in the 60's and 70's toy guns were prevalent; every kid had a six shooter. Some kids would hunt before school and bring their guns to school, locked in their cars or pick up trucks. No one ever thought about school shootings since it was beyond anyone's imagination. Guns haven't changed over time; we have. Then again, no one had to warn TV viewers, "Don't try this at home."
I agree with Egan, parents do need to become more involved...involved and committed to raising their children with a sense of values, morals, and respect that have disappeared and seem old fashion.
I agree with Egan, parents do need to become more involved...involved and committed to raising their children with a sense of values, morals, and respect that have disappeared and seem old fashion.
21
Well-written, well-done. A pleasure to read such inspiring commentary.
7
Whenever I read any writer state that we have to severely curtail gun rights because there are 33,000 deaths from guns each year. I understand that person is bucking to have the Constitutional rights of ordinary, sane and law abiding citizens banned by Federal or State legislative means, alone.
Because two thirds of those regularly stated deaths are suicides, and nations with far stricter gun control have higher suicide rates. Dedicated gun prohibitionists know that, but ignore it in their tallies.
Tallies directed at generating laws, leaving the Constitutional right intact, but denying the right as a matter of Federal, or State, legislation, and the interpretation of that legislation by left leaning regional law enforcement.
Take NYC, where ordinary folding knives, legal in the rest of the nation for decades, are interpreted by the District Attorney to be equivalent to banned gravity knives, like those used by German paratroopers during WW2. An absurd legal interpretation which has resulted in felony charges for tens of thousands, including any number of craftsmen and tradesmen, going about their completely lawful business.
What Mr. Egan is telling us indirectly is that the mentally ill must have gun rights, and that, for example, Texas Senator Cornyn's mental health focused gun control measure must be defeated by democrats bent on using the mentally ill as a lever to ban Constitutional rights. while leaving the Bill of Rights ostensibly intact.
Because two thirds of those regularly stated deaths are suicides, and nations with far stricter gun control have higher suicide rates. Dedicated gun prohibitionists know that, but ignore it in their tallies.
Tallies directed at generating laws, leaving the Constitutional right intact, but denying the right as a matter of Federal, or State, legislation, and the interpretation of that legislation by left leaning regional law enforcement.
Take NYC, where ordinary folding knives, legal in the rest of the nation for decades, are interpreted by the District Attorney to be equivalent to banned gravity knives, like those used by German paratroopers during WW2. An absurd legal interpretation which has resulted in felony charges for tens of thousands, including any number of craftsmen and tradesmen, going about their completely lawful business.
What Mr. Egan is telling us indirectly is that the mentally ill must have gun rights, and that, for example, Texas Senator Cornyn's mental health focused gun control measure must be defeated by democrats bent on using the mentally ill as a lever to ban Constitutional rights. while leaving the Bill of Rights ostensibly intact.
4
No. I know about that fact that around 20,000 of those deaths are suicides from the different gun control organizations. They are the only ones willing to discuss gun deaths and how they occur.
Perhaps you can advocate in your own community for the rights of tradesmen and craftsmen to own knives that appear similar to German paratrooper knives and for improved mental health programs throughout the nation.
No one surely is threatening the rights of all us to be organized by our respective States into the "Well regulated militias" that were intended to bring security to a free state.
Perhaps you can advocate in your own community for the rights of tradesmen and craftsmen to own knives that appear similar to German paratrooper knives and for improved mental health programs throughout the nation.
No one surely is threatening the rights of all us to be organized by our respective States into the "Well regulated militias" that were intended to bring security to a free state.
1
...and I always thought Pretzel Logic was a musical album.
The Times featured a story this week where people in Roseburg seemed to be moving more toward guns, instead of away, in the wake of the violence there. It quoted a gun shop owner as saying something to the effect of that people need guns "so the government can't tell us when to get on our knees."
But elsewhere I saw a very cogent posting addressing that fear. To wit - and I believe the media should pursue and write this story - about how many modern revolutions succeeded without any shots being fired. For example - and from here I quote the posting:
-- Gandhi toppled the British Raj without firing a shot
- The Berlin Wall fell without a shot. Also Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution, and Solidarity in Poland
- The American civil rights movement of the 60s used no guns - though guns were used on them
- Egyptians toppled Hosni Mubarak with mass demonstrations - not guns. The aftermath did not turn out well but the point stands.
- Other aspects of the Arab Spring (Tunisia for one, if memory serves) - no guns.
And in all these cases the governments they opposed were armed to the teeth.
Now, do we need guns to protect our liberties?
But elsewhere I saw a very cogent posting addressing that fear. To wit - and I believe the media should pursue and write this story - about how many modern revolutions succeeded without any shots being fired. For example - and from here I quote the posting:
-- Gandhi toppled the British Raj without firing a shot
- The Berlin Wall fell without a shot. Also Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution, and Solidarity in Poland
- The American civil rights movement of the 60s used no guns - though guns were used on them
- Egyptians toppled Hosni Mubarak with mass demonstrations - not guns. The aftermath did not turn out well but the point stands.
- Other aspects of the Arab Spring (Tunisia for one, if memory serves) - no guns.
And in all these cases the governments they opposed were armed to the teeth.
Now, do we need guns to protect our liberties?
195
Here's a better question: How do we get it through to the gun huggers that if the US government decides to come after them, their arsenals won't be much help? Our military has tanks, bombers and drones and maps of every block in every town in every county in every state. As comedian Dick Gregory said of the Black Panther movement, "They talk about 'the fire next time.' I've seen the US military from the inside. It would be all over by Wednesday."
Having said that, I wonder if what we're seeing really is the stirrings of an armed insurrection. Societies where the wealth is owned by a tiny minority and a large chunk of the population has little or no work, no money, and no hope tend to devolve toward revolution. And it's shocking to see politicians like Bush, Carson and The Donald egg them on. Did these guys sleep through History class?
Having said that, I wonder if what we're seeing really is the stirrings of an armed insurrection. Societies where the wealth is owned by a tiny minority and a large chunk of the population has little or no work, no money, and no hope tend to devolve toward revolution. And it's shocking to see politicians like Bush, Carson and The Donald egg them on. Did these guys sleep through History class?
3
Yes, Tunisia. See this morning's front page.
1
Steve Tripol: Not if one deludes oneself into believing the Berlin Wall fell without a shot.
This is latest in an endless columns and editorials about the evils of guns. Yet, once again, it offers no concrete proposal to reduce violence in our country. Why? Because for all the melodramatics on the Left, they effectively admit that there is no solution. They just want to something to feel good about themselves. The fact that they always throw in the term "common sense" when describing their policy proposals is just an admission that no data exists to support their proposals. Let's be clear on a few facts. Violence is too common in this country. The choice of weapon in this country for violence is often a gun, because guns are readily available here. Despite the propensity of people like President Obama to exploit such events to advance a political agenda, mass shootings in this country are not a significant problem. You are twice as likely to die from a lightning strike than you are to die in a mass shooting. No law that has been proposed by President Obama or any other Democrat would have prevented the Oregon shooting. The only gun policy measure that might significantly reduce violence in our country would a be near total ban on guns along with mass confiscation of guns. Until Democrats and Mr. Egan are willing to propose such a measure, please spare me the self-righteous outrage, and try to focus on gun safety education and mental health policies and awareness education that might help with the problem.
5
Australia had a similar history of mass shootings, passed strict gun control laws and hasn't had one since. It is a lie to say we can't change course on gun violence.
See for example "After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn’t Had a Similar Massacre Since."http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticu...
See for example "After a 1996 Mass Shooting, Australia Enacted Strict Gun Laws. It Hasn’t Had a Similar Massacre Since."http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticu...
1
What baloney! The article specifically mentions background checks, which is a common sense concrete solution offered over and over and over. And a gun buyback worked wonders in Australia. Your comment is actually a version of the Onion headline, but without the joke.
1
Syltherapy: Australia's Constitution does not have a Bill of Rights like the US does. They also have strict immigration laws with strict enforcement, I don't notice liberal and leftists in this nation supporting those.
Australia passed their gun ban by simple vote in their National Parliament.
Any number of gun prohibitionists seem to think the same kind of law could be passed by the US Congress and have it pass judicial review.
Perhaps the proper question might be, how do gun control advocates expect to get anywhere when they suffer from such basic ignorance?
And yes, I know the President talks about Australian gun law. But isn't he violating his Oath of Office to support, and defend the US Constitution when he advocates for bringing foreign laws here which could not survive judicial review?
And finally, Australia still suffers from all kinds of violent crime, including gun crime,
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/06/asia/australia-shooting-arrests/index.html
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/alarming-statistics-show-that-violent-c...
Australia passed their gun ban by simple vote in their National Parliament.
Any number of gun prohibitionists seem to think the same kind of law could be passed by the US Congress and have it pass judicial review.
Perhaps the proper question might be, how do gun control advocates expect to get anywhere when they suffer from such basic ignorance?
And yes, I know the President talks about Australian gun law. But isn't he violating his Oath of Office to support, and defend the US Constitution when he advocates for bringing foreign laws here which could not survive judicial review?
And finally, Australia still suffers from all kinds of violent crime, including gun crime,
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/06/asia/australia-shooting-arrests/index.html
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/alarming-statistics-show-that-violent-c...
Gov. Jindal should keep his mouth shut. We cannot know the circumstances inside any family unit, but it is quite possible with both Adam and the Oregon shooter that they withdrew from their dads. It may also be true that the parents' relationships were hostile in ways that kept the dads at arms length (maybe either or both Dad objected to the gun culture in his kid's like, but Mom liked it because she likes guns and it drew her closer to her son). I am not defending either father, just saying that those of us on the outside should not judge what we cannot know.
At least one mother of a living shooting victim has expressed the opinion that she wished her daughter had been armed. Not all of them will applaud the President's gun control push. Some apparently would have preferred a massive shoot out in that classroom.
At least one mother of a living shooting victim has expressed the opinion that she wished her daughter had been armed. Not all of them will applaud the President's gun control push. Some apparently would have preferred a massive shoot out in that classroom.
7
Mr. Egan,
You might want to follow up this column with one that examines the lack of a support system offered to women who are divorced and single parents. One might think times have changed, and divorce/single parenting is no longer stigmatized. That would be a mistaken assumption.Especially in suburbs and less populated areas.
Divorced women with children are social pariahs.If they have a life in the community it usually centers around schools and car pools. The life ends at sundown, when couples life takes over, and couples social events take place.
The isolation and rejection these women face is overwhelming, and it can, and does, make them emotionally damaged and/or mentally ill. Sometimes the only company these mothers have are their children, and this can lead to unhealthy dependence on each other.
Women living alone are also more vulnerable to violence, as well as having a justified fear of violence, since they lack the "protection" of an adult male in the home. This can lead to the purchase of a gun, or guns, in order to feel safe, however misguided that may be.
This is in no way a justification of the weaponry in the homes of Adam Lanza and the Oregon assassin, bought by their mothers.
But, Mr. Egan, if you want to look to the mothers of America to replace the political with the personal, you might first want to examine your assumptions about them and their daily lives. If it takes a village to raise a child, it follows that it takes a village to support a mother.
You might want to follow up this column with one that examines the lack of a support system offered to women who are divorced and single parents. One might think times have changed, and divorce/single parenting is no longer stigmatized. That would be a mistaken assumption.Especially in suburbs and less populated areas.
Divorced women with children are social pariahs.If they have a life in the community it usually centers around schools and car pools. The life ends at sundown, when couples life takes over, and couples social events take place.
The isolation and rejection these women face is overwhelming, and it can, and does, make them emotionally damaged and/or mentally ill. Sometimes the only company these mothers have are their children, and this can lead to unhealthy dependence on each other.
Women living alone are also more vulnerable to violence, as well as having a justified fear of violence, since they lack the "protection" of an adult male in the home. This can lead to the purchase of a gun, or guns, in order to feel safe, however misguided that may be.
This is in no way a justification of the weaponry in the homes of Adam Lanza and the Oregon assassin, bought by their mothers.
But, Mr. Egan, if you want to look to the mothers of America to replace the political with the personal, you might first want to examine your assumptions about them and their daily lives. If it takes a village to raise a child, it follows that it takes a village to support a mother.
21
"Only in a country with a pathological refusal to recognize the truth about weapons and deaths would parents arm their mentally unstable children."
Yes, this is a huge part of the problem: the parental shielding of the mentally ill and using guns (of all things!) as a way to bond with their children. It appears to be cropping up with some regularity in the backgrounds of young, male mass murderers.
But if the problems are grown in the home, perhaps the family is the best place to start to stop the madness, I truly believe that the "gun problem" won't be addressed until a large enough organized group takes a stand and whips up ways for the public to get involved in whom they vote for. The problem does not have to be intractable, if public sentiment rises high enough and has a highly organized lobbying group of its own, that can counter the NRA.
Think it can't be done? Overcoming that resignation is the first step.
Yes, this is a huge part of the problem: the parental shielding of the mentally ill and using guns (of all things!) as a way to bond with their children. It appears to be cropping up with some regularity in the backgrounds of young, male mass murderers.
But if the problems are grown in the home, perhaps the family is the best place to start to stop the madness, I truly believe that the "gun problem" won't be addressed until a large enough organized group takes a stand and whips up ways for the public to get involved in whom they vote for. The problem does not have to be intractable, if public sentiment rises high enough and has a highly organized lobbying group of its own, that can counter the NRA.
Think it can't be done? Overcoming that resignation is the first step.
13
Notice how many comments pine for more "gun control" without even trying to define what specific laws, rules, regulations, et al they desire, much less presenting a rational, logical explanation of how their proposals would have prevented any recent mass shooting.
5
George McKinney from Florida, meet Tom Harvey from Rockville, MD:
"Countries like Germany and Holland have very strict gun laws and far fewer guns. Even if we get rid of most of them, the remainder needs to be tightly protected from getting into bad hands or into the owner's hands under bad circumstances. An insurance mandate (which exists in Germany and Holland) would go a long way to enforcing this protection. The insurance has to be designed for the specific situation around firearms; just requiring a million dollars in liability insurance isn't sufficient. Details are published at http://guninsuranceblog.com, where there is a plan for a comprehensive insurance system to compensate all victims."
And Thom Hartmann (who, by the way, has sponsored - for several years - the weekly "Brunch with Bernie" episode, on which Bernie takes questions from callers for 1 hour) has been touting the need for just such an insurance program for months.
George, are you listening?
"Countries like Germany and Holland have very strict gun laws and far fewer guns. Even if we get rid of most of them, the remainder needs to be tightly protected from getting into bad hands or into the owner's hands under bad circumstances. An insurance mandate (which exists in Germany and Holland) would go a long way to enforcing this protection. The insurance has to be designed for the specific situation around firearms; just requiring a million dollars in liability insurance isn't sufficient. Details are published at http://guninsuranceblog.com, where there is a plan for a comprehensive insurance system to compensate all victims."
And Thom Hartmann (who, by the way, has sponsored - for several years - the weekly "Brunch with Bernie" episode, on which Bernie takes questions from callers for 1 hour) has been touting the need for just such an insurance program for months.
George, are you listening?
18
Listening -- and still haven't heard how a government mandated insurance requirement would have prevented any of the mass killings.
1
Well, George, it's a lot easier to categorically reject ALL solutions than to come up with answers that effectively address the problems of mental illness, family dysfunction, and too many goddam guns.
4
America is a mess! Most of the other expats who make comments to the Times don't mention why they left America. Perhaps they're being polite.
I abandoned America 12 years ago when Bush invaded Iraq. It was the last in a long series of debacles by politicians during my lifetime...but the real problem was the citizens who could always be duped again and again by a manipulative government.
Life is too short to squander living in a violent gun culture with little hope for improvement. I encourage all like minded Americans to seriously consider starting a new life in another culture.
It was the best decision I've ever made!
I abandoned America 12 years ago when Bush invaded Iraq. It was the last in a long series of debacles by politicians during my lifetime...but the real problem was the citizens who could always be duped again and again by a manipulative government.
Life is too short to squander living in a violent gun culture with little hope for improvement. I encourage all like minded Americans to seriously consider starting a new life in another culture.
It was the best decision I've ever made!
183
It's tempting. I admit there are times when I think of the ending of Jurassic Park, when the survivors helicopter away leaving the dinosaurs to trash the island, and dust off my passport.
But this is my country too, dammit! I remember when it would never cross anyone's mind that someone might shoot up a classroom, a church, a shopping center. I want to live in that America again. How do we get there from here?
But this is my country too, dammit! I remember when it would never cross anyone's mind that someone might shoot up a classroom, a church, a shopping center. I want to live in that America again. How do we get there from here?
9
Bystander....thanks for your reply. If history is any lesson, things may not improve until the country hits rock bottom. Follow your own heart!
1
Michael,
Your frustration is understandable, but not everyone can leave. Some have to fight the good fight to make this country better. Enjoy your wine!
Your frustration is understandable, but not everyone can leave. Some have to fight the good fight to make this country better. Enjoy your wine!
2
When on my Pediatrics rotation a wise Pediatrician told me to remember that "The Apple doesn't fall far from the tree" meaning that when evaluating a child observing the parents can provide valuable clues as to potential problems both physical and psychological in the child. This pretty much answers the author's question of "What kind of parent".
38
Countries like Germany and Holland have very strict gun laws and far fewer guns. Even if we get rid of most of them, the remainder needs to be tightly protected from getting into bad hands or into the owner's hands under bad circumstances. An insurance mandate (which exists in Germany and Holland) would go a long way to enforcing this protection. The insurance has to be designed for the specific situation around firearms; just requiring a million dollars in liability insurance isn't sufficient. Details are published at http://guninsuranceblog.com, where there is a plan for a comprehensive insurance system to compensate all victims.
56
Strongly agree with the insurance mandate. This is a market-based solution to address an economic externality -- the potential cost that gun ownership imposes on third parties. If you're a responsible owner (locked cabinets, gun safety training courses, etc.), you're rates would be lower; if not, your rates would be higher, to reflect the greater externality risk that you impose. The insurance market should work relatively efficiently here. This is a principle that conservatives ought to be able to get behind.
5
I'm sick to death of the gun lobby that tries to distinguish responsible gun owners from irresponsible gun owners.
Every responsible gun owner is responsible until he or she isn't. I'm certain that the parents of the 11-year-old who shot and killed the girl considered themselves responsible gun owners.
Every gun owner is potentially an irresponsible gun owner. Every single one.
Every responsible gun owner is responsible until he or she isn't. I'm certain that the parents of the 11-year-old who shot and killed the girl considered themselves responsible gun owners.
Every gun owner is potentially an irresponsible gun owner. Every single one.
643
Right, so take away our guns now and put us all in mental hospitals, for surely one day we're all gonna crack.
1
I suggest that Mr. Egan read the front page of this newspaper. The patients are clearly in charge of the insane asylum formerly known as the House of Representatives. The members of the soi disant Freedom Caucus run the majority party in the House, in a headlong pursuit of freedom to destroy good governance. 33,000 gun deaths per year may be a small sacrifice to their notion of freedom.
144
Of course mothers and fathers need to take responsibility for allowing disturbed minds and murderous weapons to mix. At the very least they need to be held accountable for making guns accessible to minor children, or to those who are mentally ill.
But this is not a solution. In a country of 330 million people, it only takes a handful of disturbed people to wreak havoc in some horrific shooting spree. Depending on all parents everywhere to voluntarily secure their private arsenals is doomed to failure.
The answer is to do what other countries do. Make the difficulty of acquiring guns proportional to their power to cause harm. Require mandatory and thorough background checks. Provide stiff penalties for failure to properly secure weapons in the home.
But along with regulations there must be a change in attitudes. Conservative politicians must stop promoting an insidious culture of fear that implicitly suggests that an armed uprising may one day be necessary against the government. This attitude intensified when Obama became president, as if his election was one part of a paranoid prophesy that had just clicked into place.
The Second Amendment is all about the ability of our citizens to defend the nation. If it is was ever necessary to take up arms against it, then the Second Amendment would be moot.
I can at least agree with one conservative take on this issue. When Bobby Jindal calls someone a failure who owes us an apology, all I can say is, he should know.
But this is not a solution. In a country of 330 million people, it only takes a handful of disturbed people to wreak havoc in some horrific shooting spree. Depending on all parents everywhere to voluntarily secure their private arsenals is doomed to failure.
The answer is to do what other countries do. Make the difficulty of acquiring guns proportional to their power to cause harm. Require mandatory and thorough background checks. Provide stiff penalties for failure to properly secure weapons in the home.
But along with regulations there must be a change in attitudes. Conservative politicians must stop promoting an insidious culture of fear that implicitly suggests that an armed uprising may one day be necessary against the government. This attitude intensified when Obama became president, as if his election was one part of a paranoid prophesy that had just clicked into place.
The Second Amendment is all about the ability of our citizens to defend the nation. If it is was ever necessary to take up arms against it, then the Second Amendment would be moot.
I can at least agree with one conservative take on this issue. When Bobby Jindal calls someone a failure who owes us an apology, all I can say is, he should know.
405
Gemli, mandatory and thorough background checks are already required. When a prohibited possessor tries buying a firearm, they are turned away but not arrested and prosecuted for the crime they have committed. As for properly secured weapons in the home, will you go in and do the inspections? And does "properly secured" mean the same thing in every home? In every state? If not, will you write the reams of qualifications, conditions, specifications and exemptions required? It would be more convoluted and obscure than anything the IRS could come up with.
As for armed uprisings, let's look at what happened with Cliven Bundy. A lot of people see a citizen militia prevailing over government, regardless of the many other issues involved. Had you been in charge of the BLM and associated "forces", what would you have done?
Nothing is so easy, so cut and dried, nor as black and white as many writers here seem to think it is. Government is rarely if ever capable of dealing with all that nuance.
As for armed uprisings, let's look at what happened with Cliven Bundy. A lot of people see a citizen militia prevailing over government, regardless of the many other issues involved. Had you been in charge of the BLM and associated "forces", what would you have done?
Nothing is so easy, so cut and dried, nor as black and white as many writers here seem to think it is. Government is rarely if ever capable of dealing with all that nuance.
2
Surely you're not suggesting that the people who would support "a citizen militia" against a democratically elected government are sane, are you? And if "Government is rarely if ever capable of dealing with all that nuance" then who do you think should do it? And how do you explain that apparently the government of all the other advanced democracies were able to accomplish this incredible feat?
4
Since other "civilized" countries seem to be able to deal with "nuance", Eric R, then the problem must be us.
1
I have been following the gun debate on various social media. Maybe I'm biased but when men vigorously defend gun rights, it doesn't come as a surprise. However, many women are as passionate about gun rights as men, and that I don't understand. I can't imagine bonding with my son on a shooting range. But then again, growing up in Europe, the thought of needing a gun for self protection never occurred to me. This is indeed a puzzling American phenomenon.
68
It's just another example of 'American Exceptionolism'
3
And a lot of women vote Republican because their husbands or relatives do.
Sometimes out of choice and sometimes not. It's called conditioning.
Many women stay with their violent spouses as well, often because their husbands own guns and may use them against her, (and their children) if she dares to leave him. This happens all too often.
Sometimes out of choice and sometimes not. It's called conditioning.
Many women stay with their violent spouses as well, often because their husbands own guns and may use them against her, (and their children) if she dares to leave him. This happens all too often.
3
Senor Egan paints a highly sexist caricature of women's political determinism. I suppose we will have to soon endure his re-telling of how the "women's vote", and the social consciousness it empowered, led to the 18th Amendment's Prohibition against alcohol; the rise of progressive albeit ham handed and over funded law enforcement tactics and agencies that even today are a mainstay in the societal effort to stem the tide of drugs.
(Notwithstanding the Bill of Rights and other writings from antiquity.)
(Notwithstanding the Bill of Rights and other writings from antiquity.)
6
We'll believe the politicians and SCOTUS are serious on gun issues when they remove the metal detectors from their doorways and join the rest of us in this little 2nd Amendment Utopia they've created - they defy the wishes of 92% of gun owners, 86% of GOP'ers and 98% of Dems:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/majority-americans-support-background-checks-...
due to the influence of gun and ammo manufacturers.
That Congress refuses to respond on an issue where such huge majorities of both parties clearly want them to act further signifies Congress's transformation from a legislative body to nothing more than a party fund-raising operation.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/majority-americans-support-background-checks-...
due to the influence of gun and ammo manufacturers.
That Congress refuses to respond on an issue where such huge majorities of both parties clearly want them to act further signifies Congress's transformation from a legislative body to nothing more than a party fund-raising operation.
362
Then the
"92% of gun owners, 86% of GOP'ers and 98% of Dems"
should become one issue voters, and stop the carnage by voting any representative who voted against the universal background check bill out of office.
"92% of gun owners, 86% of GOP'ers and 98% of Dems"
should become one issue voters, and stop the carnage by voting any representative who voted against the universal background check bill out of office.
7
Amen, many members of the US Congress care more about keeping there plush perk ridden seats than America or its citizens. Shame on them.
4
Go on, tell us about the rest of the poll, how only a fraction of those polled want legislation.
1
If proposals such as Egan's for moderate reform continue to fail, the day may well come when national disgust over the extreme violence associated with the gun culture will ignite a reaction that will overwhelm the NRA and its allies in and out of government. American political culture imbues us with a deep commitment to individual rights, but that support is not impregnable. Americans also value personal security highly, and if they arrive at a point where they no longer connect gun ownership with their own safety, the survival of the 2nd amendment may be in jeopardy.
This transformation seems highly improbable today. Still, there is a long tradition of reform opponents resisting compromises that would appease their adversaries while also preserving their privileges or rights. The French and Russian Revolutions both originated in part from stubborn elite rejection of reform. I am not predicting such an upheaval here, but a political revolt against the 2nd amendment is not impossible.
Only a minority of Americans own guns, and the rate of ownership is falling. If this trend continues, then firearm advocates will have to rely increasingly on the support of the unarmed public to preserve their arsenals. Persistence of the current level of violence will undermine that alliance. But an effective coalition of moderate gun owners and the rest of us might improve safety without impinging on the 2nd amendment. Surely that would be in the interests of everyone.
18
Haven't heard such common sense counsel since the days of The Reichsvertretung.
1
Americans also value personal security highly, and if they arrive at a point where they no longer connect gun ownership with their own safety, the survival of the 2nd amendment may be in jeopardy.
Only a minority of Americans own guns, and the rate of ownership is falling. If this trend continues, then firearm advocates will have to rely increasingly on the support of the unarmed public to preserve their arsenals.
==================
You should really look at the historic trends on gun control in this Gallup poll. The trends are all against gun control in recent years. In fact less than half of the country is in favor of gun control.
On the personal security issue - if you don't live in an inner city, your chances of being shot in gun crime are much different than your being struck by lightning. The sad reality is that the vast majority of gun homicides are inner-city youth murdering each other in gang wars. That's why, as Egan fails to point out, gun murder is the leading cause of death among teens.
That's why people aren't out in the streets demanding gun control. For the vast majority of middle-class suburban-dwelling Americans, gun crime isn't a real part of
their lives.
The Gallup poll also addresses gun ownership. The "minority" of gun owning Americans has fallen from 49% in 1960 to 42% in 2013. It appears that the trend line is rising again.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
Only a minority of Americans own guns, and the rate of ownership is falling. If this trend continues, then firearm advocates will have to rely increasingly on the support of the unarmed public to preserve their arsenals.
==================
You should really look at the historic trends on gun control in this Gallup poll. The trends are all against gun control in recent years. In fact less than half of the country is in favor of gun control.
On the personal security issue - if you don't live in an inner city, your chances of being shot in gun crime are much different than your being struck by lightning. The sad reality is that the vast majority of gun homicides are inner-city youth murdering each other in gang wars. That's why, as Egan fails to point out, gun murder is the leading cause of death among teens.
That's why people aren't out in the streets demanding gun control. For the vast majority of middle-class suburban-dwelling Americans, gun crime isn't a real part of
their lives.
The Gallup poll also addresses gun ownership. The "minority" of gun owning Americans has fallen from 49% in 1960 to 42% in 2013. It appears that the trend line is rising again.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
2
Mr. Egan is on the right track, but his argument is too narrow. The old saying is true, "It takes a village to raise a child."
I grew up in a neighborhood with homes on 33 foot wide lots and front porches, no attached garages and many homes didn't even have driveways. No 6 foot privacy fences either. Everyone was in everyone else's face all the time. It was a community. There was always someone's Mom watching over the kids and all had authority.
Now, no one knows anyone. We hide in our homes. A couple moved in across the street. No one knows their names. They just had a baby. Baby who?
We have replaced the community with the electronic isolation bubble of the Internet filled with hate and violence. All of these shooters live in that bubble.
Adam Lanza was home schooled. If he, and others like him, was in real school, he might have gotten the support he needed to stay sane. His teachers would have noticed his problems and sought help. Instead, his mother sought further isolation, just the opposite.
If he lived in my old neighborhood, others would have intervened. Dad's would have befriended him. My Mom would have yelled at his mother to put him in school.
Instead, his mother tries to bond with him with guns, worst choice possible.
The gun people refuse to recognize that we are no longer the people we were. We lost the community. Marginal minds have no support and go insane. Guns are everywhere. We need each other. We don't need guns.
I grew up in a neighborhood with homes on 33 foot wide lots and front porches, no attached garages and many homes didn't even have driveways. No 6 foot privacy fences either. Everyone was in everyone else's face all the time. It was a community. There was always someone's Mom watching over the kids and all had authority.
Now, no one knows anyone. We hide in our homes. A couple moved in across the street. No one knows their names. They just had a baby. Baby who?
We have replaced the community with the electronic isolation bubble of the Internet filled with hate and violence. All of these shooters live in that bubble.
Adam Lanza was home schooled. If he, and others like him, was in real school, he might have gotten the support he needed to stay sane. His teachers would have noticed his problems and sought help. Instead, his mother sought further isolation, just the opposite.
If he lived in my old neighborhood, others would have intervened. Dad's would have befriended him. My Mom would have yelled at his mother to put him in school.
Instead, his mother tries to bond with him with guns, worst choice possible.
The gun people refuse to recognize that we are no longer the people we were. We lost the community. Marginal minds have no support and go insane. Guns are everywhere. We need each other. We don't need guns.
872
It might take a village to raise a child but it starts with parents taking responsibility for rearing and guiding their own offspring. In the cases you mentioned guns are not the common denominator; it's lack of supervision and appropriate interventions
1
Mike, you will not convince me that Lanza & Harper-Mercer's mothers didn't love their children, they were simply misguided. I think Bruce is saying that if we were all more connected to each other, there would have been more opportunities for others to intervene. We are all our brother's keeper, regardless of all this isolating technology.
3
I agree about community. In defense of Tim Eagan's point about Moms: a new family moved next door with a toddler. This mom baked a berry crisp gift as an excuse to introduce myself and offer my phone number before winter's ice storms. It's not hard to find out the name of that baby across the street.
4
Carson was ignorant of nothing. The others in that classroom WERE too passive, but it is a learned passivity engendered by a culture where children are not even allowed to play tag or dodge ball. These games are too risky, it seems, and they are also atavistic having roots in social training in basic prey vs predator instincts and tactics.
I am not a believer in arming teachers and students with firearms. Politically, that just isn't going to happen, so don't waste time thinking about it. I am a believer in what I learned from a career in criminal corrections (and combat in Vietnam.)
First, trouble jumps up when you least expect it, so when you walk into a room always check for everything that you could use as a weapon. Corrections officers often don't carry any weapons, not even a tazer, but they do have handcuffs, which when held right can be used as a sap or as pointed brass knuckles.
Second, wisdom from the late Jimmy Hoffa, who didn't see it coming. If you do see it coming Hoffa offered this street wisdom: always run at a threat with a gun and away from a threat with a knife. Unless you have had an awful lot of martial arts training you are not going to get a knife away from a determined attacker. You can't outrun a bullet.
Third, if you are with a group that meets regularly, agree on a code word that means "Let's roll." If you are in the back of the room, throw something--it will help. The Oregon shoot had 6 guns, but only 2 hands, 4 guns were up for grabs.
I am not a believer in arming teachers and students with firearms. Politically, that just isn't going to happen, so don't waste time thinking about it. I am a believer in what I learned from a career in criminal corrections (and combat in Vietnam.)
First, trouble jumps up when you least expect it, so when you walk into a room always check for everything that you could use as a weapon. Corrections officers often don't carry any weapons, not even a tazer, but they do have handcuffs, which when held right can be used as a sap or as pointed brass knuckles.
Second, wisdom from the late Jimmy Hoffa, who didn't see it coming. If you do see it coming Hoffa offered this street wisdom: always run at a threat with a gun and away from a threat with a knife. Unless you have had an awful lot of martial arts training you are not going to get a knife away from a determined attacker. You can't outrun a bullet.
Third, if you are with a group that meets regularly, agree on a code word that means "Let's roll." If you are in the back of the room, throw something--it will help. The Oregon shoot had 6 guns, but only 2 hands, 4 guns were up for grabs.
5
Good advice for a violence-riddled area or a war zone. And while the country may look like one sometimes, we need solutions that reject violence and combat, that reject the inflamed gun culture that is the root of the problem.
38
So the first-graders at Newtown should have been taught all these tactics. at the age of six? If this is what we have to start doing in this country , then we are truly doomed as a civilized nation.
51
Sustained combat mentality drives everyone crazy after some period of time.
31
“ ‘No Way to Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens.”
It is time to stop beating around the bush and make a national push to amend the 2nd Amendment. The Founding Fathers were not thinking of protecting the power of the NRA and gun manufacturers when adopting it. They were thinking of sensible reform in allowing for future amendments.
It is time to stop beating around the bush and make a national push to amend the 2nd Amendment. The Founding Fathers were not thinking of protecting the power of the NRA and gun manufacturers when adopting it. They were thinking of sensible reform in allowing for future amendments.
98
This is one of the first sensible comments I've read, urging those of like mind to gather and participate in the process. I don't necessarily agree with the writer, as he or she doesn't specify how the new amendment would read, but it's a start. Given the current climate of fear and many of us teetering still on the razors edge of economic helplessness, I doubt you'd get much traction, but democracy is tough and messy, it requires stamina and determination.
It's well nigh impossible for government to enact, much the less enforce, laws sufficiently nuanced to gain even grudging acceptance from all affected. Any proposal is going to anger some large plurality and enrage some small but vocal minority. Zealous supporters of both sides will be squeaky wheels and thorns in our side until our cowardly congress once again throws up its hands and passes the buck.
I've argued before for universal early firearms education and training. This would develop the proper respect for guns before other notions might take root, and give us an early look at those who perhaps should not have any access to firearms. It would also be a precursor to national service, where everyone learns to make their own bed and get along with people different than yourself. These steps would go a very long way to winnowing out dangerous people, either with guns or in politics, and keeping our military profile less aggressive. There would be no exemptions for bone spurs, nervous tics or family connections.
It's well nigh impossible for government to enact, much the less enforce, laws sufficiently nuanced to gain even grudging acceptance from all affected. Any proposal is going to anger some large plurality and enrage some small but vocal minority. Zealous supporters of both sides will be squeaky wheels and thorns in our side until our cowardly congress once again throws up its hands and passes the buck.
I've argued before for universal early firearms education and training. This would develop the proper respect for guns before other notions might take root, and give us an early look at those who perhaps should not have any access to firearms. It would also be a precursor to national service, where everyone learns to make their own bed and get along with people different than yourself. These steps would go a very long way to winnowing out dangerous people, either with guns or in politics, and keeping our military profile less aggressive. There would be no exemptions for bone spurs, nervous tics or family connections.
3
We need referendums by state on gun registration. Let the people vote. We can't count on a paid off representative Congress anymore. So many guns in the home is sheer madness.
14
Earlier this week thirty year old Chris Muntz spent 6&1/2 hours on the operating table as surgeons repaired multiple gunshot wounds to his abdomen, back and legs. Muntz sustained the injuries whilst trying to first block and then reason with the Umpqua college murderer 26 year old Christopher Harper-Mercer. After leaving Muntz for dead Harper-Mercer went on to kill nine and injure many others. As Muntz was recuperating, his ex partner and mother of his son, Jamie Skinner, talked about her positive attitude to guns. Both Muntz and Skinner had been regular shooters at local shooting ranges. Since the massacre she had renewed her determination to have arms in her home. “I like to have the ability to protect myself and my child,” she said. NYT 20151007
Muntz and Skinner’s six year old son Tyrik has autism.
Before committing the massacre Christopher Harper-Mercer lived with his mother Laurel Harper. Ms Harper had divorced Christopher’s father a decade earlier. Ms Harper was a gun enthusiast. According to a NYT column 20151005. ‘In an online forum, answering a question about state gun laws several years ago, Ms. Harper took a jab at “lame states” that impose limits on keeping loaded firearms in the home . . . “I keep two full mags in my Glock case. And the ARs & AKs all have loaded mags,” Ms. Harper wrote. “No one will be ‘dropping’ by my house uninvited without acknowledgement.”’
Christopher suffered from autism spectrum disorder.
(to next post(
Muntz and Skinner’s six year old son Tyrik has autism.
Before committing the massacre Christopher Harper-Mercer lived with his mother Laurel Harper. Ms Harper had divorced Christopher’s father a decade earlier. Ms Harper was a gun enthusiast. According to a NYT column 20151005. ‘In an online forum, answering a question about state gun laws several years ago, Ms. Harper took a jab at “lame states” that impose limits on keeping loaded firearms in the home . . . “I keep two full mags in my Glock case. And the ARs & AKs all have loaded mags,” Ms. Harper wrote. “No one will be ‘dropping’ by my house uninvited without acknowledgement.”’
Christopher suffered from autism spectrum disorder.
(to next post(
14
c't'd
Funny how there are parallels with Nancy Lanza and her son Adam. Nancy also loved guns and wanted to protect her home and vulnerable son. Adam - you know the troubled socially isolated young man who shot Nancy whilst she lay sleeping in her bed. Adam then went on to mow down 26 including 20 school kids at Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012.
It is not the stranger outside the home we should be worried about. Nor surprisingly is it the young man with a personality disorder. It is the belief that many mothers and fathers have that they are on their own and that guns are the only defense they have against the outside world.
Having been involved in designing and assisting with behavioral / cultural change initiatives for much of my professional life I would like to suggest this approach to reigning in the gun violence. If parents can be helped to feel safer in their home, guns can be seen to be what they truly are – a dangerous threat to the family by members of that family.
For some ideas . . . [email protected]
Funny how there are parallels with Nancy Lanza and her son Adam. Nancy also loved guns and wanted to protect her home and vulnerable son. Adam - you know the troubled socially isolated young man who shot Nancy whilst she lay sleeping in her bed. Adam then went on to mow down 26 including 20 school kids at Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012.
It is not the stranger outside the home we should be worried about. Nor surprisingly is it the young man with a personality disorder. It is the belief that many mothers and fathers have that they are on their own and that guns are the only defense they have against the outside world.
Having been involved in designing and assisting with behavioral / cultural change initiatives for much of my professional life I would like to suggest this approach to reigning in the gun violence. If parents can be helped to feel safer in their home, guns can be seen to be what they truly are – a dangerous threat to the family by members of that family.
For some ideas . . . [email protected]
5
Three of the stooges, Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Wayne La Pierre, Executive Director of the NRA, of the All Guns All The Time wing of the wingnuts share one commonality.
They all dodged their big chance at gunslinging, they all dodged the Viet Nam draft.
Trump, deferments and an exemption for bone spurs.
Carson, student deferments.
La Pierre, exemption for an anxiety disorder. "Lil Wayne, you see, was quite anxious about being SHOT.
They all dodged their big chance at gunslinging, they all dodged the Viet Nam draft.
Trump, deferments and an exemption for bone spurs.
Carson, student deferments.
La Pierre, exemption for an anxiety disorder. "Lil Wayne, you see, was quite anxious about being SHOT.
525
I had no idea that Wayne La Pierre had an anxiety disorder deferment. That makes complete sense! Now I understand why the NRA pedals paranoia with such aplomb--the organization has become a physical manifestation of La Pierre's mental illness! Let's send him to Iraq and Syria.
12
mother dear, please Don't send him to Iraq and Syria, there are human beings who live there, breathe there, mothers with children, wives with husbands, brothers and sisters...
Iraqis and Syrians are humans too.
Iraqis and Syrians are humans too.
9
The US is ready for national street protests demanding gun safety laws, in the tradition of Occupy Wall St, the huge marches on Climate Change, for minimum wage, against police abuse.
We and Obama are fed up. The Democratic debates will sharpen this issue to a razor’s edge. Clinton and Sanders differ.
Obama on TV compared the US with other nations--- a crucial and neglected topic on media. Street protests should display big banners listing the high US death rates vs other nations, where they also have criminals and mentally ill, but not easy access to guns.
Motive, means, opportunity equals death.
These other countries don’t have powerful gun lobbies, since their elections are paid for by mostly public funding. Thus their democracies are stronger than ours, it must be said.
We need street protests with the theme-- “OUR LIVES MATTER”. This slogan could be a factor bringing various groups together in a common cause against easy guns for profit. A movement truly 'PRO LIFE'.
The many NRA members who disagree with NRA leaders could march with their own banners identifying themselves in street protests, to start pressuring lawmakers.
Most police depts favor strong gun laws. How much easier their job would be. A police rep should march with their communities. Is this a chance for an historic alliance---police, civilians, moms & dads, all races, ethnicities, ages, economic status? An real pro life issue to start a path toward national cooperation not polarization.
We and Obama are fed up. The Democratic debates will sharpen this issue to a razor’s edge. Clinton and Sanders differ.
Obama on TV compared the US with other nations--- a crucial and neglected topic on media. Street protests should display big banners listing the high US death rates vs other nations, where they also have criminals and mentally ill, but not easy access to guns.
Motive, means, opportunity equals death.
These other countries don’t have powerful gun lobbies, since their elections are paid for by mostly public funding. Thus their democracies are stronger than ours, it must be said.
We need street protests with the theme-- “OUR LIVES MATTER”. This slogan could be a factor bringing various groups together in a common cause against easy guns for profit. A movement truly 'PRO LIFE'.
The many NRA members who disagree with NRA leaders could march with their own banners identifying themselves in street protests, to start pressuring lawmakers.
Most police depts favor strong gun laws. How much easier their job would be. A police rep should march with their communities. Is this a chance for an historic alliance---police, civilians, moms & dads, all races, ethnicities, ages, economic status? An real pro life issue to start a path toward national cooperation not polarization.
57
In every town, city,and hamlet bring back the old signs showing, in real time, each death caused by guns, violent and accidental.
9
But then you have the sheriff of the Oregon community who, prior to the shooting, vowed that he would refuse to uphold laws that infringed on the total freedom of gun ownership. I realize that the Roseburg community is in a rural and hunting region and that gun ownership is widespread. Still, no restraint whatsoever is not the solution.
There should be no reason at all that the populace owns assault rifles. Congress should reinstate the ban on those weapons and make it prohibitive to own them and then offer buyback mechanisms to get them off the streets.
There should be no reason at all that the populace owns assault rifles. Congress should reinstate the ban on those weapons and make it prohibitive to own them and then offer buyback mechanisms to get them off the streets.
13
The US ranks 12th for firearm related deaths, including murder, suicide, collateral damage, accidents and cops shooting 12 year olds. Another Bloomberg/Mommy group may make some feel better but it will change nothing.
2
Mothers against drunk drivers had an impact. Maybe mothers against guns could work too to bring some sanity to our gun laws.
168
I totally agree. As a 76 yr old, I have seen a HUGE change in societal attitudes toward drunk driving; MADD surely deserves a great deal of credit for that. They claim that deaths due to drunk drivers have been cut in half since the organization was founded 30 years ago.
13
What about Fathers against Guns? Is that asking too much?
6
Mothers against drunk drivers had an impact changed the drinking age to 21, which did nothing to stop young people from drinking, it only forced their drinking underground, where there were no adults to watch over them.
1
Great post.Mr. Egan!
17
I respectfully disagree. It says moms are the solution based on two incidents in which the perpetrators lived with their moms. True, the moms showed wishful thinking and failed as parents. But what about mental illness? Is it really the general assumption that any human being will inevitably go about and kill innocents as long as s/he has access to a gun? If so, I have no word for it.
3
@comment - Please tell us how all other advanced nations have solved their mental health issues since this doesn't happen in those countries. Legit sources, please.
4
@pauleky, Logically speaking, a country that is comparable to the U.S. is a country/set of countries that are populous, diverse, and with years of diverting its wealth from domestic needs to war. Which country/countries do you have in mind? Alternatively, you can compare the U.S. with itself over a fairly long period time if you can hold everything else constant.
I heard Piers Morgan say in an NPR interview yesterday that there have been 146 school shootings since Sandy Hook. The Texas legislature approves guns on the campuses of the state universities -- and our Congress does nothing while 90% of Americans want at least a universal background check. I am wondering if it will take insurance companies withdrawing liability insurance from universities, schools, businesses and other public places -- to finally get the attention of our leaders? Will it take students and faculty vacating the universities -- and the states -- that tolerate concealed carry? What will it take to bring sanity and safety back?
371
My favorite part of the second amendment is "well-regulated".
19
"I am wondering if it will take insurance companies withdrawing liability insurance from universities, schools, businesses and other public places -- to finally get the attention of our leaders?"
This is not a bad idea! Most colleges and universities have Risk Management officers. They're the ones who declare "No more bonfires!" after a flaming tower of logs collapses and injures students.
If the insurers said, "You're too big a risk for us" to campuses that allow guns, Risk Management would be there in a heartbeat to install metal detectors at all entrances to campus. I'm not being satirical--it really would be that effective.
Risk Management doesn't waste time figuring out which interpretation of the Second Amendment is correct. Risk Management just wants its employers to stay in business. And really, that business is education, period. Except for ROTC, guns don't enter into it.
This is not a bad idea! Most colleges and universities have Risk Management officers. They're the ones who declare "No more bonfires!" after a flaming tower of logs collapses and injures students.
If the insurers said, "You're too big a risk for us" to campuses that allow guns, Risk Management would be there in a heartbeat to install metal detectors at all entrances to campus. I'm not being satirical--it really would be that effective.
Risk Management doesn't waste time figuring out which interpretation of the Second Amendment is correct. Risk Management just wants its employers to stay in business. And really, that business is education, period. Except for ROTC, guns don't enter into it.
21
What will it take?
It will take the citizens of the United States depriving elective office to all those in thrall to the NRA. Only if it becomes clear that no one can get elected unless they take a sensible position on guns, will things change.
It will take the citizens of the United States depriving elective office to all those in thrall to the NRA. Only if it becomes clear that no one can get elected unless they take a sensible position on guns, will things change.
12
The Second Amendment? Who knew
How much mayhem this clause would brew,
The gun sale explosion,
Compassion erosion,
And blood spilling is nothing new.
A Nation besotted with guns
A Congress the NRA runs,
Repub nominees
Whose blood doesn't freeze
Rashly sacrifices our sons.
A an
the NRA who Congress runs,
How much mayhem this clause would brew,
The gun sale explosion,
Compassion erosion,
And blood spilling is nothing new.
A Nation besotted with guns
A Congress the NRA runs,
Repub nominees
Whose blood doesn't freeze
Rashly sacrifices our sons.
A an
the NRA who Congress runs,
75
You know what? No limericks on this subject, Larry. Show some respect.
6
I appreciate your thoughts. Bill sadly doesn't know what a limerick is.
4
@Bill78654 - Why? Because you disagree? A limerick is less respectful than not respecting the rights of others to live? Interesting...
6
Because "it’s the mothers, in most cases, who know the names of their children’s teachers, who understand their deepest fears, who have a unique relationship", he believes that not only can we "fault the mothers in many cases" but we must now ask them to SOLVE this national crisis?
The idea that mothers own disproportionate blame for the not just the bad behavior of their children but for any emotional issues they might suffer from is an old one, and a sexist one. (By the way, it would be interesting to know whether the author could tell us what proportion of the guns used by accidental or deliberate killers is actually provided by people other than mothers.)
Man up, Mr. Egan, and stop blaming mothers for the craven idiocy of our political "leaders".
Heather Collins