The last time there was meaningful gun control legislation in this country was when black people combined political ambition with gun ownership. All it took was a popular poster of Huey Newton, a Black Panther with a rifle, to make Republicans insist on the need to control gun ownership and for them to pass laws to that effect.
51
NATIONAL SECURITY The greatest threat to national security are gun deaths on US soil. Since the 1968 assassinations of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy, more than twice the number of US citizens have been killed on US soil by guns than in all the wars fought since the founding of the nation! What we urgently need is a second Emancipation Proclamation. We need to be freed from slavery and slaughter to and by the 25% of the NRA who are dictating the legality of the Number One Threat to National Security. Meaning those killed by guns on US soil! I thought that the wars fought against the terror of 9/11 were intended to free us from terror. But they have not! Domestic terror committed by US citizens, home grown by the NRA, is legal! Gun deaths are very personal to me. In 1973 my beloved cousin, Fern Toby Newman, was gunned down at 19 in Florida on Thanksgiving weekend by an ex-boyfriend who killed her and then committed suicide by taking pills. She was brilliant, with a great future ahead of her. But it was meant to be. How much longer must the peace-loving citizens of the US be constrained from pursuing life, liberty and happiness? We cannot do what the Declaration of Independence guarantees us as our rights because of the threat of being shot to death. We are enslaved to the terror of gun violence. We deserve emancipation! We law-abiding citizens need the right to life our lives free from fear. The fear of being shot to death.
14
Gun lovers argue that guns prevent gun violence. Why then, does the south have both the highest rate of gun ownership and highest level of gun violence?
22
Two thoughts: (1) We don't have to outlaw guns, and taking them away would be a pointless provocation against well-meaning citizens who are genuinely concerned their liberty will be infringed. On the other hand: guns are a lot less lethal without ammo. Why not restrict the ammo supply? Outlaw ammo designed for murder, and heavily tax the rest? (2) I just wonder how the angry, defensive, primarily white gun conversation would change if black people went on TV, radio, etc. talking about their intention to carry guns anywhere and everywhere? Where are the Black Panthers when you need 'em?
19
Having lived in the UK, Japan, China, Korea, Australia and visited more than 70 countries, friends often ask if we feel safe going to all those places. In truth, we're much more nervous coming home. With our tense, reactive, and armed society here in the US, I'm worried that practically any action will spark a shoot out.
For all you who feel that you need protection, I'm 100% supportive of your right to have guns in the home for that purpose (or hunting) -- but leave them at home when you go out -- most of us don't want to see your guns and we can't tell if you're a good guy or not anyway. If you really think you need to carry a weapon at all times then you should be prepared to undergo a level of training and licensing demonstrating that you can handle a weapon in public (distinguish the good from bad, fire accurately under pressure, demonstrate safe practices, etc) and be insured. Why should we treat weapons any differently from say, cars? Further, every Supreme Court decision enabling gun ownership has specifically indicated that requirements for licensing and training is perfectly acceptable under the constitution.
The current direction where anyone can have any weapon practically anywhere is not conducive to peaceful and healthy society.
For all you who feel that you need protection, I'm 100% supportive of your right to have guns in the home for that purpose (or hunting) -- but leave them at home when you go out -- most of us don't want to see your guns and we can't tell if you're a good guy or not anyway. If you really think you need to carry a weapon at all times then you should be prepared to undergo a level of training and licensing demonstrating that you can handle a weapon in public (distinguish the good from bad, fire accurately under pressure, demonstrate safe practices, etc) and be insured. Why should we treat weapons any differently from say, cars? Further, every Supreme Court decision enabling gun ownership has specifically indicated that requirements for licensing and training is perfectly acceptable under the constitution.
The current direction where anyone can have any weapon practically anywhere is not conducive to peaceful and healthy society.
49
I think the link "The South is the most violent region" directly contradicts Mr. Egan's argument. It is clear from the data presented there that violence correlates most strongly with race and very weakly with gun ownership and gun laws.
10
Let's start with disarming the police.
12
Appreciate the column. However, I would be interested in your exploration of the 2nd amendment being based on British tyranny. According to "An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States (ReVisioning American History)" by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz the militia's main purpose was to ethnically cleanse the continent. Not only is the current use of the amendment morally bankrupt, its origins may be even more suspect.
19
I don't have time to read through all of the comments, but undoubtedly, someone has suggested that the solution is...more armed "good guys". Tell me, how did that work out for JFK and Ronald Reagan?
14
Chicago has tough gun laws, a high homicide by gun rate, and is not in the south.
9
ummm - Violent crime rates are at their lowest level in generations... What is up with the hysteria? Clearly we are improving dramatically. This is good news people. If you are a white person who doesn't live in a decayed urban area, your chances of getting shot by someone else are almost nil. This is like having endless news articles about shark attacks. Very dramatic but very unlikely.
10
And yet the liberals are all against stop and frisk. Who's crazy?
9
Most major cities like Detroit have very strict gun laws, yet your chance of getting shot and killed there is much less than in a movie theater anywhere in the South. Egan picks and chooses his "facts". The reality is that your chance of being killed in a mass shooting is extremely small.... an angry ex wife or husband with a handgun is another story!
6
I try to be out of Texas as much as I can. Everybody carries gun over there. One day I was in a car with a beautiful lady with PhD in Chemistry for a training. She carried a gun in her purse and a bumper sticker in her car said: I "heart" Jesus. Then I " heart" gun" It means Jesus "heart" gun too ????. Scarry
6
Mr. Eagan failed to mention that a Southwestern State has the Highest Death Rates in its populace in Death Rates by 'Firearms', - as do many of other States that are not in the South!
REFERENCE: The State of Arizona! (where this commentator happens to live)!
REFERENCE: The State of Arizona! (where this commentator happens to live)!
6
Timothy go read "More Guns Less Crime" by John Lott then return and rewrite this article with facts instead of your phobias.
7
Actually, Georgia airports are not gun free, so there goes another bubble popped...
6
OK so both sides will realize that we both can't get our way 100%. We won't have zero gun laws, although Vermont does this and it works well for them which should tell you something, and we won't take everyone's guns away magically. So if folks care about this their will have to be some compromises. I'm OK with this. Let's make the NICS system better. That's a good place to start. OK but let's say you whiny liberal gun grabbers want more, you want no more person to person sale without NICS check, I'm even OK with this. But this is a compromise right? So in return I want suppressors and SBRs taken off the NFA list and "nation wide shall issue" law. Herein lies the main issue, we don't speak the same languag. Can any of you tell me what an NFA item is or the rules regulating them without Google? What is a shall issue state? If this is going to work everyone will need to learn the laws the way gun owners do and you gotta give some to get some.
6
Looking at this from abroad (England, proof that few guns = very small gun violence), I study public health issues and have looked at US gun violence. There are common misconceptions I see from the gun supporters.
1. 'Most gun violence is gang-related.' From your FBI figures, this seems to be false. Gang homicides are actually a fairly small percentage of gun homicides; much larger are things like disputes (drunken, domestic etc).
2. 'Switzerland - lots of guns little violence.' Actually it has a gun violence rate in Europe and has had a number of massacres. But ammunition is strictly controlled, most ex-servicepeople keep unloaded military weapons and very few people can carry a gun in public.
3. 'Don't blame responsible gun owners'. Well - there's no one else to blame for the leakage to illegal use and as per point 1 a lot of misuse is from legal weapons. And the cost is borne by everyone - there are not only many homicides but a much larger and mostly uncounted number of injuries.
4. 'Suicides don't count' - there's a raised rate among men in high gun owning states.
1. 'Most gun violence is gang-related.' From your FBI figures, this seems to be false. Gang homicides are actually a fairly small percentage of gun homicides; much larger are things like disputes (drunken, domestic etc).
2. 'Switzerland - lots of guns little violence.' Actually it has a gun violence rate in Europe and has had a number of massacres. But ammunition is strictly controlled, most ex-servicepeople keep unloaded military weapons and very few people can carry a gun in public.
3. 'Don't blame responsible gun owners'. Well - there's no one else to blame for the leakage to illegal use and as per point 1 a lot of misuse is from legal weapons. And the cost is borne by everyone - there are not only many homicides but a much larger and mostly uncounted number of injuries.
4. 'Suicides don't count' - there's a raised rate among men in high gun owning states.
25
I am against gun-free zones of any kind. People should be able to bring weapons into the U.S. Congress, the Supreme Court, and all state legislatures. What, you can't do that? I demand my second amendment rights!
14
Where to begin?
The author starts out by pointing to the shootings that happen in elementary schools, high schools, colleges military recruitment centers, theaters, parks, churches -- all "gun-free zones" created by gun control advocates. Do you hear of mass shootings at gun shows? Pistol ranges? Firearms training schools? Why not? Not only is just about everyone there a gun owner, they are carrying loaded guns. Oh, wait, is that a deterrent?
He then redefines a gun free zone to be a place where guns have been removed or physically prevented from being allowed in rather than a place where guns are not legally allowed. So I guess his solution is to give you the full TSA treatment every time to go to the movies, the mall, a school, church, etc. Rather than being groped every now and then, why get groped three times a day. Will it work? Sure. Is that your vision of America?
Since Obama took office the number of concealed carry permit holders has increased from about 4 million to over 12 million. At the same time the murder rate has fallen 25%. Coincidence?
http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/2015/07/new-study-over-12-8-con...
The author starts out by pointing to the shootings that happen in elementary schools, high schools, colleges military recruitment centers, theaters, parks, churches -- all "gun-free zones" created by gun control advocates. Do you hear of mass shootings at gun shows? Pistol ranges? Firearms training schools? Why not? Not only is just about everyone there a gun owner, they are carrying loaded guns. Oh, wait, is that a deterrent?
He then redefines a gun free zone to be a place where guns have been removed or physically prevented from being allowed in rather than a place where guns are not legally allowed. So I guess his solution is to give you the full TSA treatment every time to go to the movies, the mall, a school, church, etc. Rather than being groped every now and then, why get groped three times a day. Will it work? Sure. Is that your vision of America?
Since Obama took office the number of concealed carry permit holders has increased from about 4 million to over 12 million. At the same time the murder rate has fallen 25%. Coincidence?
http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/2015/07/new-study-over-12-8-con...
8
Egan's essay simplifies the issues and his foot stomping intransigence is as inflammatory as those he vilifies, the NYT is better than that. Let's start with opening up a wider discussion about firearms. Firstly, check out Gallery 380, The Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Gallery in New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is dedicated to new acquisitions of Arms and Armor, and newly on show is an exquisite 1861 Colt Navy revolver, as well as a WWI helmet prototype made at the Met for our Doughboys. Next up, know that country mice keep guns for a host of very different reasons than city mice. For example, country mice buy ammo as a hedge against hard times: working the fluctuating price of a round of .223 or 9mm is no different to city mice popping down to Wall Street to buy some stock.
I could go on, but open your ears and you will hear a different kind of tune out there. Regarding Shanahan's question, "What would Jesus pack?" Well, his Bug Out Bag would certainly not have very much in it, as he would more likely trust on the kindness of strangers. His twelve disciples would much more likely to carry for him: a Chiappa 'White' Rhino 40DS in .357 would get everyone's attention. If he did have a little something tucked away, I would put my money on a Sig Sauer Rainbow Titanium Finish P-239.
I could go on, but open your ears and you will hear a different kind of tune out there. Regarding Shanahan's question, "What would Jesus pack?" Well, his Bug Out Bag would certainly not have very much in it, as he would more likely trust on the kindness of strangers. His twelve disciples would much more likely to carry for him: a Chiappa 'White' Rhino 40DS in .357 would get everyone's attention. If he did have a little something tucked away, I would put my money on a Sig Sauer Rainbow Titanium Finish P-239.
11
Our gun laws provide aid and comfort to our enemies.
12
"Once a shooting starts, the bad guy with the gun will be killed by the good guy with the gun, somehow able to get a draw on the shooter in a darkened theater, or behind a pew in church. This scenario almost never happens. The logic is nonsense, the odds of a perfectly timed counter-killer getting the drop on the evil killer unlikely."
__________________
It's also irrelevant to the problem, because it does nothing to prevent the initial shooting from happening in the first place.
__________________
It's also irrelevant to the problem, because it does nothing to prevent the initial shooting from happening in the first place.
12
I don't believe that Mr. Egan is calling all gun owners "gun nuts". The "gun nuts"he refers to are those who make the slightest safeguard into a rant about Government taking our guns. And is it true that gun ownership is down. Tha sales are attributed to certain people who own multiple guns.
And I'm not totally buying into this mental illness nonsense. The aurora shooter,yes.nthe Arizona shooter, yes. The Newtown shooter, yes but in that case they had the resources to get treatment but also handed this guy violent videos and "bonded" at a shooting range. BUT, there are a lot of shootings where the person is completely sane. They kill their wives, their husbands, they kill for money, they kill for drugs. They kill over a backyard BBQ. They kill at bars. They kill because the music is too loud.
The worst are when the "responsible " gun owner's firearm finds it 's way into a 2 year old or 3,year old or the teenager getting harassed on Facebook decides to end the pain in a split second. Or the person whose spouse left them and decides there is nothing left to live for.
If this is such a great idea, allow weapons on the steps of SCOTUS, WH, and Congress.
And I'm not totally buying into this mental illness nonsense. The aurora shooter,yes.nthe Arizona shooter, yes. The Newtown shooter, yes but in that case they had the resources to get treatment but also handed this guy violent videos and "bonded" at a shooting range. BUT, there are a lot of shootings where the person is completely sane. They kill their wives, their husbands, they kill for money, they kill for drugs. They kill over a backyard BBQ. They kill at bars. They kill because the music is too loud.
The worst are when the "responsible " gun owner's firearm finds it 's way into a 2 year old or 3,year old or the teenager getting harassed on Facebook decides to end the pain in a split second. Or the person whose spouse left them and decides there is nothing left to live for.
If this is such a great idea, allow weapons on the steps of SCOTUS, WH, and Congress.
9
I walked alone at night in Hong Kong, a white woman, and I felt safe.
I went through a bag check in a mall in Tel-Aviv and I felt safe.
I go to a movie in California, the home of Google and futuristic bio-industry, and I don't feel safe because some Neandertal may decide that today is the day to take revenge on the world that does not "respect" his guns and his Bible.
Think about it. Would you like to know how the rest of the world sees this uniquely American madness? No, you probably don't. It's too depressing.
I went through a bag check in a mall in Tel-Aviv and I felt safe.
I go to a movie in California, the home of Google and futuristic bio-industry, and I don't feel safe because some Neandertal may decide that today is the day to take revenge on the world that does not "respect" his guns and his Bible.
Think about it. Would you like to know how the rest of the world sees this uniquely American madness? No, you probably don't. It's too depressing.
19
Why are guns not allowed in the halls of Congress, or in State Legislatures, where many of those who are members that decry "gun free zones"?
11
When regulations are either lax, non-existent or not enforced -- e.g., guns, Uber, Lyft, crumbling infrastructure -- people will be needlessly injured or killed.
6
I ride the metro buses and trains. Yesterday when I saw a young man--and, yes, he was black!--pull something out of his pocket with what looked to be the handle of a gun, I panicked. Until, that is, I realized it was only a hammer. But even then I thought: is he going to blugeon us? Recently I have had that thought when I ride these Miami-Dade buses and trains, of just how easy it would be for someone to enter and slaughter the entire human contents of the vehicle. And that has happened, for me, because of just how easy it would be. And I do live in the "Gunshine" state!
5
As I have said before, since belonging to a state militia is directly linked to gun ownership in the 2nd Ammendment, all people wishing to buy a gun should be required to join a state militia. Marching, training, calisthenics, range practice, safety instruction. Minimum of one weekend a month for a year. Let's find out how many gun lovers are willing to do that.
20
How can this country, supposedly the richest most powerful in history, be so far behind other developed countries. Guns, anti-abortion, anti women, health care for the rich, low taxes for the rich, less and less public education, and on and on.
11
You're right, Tim, the Second Amendment has become a form of tyranny. I feel much more threatened by crazy, angry armed Americans than I do the U.S. government, foreign powers or foreign terrorists. I know they are out there, ready to strike, these armed Americans, and I go through my daily life with a bit of paranoid alertness when out in public. For instance, I flinch every time I see a movie theater employee walking down the outer aisle to check the emergency exit doors during a movie. For an instant, I think it might be a shooter. Wish I could feel safer in my own country.
15
My moment of truth happened after Newtown massacre. even those little children lives were taken by a mental problematic guy with Gun didn't move one inch the feelings of NRA and their 2nd amendment ilk people.
Today I am 100% sure in America any body can be killed by no reason and be sweep under the carpet.
When it comes the Gun affliction , America has no sense of reason what so ever.
Today I am 100% sure in America any body can be killed by no reason and be sweep under the carpet.
When it comes the Gun affliction , America has no sense of reason what so ever.
14
Why don't they make buying a gun as difficult as getting an abortion?
26
Yes, big cities with tight gun laws are safer. Just look at Chicago. I'd feel safe on the streets there by myself at 3 a.m. with a thousand dollars in my pocket. Sure I would.
I'm much safer in my small town with no police department, just the county sheriff.
I'm much safer in my small town with no police department, just the county sheriff.
6
Mr. Egan is has cherry picked data in the extreme. Here are some murder rates (per 100,000) for places with vastly differing gun laws and gun ownership rates. There is no significant correlation between gun laws/ownership and murder rate.
From City-Data(dot)com: El Paso (1.5), Laredo (1.2), Fort Worth (6.1), Boston (6.1), San Antonio (5.1), Dallas (11.4), Atlanta (18.5), Montgomery (21.1), Birmingham (29.7), Chicago (15.2), Philadelphia (15.9), Austin (3.0), Corpus Christi (5.7), Houston (9.8), Baltimore (37.4), and Washington, DC (15.9).
There is no useful correlation of guns to murders.
Mr. Egan's key failure is choosing regions with similar demographics not similar gun laws. Less restrictive states with high gun ownership rates would include much of the USA west of the Mississippi, the Old South, and several New England states.
About 35 states have "shall issue" permit to carry laws and this is a good litmus test for "pro gun" politics. Some are: Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Connecticut is officially "may issue" but effectively "shall issue" by court rulings. Large areas in California, Massachusetts, and New York with county issued permits are de facto "shall issue" jurisdiction.
From City-Data(dot)com: El Paso (1.5), Laredo (1.2), Fort Worth (6.1), Boston (6.1), San Antonio (5.1), Dallas (11.4), Atlanta (18.5), Montgomery (21.1), Birmingham (29.7), Chicago (15.2), Philadelphia (15.9), Austin (3.0), Corpus Christi (5.7), Houston (9.8), Baltimore (37.4), and Washington, DC (15.9).
There is no useful correlation of guns to murders.
Mr. Egan's key failure is choosing regions with similar demographics not similar gun laws. Less restrictive states with high gun ownership rates would include much of the USA west of the Mississippi, the Old South, and several New England states.
About 35 states have "shall issue" permit to carry laws and this is a good litmus test for "pro gun" politics. Some are: Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Connecticut is officially "may issue" but effectively "shall issue" by court rulings. Large areas in California, Massachusetts, and New York with county issued permits are de facto "shall issue" jurisdiction.
9
Even in strife-riven, gun-slinging Chad in the mid-1980s, movie theater patrons in Ndjaména had to pile up their weapons outside before entering.
7
The correlations between gun murders and locations is not North-South, and is not gun-friendly vs non-gun friendly.
It is very simple, but apparently not allowed to be printed in the NYTimes.
Why is Vermont, a state with the most permissive gun laws - anyone can carry a gun without a permit - also has the one of the lowest murder rates in the US (comparable to the favorite European countries)?
Why is the murder rate in Manhattan north of 100 St so much higher than below 100 St? Same state, same city, same laws, same population density.
Gun murders are directly correlated with the percentage of the population that is black and (to a lesser degree) hispanic. But that is a taboo subject.
The fact that Mississippi and the other states in the South have the highest percentages of black population is constantly used by the NYT to claim that gun violence and poverty is a Red State phenomena. It is not. It is a high-percentage of black population phenomena.
If you want to compare Norway to America. Compare it to states that have a similar racial composition. Like Vermont. And Norway with all its gun bans, has had the single largest gun massacre by a lone young man in the world.
So yes, anti-gun laws don't work in Norway either.
It is very simple, but apparently not allowed to be printed in the NYTimes.
Why is Vermont, a state with the most permissive gun laws - anyone can carry a gun without a permit - also has the one of the lowest murder rates in the US (comparable to the favorite European countries)?
Why is the murder rate in Manhattan north of 100 St so much higher than below 100 St? Same state, same city, same laws, same population density.
Gun murders are directly correlated with the percentage of the population that is black and (to a lesser degree) hispanic. But that is a taboo subject.
The fact that Mississippi and the other states in the South have the highest percentages of black population is constantly used by the NYT to claim that gun violence and poverty is a Red State phenomena. It is not. It is a high-percentage of black population phenomena.
If you want to compare Norway to America. Compare it to states that have a similar racial composition. Like Vermont. And Norway with all its gun bans, has had the single largest gun massacre by a lone young man in the world.
So yes, anti-gun laws don't work in Norway either.
10
According to Mother Jones our love affair with firearms costs this country 229 billion dollars a year. Take for instance, the Lafayette theater shooting, nine people were wounded, who picks up the tab for their shattered lives? The shooter, nope he's dead and broke. The gun manufacturers? Nope, our feckless politicians have given them immunity from lawsuits. Whose left? The taxpayers. We are fools to put up with the NRA and the imposition of these costs on both our pocketbooks and our freedoms.
12
What doesn't make sense is gun owners are a minority group in the US. Most US citizens do not own guns. A majority of people in the US want stronger gun laws. Yes this small minority of gun owners continue to drive congress (mainly Republicans) to pass laws that protect gun ownership, but will protect citizens from gun owners.
I have not owned or handled a gun since I left the service back in 1968 - no need to own a gun in the city - I have never felt threatened to have a gun at home - nor the need to carry a concealed weapon. Yes, maybe if I lived on a farm - a gun might make sense for hunting and shooting vermin - but since I don't live the country - I feel much safer without owning a gun.
I have not owned or handled a gun since I left the service back in 1968 - no need to own a gun in the city - I have never felt threatened to have a gun at home - nor the need to carry a concealed weapon. Yes, maybe if I lived on a farm - a gun might make sense for hunting and shooting vermin - but since I don't live the country - I feel much safer without owning a gun.
7
Do you know what town sheriffs and marshals did in the west to control gun violence in the second half of the 19th century? They required people to leave their firearms at home or with law enforcement officials when they came into town. If Wyatt Earp etc. new that more guns make gun violence more likely why don't Rick Perry and and the other Republican's? The answer is that they are politically beholden to the NRA. Logic, statistics, and facts are against them, but money is behind them.
10
If I understand correctly, gun advocates support the idea that carrying guns makes them safer since they can take on any would-be shooter. If that's the case, I once suggested to my gun-toting friends that we should provide guns to all young black men who are most likely to die by gun shot. Not surprisingly they didn't seem to like the idea.
7
Burdensome to interstate commerce when individuals stay home in fear of a shoot 'em up relying on the internet for survival. Collision of the Commerce Clause and the Second Amendment?
3
We are a nation of extremes with a wide distance between the two ends. We do not like to compromise as individuals and we do not like to accept our doubts.
Now add to all this our gun culture...
Now add to all this our gun culture...
1
I challenge commenters to consider a question: Is it worse to be murdered by a gun than by a knife, hammer, club, bomb, etc.? I ask that because most pro-gun-control editorials always emphasize GUN deaths or homicides as opposed to overall homicides by any means. As for me, I don't want to be a homicide victim by any means, so for me, that is the relevant statistic.
Strip away the emotion and look at the evidence. The most carefully-conducted, most recent scientific studies that have been done using data from Australia and other countries with very strict gun control laws show reductions in GUN deaths, but NO reductions in overall homicide rates by any means. This is exactly what common sense would predict: Make guns more difficult to obtain and criminals will switch to other weapons. Do we really expect the type of people who would murder someone to just give up if a gun is harder to obtain?
One more point: Lots of people seem to panic about the recent mass shootings, but please be rational and realize that the overwhelming (and I mean OVERWHELMING) majority of homicides are single victim cases.
Strip away the emotion and look at the evidence. The most carefully-conducted, most recent scientific studies that have been done using data from Australia and other countries with very strict gun control laws show reductions in GUN deaths, but NO reductions in overall homicide rates by any means. This is exactly what common sense would predict: Make guns more difficult to obtain and criminals will switch to other weapons. Do we really expect the type of people who would murder someone to just give up if a gun is harder to obtain?
One more point: Lots of people seem to panic about the recent mass shootings, but please be rational and realize that the overwhelming (and I mean OVERWHELMING) majority of homicides are single victim cases.
6
You know who the "people" are who "panic" most about mass shootings? The victims trapped in the movie theater/church/school or mall being efficiently hunted down by the gun-wielder. Try telling them that they'd be just as safe if their attacker had a...club. Your argument evaporates the minute you get to the word "mass" as in mass shootings. Since you seem to be concerned about gun-control supporters' lack of consistency, let me be the first to assure you, the minute that mass hammerings become an issue in the US I will call for sensible legal oversight of hand-tools as well.
4
Maybe there is a clear route to less guns in America: create more strictly enforced gun free zones--so much so that eventually one can't go anywhere packing heat for fear of a bag check or TSA type detector. Make like the video cameras on police squad cars, and put walk through detectors everywhere. Draconian, yes, but like the police camera solution, probably needed to change our culture. Especially if our politicians are bought and sold by the gun lobby.
The writer asserts: "The waves of mass shootings continue to roll over the United States like surf on the ship of state’s prow. Every few weeks now we get hit with a jolt of cold water. We shake and shudder, and then brace ourselves for the next one."
He is not describing random violence, he is describing an ideological psychological operation, perpetuating its narrative while masking its actual source. There are indeed two Americas: those who know, and those who do not.
As for the entire aggregation of shootings, he tellingly omits the most common lethal killing ground: city streets of black-on-black homicide. Five hundred per year in Chicago alone and counting. This is not merely moral equivalency but fact-based prioritization.
He is not describing random violence, he is describing an ideological psychological operation, perpetuating its narrative while masking its actual source. There are indeed two Americas: those who know, and those who do not.
As for the entire aggregation of shootings, he tellingly omits the most common lethal killing ground: city streets of black-on-black homicide. Five hundred per year in Chicago alone and counting. This is not merely moral equivalency but fact-based prioritization.
6
America may indeed have a problem with gun violence and all-too-easy availability, but Mr. Egan writes as if random murders by strangers in public places is the concern. It's lunacy. Gun violence in the US revolves around suicide, drug-related activity, and homicide by a close friend or relative. Determining public policy on guns based on mass public shootings is as smart as basing foreign policy on random terrorist attacks... oh wait, we do that too???
3
What is amazing is that the leading healthcare organizations and medical associations have not taken stronger political stands regarding civilian weapons control. They just don't seem to have the professional fortitude.
2
One problem with the gun debate, if it can be called a "debate," is the
ignorance of both sides of the question about the history of guns and their
regulation in the United States. This is a fascinating story with roots
that go back at least as far as the Magna Carta signed, reluctantly, by King John in England in 1215.
I would recommend to all parties of good faith in this debate to
read the following books before trying to form an opinion on the Second
Amendment in the light of the June, 2008., Heller V. D.C. US Court
decision that, for better or for worse, unless changed in the future, has
enshrined the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms.
1. "Gun Fight" by Adam Winkler. in my opinion, this is a well-written book tracing the history of the right to keep and bear arms from the time of
the Magna Carta to the US Supreme Court's decision in Heller V. D.C.
2. "The Second Amendment - A Biography" by Michael Waldman. This book
takes an in-depth look at the birth of the Second Amendment and the many
political and social currents that swirled around its inception (it was almost
an after thought) during the writing of the US Constitution and the
subsequent addition of the Bill of Rights.
3. The syllabus of the US Supreme Court's decision in Heller V. D.C. :
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
The syllabus of the decision is short and understandable. The rest of the
Court's opinion follows, in line, with the syllabus.
ignorance of both sides of the question about the history of guns and their
regulation in the United States. This is a fascinating story with roots
that go back at least as far as the Magna Carta signed, reluctantly, by King John in England in 1215.
I would recommend to all parties of good faith in this debate to
read the following books before trying to form an opinion on the Second
Amendment in the light of the June, 2008., Heller V. D.C. US Court
decision that, for better or for worse, unless changed in the future, has
enshrined the right of all citizens to keep and bear arms.
1. "Gun Fight" by Adam Winkler. in my opinion, this is a well-written book tracing the history of the right to keep and bear arms from the time of
the Magna Carta to the US Supreme Court's decision in Heller V. D.C.
2. "The Second Amendment - A Biography" by Michael Waldman. This book
takes an in-depth look at the birth of the Second Amendment and the many
political and social currents that swirled around its inception (it was almost
an after thought) during the writing of the US Constitution and the
subsequent addition of the Bill of Rights.
3. The syllabus of the US Supreme Court's decision in Heller V. D.C. :
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
The syllabus of the decision is short and understandable. The rest of the
Court's opinion follows, in line, with the syllabus.
3
Thank you, Mr. Egan, for an insightful column on the state of the gun mentality in this country.
The comment on pro-football's "security theater" applies completely to the NRA's argument that everyone walking around toting a weapon will provide security for all. The theatre shootings prove otherwise, along with many other instances of gun violence.
"Violence only begets violence" seems an appropriate summary here. So would "irrational fear only begets irrational fear." Or "perceived loss of control."
If we all walk around with guns and don't know whom to shoot when the shooting starts, we will make the old West look civilized and intelligent - which we Americans, apparently, no longer wish to be.
The comment on pro-football's "security theater" applies completely to the NRA's argument that everyone walking around toting a weapon will provide security for all. The theatre shootings prove otherwise, along with many other instances of gun violence.
"Violence only begets violence" seems an appropriate summary here. So would "irrational fear only begets irrational fear." Or "perceived loss of control."
If we all walk around with guns and don't know whom to shoot when the shooting starts, we will make the old West look civilized and intelligent - which we Americans, apparently, no longer wish to be.
3
As someone who is in favor of significantly more gun control, I think Egan has actually hit on the exact wrong solution to a very real problem. Gun free zones, in stadiums etc., work not simply because they are declared gun free zones but because Americans are willing to submit to additional scrutiny and those venues can support significantly increased police presence. It's not just having a metal detector it is having someone there to do something about it if the machine goes off. Some mass killers tend to avoid places where they are likely to be stopped quickly (not all crazy people are stupid), while others don't... the military bases that recently come under attack were also gun free zones.
Having similar security at every theater, every church, every subway station, every mall, every large building, in short every place where more than thirty people congregate is completely unrealistic and undesirable given that the threat is actually really small to any given location. I'd rather take the tens of billions of dollars this proposal would cost and spend it on getting guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
Having similar security at every theater, every church, every subway station, every mall, every large building, in short every place where more than thirty people congregate is completely unrealistic and undesirable given that the threat is actually really small to any given location. I'd rather take the tens of billions of dollars this proposal would cost and spend it on getting guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
3
Egan writes "More guns, easily obtained by the mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti-government extremists, mean more gun deaths."
Yet he somehow fails to mention that the most likely places in the US to be shot dead, by a ludicrously wide margin, are its inner cities, where both the perpetrators and victims are disproportionately black.
Why does Mr. Egan omit this germane fact? Is it perhaps because it's easier for him to avoid the truth and try to pin gun violence on "religious fanatics and anti-government extremists" and thereby confirm his biases, than to confront stark reality?
Yet he somehow fails to mention that the most likely places in the US to be shot dead, by a ludicrously wide margin, are its inner cities, where both the perpetrators and victims are disproportionately black.
Why does Mr. Egan omit this germane fact? Is it perhaps because it's easier for him to avoid the truth and try to pin gun violence on "religious fanatics and anti-government extremists" and thereby confirm his biases, than to confront stark reality?
12
Assuming your statistic is correct (although you provide no basis for it), let's think of the differences between a movie theater and a high crime area. Those differences might explain your statistic and why it is not germane to the point of Mr. Egan's article, i.e. the safe places are those with gun restrictions that are enforced.
Even after 20 years of periodic firearms training, I elected not to get a concealed weapons permit. I know that I can never stay adequately trained and prepared to use my weapon in a chaotic situation where it may be unclear what is happening and who the bad guys are. I don't want the civil liability of possibly shooting an innocent bystander or having it on my conscience for the rest of my life. The average gun owner is just not trained or capable of making good decisions under fire. So, my weapon stays in my home where it can do the most good for me and my family.
9
I chose differently because I can and most likely would chose not to use the gun. It is a matter of harsh and heartless discipline. The gun is to protect me and my family, no one else. I would never heroically intervene for the reasons you mention; too easy to make a lethal mistake. My gun is to insure my and any family members disengagement and retreat.
That may be your intent, BJ, but how would you actually react when your adrenaline is raging? Do you get angry? Do you have a temper? Ever have road rage? Been in a fight? Thousands of people shoot guns at other people every year - and prior to that bullet leaving the chamber, they woud have sworn on a Bible they that were not capable of doing such a thing.
1
This focus on guns ignores a host of societal issues that lead to gun violence. Switzerland, for example, has very high rates of gun ownership and low gun violence. Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, etc. all have extremely high rates of gun ownership and low rates of gun violence., and very relaxed concealed carry laws. Yes, there are mass murders around the country, but most of the gun violence is gang related. Moreover, as a practical matter, long guns can be used just as effectively for mass murders, and no one is suggesting we try to seize all the long guns. The bottom line is we need to make it harder for the bad guys to get guns. Perhaps more background checks, an easier way to identify those with mental illness, and other similar requirements. Just endless complaining about guns is not realistic, nor would it really make much of an impact. The bad guys would just bring in guns, as they did with alcohol and drugs, if they tried to ban them (aside from the fact there would be a civil war as many people would not just hand over their long guns).
4
Mr. Egan makes an important point when he notes that a "gun-free" zone is only gun free when the claim is enforced with security, metal detectors, and the like. Otherwise it's only free of LEGALLY carried guns.
But his argument that we're not safe except where there is screening to keep out guns falls flat. It's similar to arguing that because an illegal immigrant shot a woman in SF, we aren't safe anywhere from the depredations of illegal immigrants.
If you want to be safe from gun violence, live in a predominantly white, wealthy suburb. Where I live there has been one murder in the past few decades, and it did not involve a gun. Statistically the murder rate among white citizens (about 2.4 per 100,000) is comparable to that of Canada and Europe. What distorts the US data is that the murder rate among black citizens is over 16 per 100,000. So is the answer that we should restrict gun ownership by blacks?
But his argument that we're not safe except where there is screening to keep out guns falls flat. It's similar to arguing that because an illegal immigrant shot a woman in SF, we aren't safe anywhere from the depredations of illegal immigrants.
If you want to be safe from gun violence, live in a predominantly white, wealthy suburb. Where I live there has been one murder in the past few decades, and it did not involve a gun. Statistically the murder rate among white citizens (about 2.4 per 100,000) is comparable to that of Canada and Europe. What distorts the US data is that the murder rate among black citizens is over 16 per 100,000. So is the answer that we should restrict gun ownership by blacks?
6
I agree with Mr Egan in that more guns being carried in public makes us all less safe. Personally, I’d like to see a ban on all handguns and assault type rifles so that the only guns that could be legally sold would be legit hunting weapons like shotguns and deer rifles. A shotgun also provides reasonable home protection.
As for those that say they carry guns in public to protect their family I would say I also have a concern for the safety of my family in places where others are carrying guns. My guess is that most people who aren’t police or military have little, if any, training, in the proper use of a gun in situations where defensive use of a gun is required, much less understanding if a situation requires a gun to be used at all. And given the emotional nature of humans, arming more of them makes me very uneasy. I’d much rather focus on doing what it takes to improve our police force than making it easier to buy and carry firearms.
As for those that say they carry guns in public to protect their family I would say I also have a concern for the safety of my family in places where others are carrying guns. My guess is that most people who aren’t police or military have little, if any, training, in the proper use of a gun in situations where defensive use of a gun is required, much less understanding if a situation requires a gun to be used at all. And given the emotional nature of humans, arming more of them makes me very uneasy. I’d much rather focus on doing what it takes to improve our police force than making it easier to buy and carry firearms.
9
In your thoughtful piece you forgot to mention State and Federal Legislative buildings which are highly screened for guns. The legislators have to wait until they exit these areas to be shot.
And yet these same legislators safe in their enclaves will be the first to say everyone needs a gun all the time.
And yet these same legislators safe in their enclaves will be the first to say everyone needs a gun all the time.
93
Louisiana is about as awash with guns as any 2nd Amendment enthusiast could imagine, with perhaps the most laissez-faire gun laws in the world. It's very easy to get a concealed carry permit here. We also "enjoy" some of the highest rates of gun violence in the country, if not the world.
That said, I see little empirical support for the favorite argument: an armed population will reduce crime. It seems to go the opposite way.
A couple of things I have learned in my 60+ years, through personal experience. First, carrying a gun does not make the carrier more secure; rather, it makes him feel less secure and more nervous. The armed citizen must always be on heightened alert, mindful of his weapon and ready to use it instantaneously.
Secondly, just having a gun offers little protection by itself. The armed citizen needs to constantly train and practice, to hone his skill with the weapon. Otherwise, he's just going to be clumsy in an adverse situation, probably to his regret.
Thirdly, and most importantly, to actually point a gun at another, you have to turn sociopathic, and close down that part of you that instinctively sees other people as human beings.
Fourth and finally, children are fascinated by guns. 100% of boys, if given the slightest chance, will seek out and handle a firearm they encounter, often with tragic outcomes. Curious, clever and patient boys have a way of defeating whatever security measures their parents might use.
That said, I see little empirical support for the favorite argument: an armed population will reduce crime. It seems to go the opposite way.
A couple of things I have learned in my 60+ years, through personal experience. First, carrying a gun does not make the carrier more secure; rather, it makes him feel less secure and more nervous. The armed citizen must always be on heightened alert, mindful of his weapon and ready to use it instantaneously.
Secondly, just having a gun offers little protection by itself. The armed citizen needs to constantly train and practice, to hone his skill with the weapon. Otherwise, he's just going to be clumsy in an adverse situation, probably to his regret.
Thirdly, and most importantly, to actually point a gun at another, you have to turn sociopathic, and close down that part of you that instinctively sees other people as human beings.
Fourth and finally, children are fascinated by guns. 100% of boys, if given the slightest chance, will seek out and handle a firearm they encounter, often with tragic outcomes. Curious, clever and patient boys have a way of defeating whatever security measures their parents might use.
10
There are 126 million more US residents today than there were 40 years ago.
Back when the mentally ill were often housed in state mental institutions.
Yet, despite what the 24 hour news cycle tells us, the US murder rate is at historic low levels.
Even as the number of guns is at an all time high in the US.
And, speaking of common sense, as the media and ngo drumbeat continues for more, and more, gun control legislation, fewer Americans admit to owning a firearm.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/05/us-murder-rate-track-be-lo...
http://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html/
Back when the mentally ill were often housed in state mental institutions.
Yet, despite what the 24 hour news cycle tells us, the US murder rate is at historic low levels.
Even as the number of guns is at an all time high in the US.
And, speaking of common sense, as the media and ngo drumbeat continues for more, and more, gun control legislation, fewer Americans admit to owning a firearm.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/05/us-murder-rate-track-be-lo...
http://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html/
2
Actually, safety from guns at airports is questionable since the killing of a TSA officer at Los Angeles International in November, 2013. And if airports are the gold standard for gun screening, the number of weapons that can slip through TSA inspections, as recently demonstrated by the government's own testing of its security systems, should give further pause. But Egan's failure to note this only proves his larger point -- that mass gun violence has become so common in tis country, we can hardly keep track of it all. The sad fact is that the NRA and its Congressional allies have succeeded in pushing us past the tipping point for being able to control guns effectively, even where such control makes the most sense.
2
We find ourselves living in an America now run by right wing fringe fanatics like the Rick Perry's of the country and the oligarchs like the Koch brothers. We the people need to come back to our senses, take a deep breath and hit the reset button. The timid media needs to start calling a spade a spade. Our gutless politicians (yes you Hillary) need to take a stand on gun safety and regulation and on unbridled capitalism. The only one I hear taking the lead on this is Bernie Sanders. The rest are either cowards or securely in the fold of Wall Street. We need to get mad as hell and not be willing to take it anymore. Just how many more mass shootings, cases of unwarranted police violence against people of color and plutocrats sucking the economic livelihood of the rest of us will it take for America to finally say that we have had enough.
4
Mr Egan claims states with most restrictive gun laws have lowest rates of murders & injuries where guns were used. And your source for your so called "facts" Mr. Egan? Thought so. More Liberal lies, made up on the spot to support your anti gun agenda. Suggestion: Try walking through East LA, Oakland, Richmond, or the "low rent" district of Chicago, after dark, especially if you're White, & see how long you survive.
7
Richmond CA has substantially reduced its gun violent deaths by paying those at high risk for gun violence to not do so. For specifics:http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2015/06/01/the-case-...
It's easy to Google. Try Gun Murder Rate by State.
At the very top of every list are Louisiana and Mississippi, where gun laws go to die.
At the very top of every list are Louisiana and Mississippi, where gun laws go to die.
The exceptions you mention do not make Mr. Egan's facts invalid. Regardless, what sane person walks through a high crime neighborhood after dark on purpose? Street smarts have to enter into the equation here. Oh, and being white has nothing to do with this issue except to those who fear non-whites.
1
Better to go to a city or state with gun restrictions, at least if you’re playing the odds. Most of the states with tighter gun laws have fewer gun deaths.
Chicago???
Chicago???
4
Chicago/Illinois have gun laws that are among the nation'a strictest, and yet the south side of Chicago is the murder by gun capital of the western world. Alas, Mr Egan, a rather poorly reasoned column.
7
Most illegal weapons recovered in Northern states are brought in illegally from Southern states with lax gun laws. Solution: Effective nationwide gun laws which actually keep guns out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers.
5
bd: Guns travel across jurisdiction city and state boundaries.
There are several gun stores just outside the Chicago city limits that are major sources of guns for crimes in Chicago.
During the period of time that Virginia limited gun purchases to one/mo., the flow of guns from the Commonwealth to NYC was substantially reduced -- as reflected in the use of bought in Virginia guns for gun crimes in NYC.
The implications are clear. State, better Federal, gun control is needed.
There are several gun stores just outside the Chicago city limits that are major sources of guns for crimes in Chicago.
During the period of time that Virginia limited gun purchases to one/mo., the flow of guns from the Commonwealth to NYC was substantially reduced -- as reflected in the use of bought in Virginia guns for gun crimes in NYC.
The implications are clear. State, better Federal, gun control is needed.
2
not true. look up the numbers. "chicago" is a gun nut dog whistle buzz word, but the truth is quite different.
also, chicago suffers from being next to some suburbs, riverdale, dolton, glenwood, with lax laws and gun shops. and it's right next to indiana, a 5 minute drive away. that's where the guns are coming from.
also, chicago suffers from being next to some suburbs, riverdale, dolton, glenwood, with lax laws and gun shops. and it's right next to indiana, a 5 minute drive away. that's where the guns are coming from.
It is so simple. Call your members of Congress and tell them to confiscate all the guns.
If enough go along with the idea then it gets done.
If not then the country wants to keep the guns.
Majority rule and all that.
If enough go along with the idea then it gets done.
If not then the country wants to keep the guns.
Majority rule and all that.
" Jimmy Greenville, North Carolina 17 minutes ago
It is so simple. Call your members of Congress and tell them to confiscate all the guns.
If enough go along with the idea then it gets done.
If not then the country wants to keep the guns.
Majority rule and all that. " [end quote]
Sorry Jimmy, but it's not quite that simple. America is not an actual Democracy, it's a Democratic Republic. The founding fathers wanted to insure that a small majority could never run roughshod over a large minority. Your basic premise is correct, but only in theory. Especially when it comes to the second amendment. Here's a little visual graphic that you might find very interesting:
http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
It is so simple. Call your members of Congress and tell them to confiscate all the guns.
If enough go along with the idea then it gets done.
If not then the country wants to keep the guns.
Majority rule and all that. " [end quote]
Sorry Jimmy, but it's not quite that simple. America is not an actual Democracy, it's a Democratic Republic. The founding fathers wanted to insure that a small majority could never run roughshod over a large minority. Your basic premise is correct, but only in theory. Especially when it comes to the second amendment. Here's a little visual graphic that you might find very interesting:
http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php
Suggesting a fix that is unconstitutional doesn't help this debate. What most Americans want is sane control of lethal weapons.
Everytime I hear the mantra of "arm the good guys to take out the bad guys with guns" I am reminded of the 2012 Empire State Building shooting in which 9 bystanders were injured as a result of TRAINED police officers shooting the suspect. If trained personnel have difficulty I shudder to think what "untrained" people with guns could do. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/nyregion/empire-state-building-shootin...
12
If you took the 25 largest cities in the United States, most of which are democratic sewers that have been controlled by democratic administrations for years,(think Detroit, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, etc.) and removed all firearms deaths caused by the inhabitants of those cities, the deaths per capita from firearms statistics for America would be the envy of the world.
That my friends, is the REAL truth!
That my friends, is the REAL truth!
That's a big concern for me as well.
Maryland has severe gun restrictions and is very dangerous. Perhaps what you are seeing is correlation and not causation.
6
"Better to go to a city or state with gun restrictions, at least if you’re playing the odds. Most of the states with tighter gun laws have fewer gun deaths."
Really? Have you been to Chicago lately? It has some of the most draconian gun laws this side of North Korea and yet your chances of getting shot in Chicago are probably higher than they are in Syria. An incovenient truth, Mr. Egan.
Really? Have you been to Chicago lately? It has some of the most draconian gun laws this side of North Korea and yet your chances of getting shot in Chicago are probably higher than they are in Syria. An incovenient truth, Mr. Egan.
9
I am totally sick of the constant liberal meme that states with tighter gun laws have fewer gun deaths. It is a specious argument at best, and totally disingenuous at worst.
First of all, suicides should be removed from the equation completely. Secondly, be honest and compare the gun deaths per state with the total ethnic composition of that state. In other words, give the percentage of the total firearms death in any state broken down by what group commits commit the most murders relative to their percentage of the total population of that state. Then it's easy to see that America does not have a gun problem, America has a crime problem. The left refuses to admit that because the left and it's "great society" programs are responsible for the problems the country now faces!
First of all, suicides should be removed from the equation completely. Secondly, be honest and compare the gun deaths per state with the total ethnic composition of that state. In other words, give the percentage of the total firearms death in any state broken down by what group commits commit the most murders relative to their percentage of the total population of that state. Then it's easy to see that America does not have a gun problem, America has a crime problem. The left refuses to admit that because the left and it's "great society" programs are responsible for the problems the country now faces!
3
That's because neighboring states have lax laws. But dont worry, nothing will be done to curb gun violence in the USA.
1
I suspect if you dig the details on Chicago, you'll find gang on gang violence. In Chicago, you are probably in more danger as a member, neighbor or relative of a gun owning banger than as a person who just shows up in Chicago. That is yet a third America for most of us.
1
Combat veterans in the Police Department can be fixed. We need to clean our police departments house before we can reasonablly deal with citizens.
Open carry at least gives you fair warning, although it is intimidating. If you go to a UTexas football game this fall, realize that guns are allowed this year. I am not going, but if I did, I would hope my knife is accepted, just in case I happened to sit next the kook of the day.
Open carry at least gives you fair warning, although it is intimidating. If you go to a UTexas football game this fall, realize that guns are allowed this year. I am not going, but if I did, I would hope my knife is accepted, just in case I happened to sit next the kook of the day.
Good lord, what kind of society do some of us live in, where violence is expected and the question asked is not how to stop it, but what sort of weapon to use in response?
1
I'm just waiting for a court case, or a slew of court cases to be brought against insurance companies.Yep. Did the venue where guns were fired carry insurance? Great. Then that makes them the responsible party, right? Go after the money and see if it doesn't start to change things. Maybe then the feckless cowboy-want-a-be's like Rick Perry and his congressional co-horts will get a dose of reality. There's a cost to your cowardice and vacuous ideas of manhood--time to pay up.
5
In one dimension it is even sillier than fending off British tyranny.
The historical precedent was the imported British desire to fend off religious tyranny. A holdover from a battle between papists and roundheads.
The actual purpose of the second amendment was to preclude the need for a standing army by making property owners responsible for being prepared to join a posse under the local sheriff to enforce peace and defend against marauders on the open border to the west.
As we have no history of state sponsored religious oppression and we now have the most power standing army and well armed and militarily trained on the planet it is hard to imagine an armed citizenry being of any use to those who love personal freedom?
Just the same, I would advise against replacing the second amendment, which has been transformed into this supposed protector of our freedom from governmental tyranny. Not because I expect the citizenry to protect me, they won't. But because no one has any idea what such a change might wrought and while this violence is distasteful and troubling it actually appears to be subsiding and at its worst was something we could live with. The unknown alternative is possibly much worse.
Quite probably very much worse.
The historical precedent was the imported British desire to fend off religious tyranny. A holdover from a battle between papists and roundheads.
The actual purpose of the second amendment was to preclude the need for a standing army by making property owners responsible for being prepared to join a posse under the local sheriff to enforce peace and defend against marauders on the open border to the west.
As we have no history of state sponsored religious oppression and we now have the most power standing army and well armed and militarily trained on the planet it is hard to imagine an armed citizenry being of any use to those who love personal freedom?
Just the same, I would advise against replacing the second amendment, which has been transformed into this supposed protector of our freedom from governmental tyranny. Not because I expect the citizenry to protect me, they won't. But because no one has any idea what such a change might wrought and while this violence is distasteful and troubling it actually appears to be subsiding and at its worst was something we could live with. The unknown alternative is possibly much worse.
Quite probably very much worse.
4
"Something we could live with"? Ask the families in Newtown, just for a place to start. An unhinged person had unlimited access to unnecessary assault weapons -- how is any of that something to live with?
I see no reason to have a gun in my house, nor any reason for someone else to have one. Law enforcement, OK. Rifle range or skeet shooting or subsistence hunting, OK. But otherwise, let's dump the (interpretation of) the 2nd amendment!
I see no reason to have a gun in my house, nor any reason for someone else to have one. Law enforcement, OK. Rifle range or skeet shooting or subsistence hunting, OK. But otherwise, let's dump the (interpretation of) the 2nd amendment!
One has to give gun fanatics the credit they are due. They have grossed out many people from owning guns.
For someone packing heat every problem is a potential target. Ironic how gun-control advocates become pro-life and the 'everyone with guns' crowd becomes pro-choice.
Which amendment is it that guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? To enjoy these guarantees we need to be secure. We need an amendment that guarantees people the right to not be surrounded by citizens with guns to balance out the gun rights laws.
There is no country in the world where gun proliferation reduces violence. The lowest homicide countries have the strictest gun laws. Those are the facts. So it comes as no surprise that gun control states have fewer homicides.
The Republican party is owned by the NRA which is nothing more than a bounteously bankrolled gun lobby. Republican operatives have mortgaged their party's soul for the hope of primary victories --the chance to bribe the few and the radical who actually vote in primaries.
How sad. How very, very sad that America will continue to mortgage its citizens' lives because of a minority of Republican voters bankrolled by a gun lobby....and because religious, civic and political leaders will not stand up and say "enough"...
Which amendment is it that guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? To enjoy these guarantees we need to be secure. We need an amendment that guarantees people the right to not be surrounded by citizens with guns to balance out the gun rights laws.
There is no country in the world where gun proliferation reduces violence. The lowest homicide countries have the strictest gun laws. Those are the facts. So it comes as no surprise that gun control states have fewer homicides.
The Republican party is owned by the NRA which is nothing more than a bounteously bankrolled gun lobby. Republican operatives have mortgaged their party's soul for the hope of primary victories --the chance to bribe the few and the radical who actually vote in primaries.
How sad. How very, very sad that America will continue to mortgage its citizens' lives because of a minority of Republican voters bankrolled by a gun lobby....and because religious, civic and political leaders will not stand up and say "enough"...
128
The Constitution is a sacred text when the question is the 2nd Amendment. But when it comes to the 14th Amendment, it is not sacred at all. The very same people who extoll the sacredness of the Constitution in the former case are demanding a Constitutional amendment in the latter (obviously, not realizing what it takes to do it).
The radical misinterpretation of the second amendment is infringing on my first amendment right of free assembly. Why hasn't there been a constitutional challenge on these grounds?
9
This line from Egan's stellar article cuts to the heart of the matter: "But that’s the cost, apparently, of an extreme interpretation of a constitutional amendment designed to fend off British tyranny, a freedom that has become a tyranny in itself."
We can thank our 5 reliable reactionary Supreme Court justices, justices that are little more than politicians in judicial, robes, for giving us the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision that paved the way for gun violence in public spaces. We can also thank our cowardly legislators for doing nothing to end the oppression attributable to "an extreme interpretation of a constitutional amendment designed to fend off British tyranny, a freedom that has become a tyranny..."
We can thank our 5 reliable reactionary Supreme Court justices, justices that are little more than politicians in judicial, robes, for giving us the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision that paved the way for gun violence in public spaces. We can also thank our cowardly legislators for doing nothing to end the oppression attributable to "an extreme interpretation of a constitutional amendment designed to fend off British tyranny, a freedom that has become a tyranny..."
7
Egan is wrong about one thing. In many states, "no gun signs" in theaters are legally binding, meaning that concealed handgun license holders--the good guys, the ones with overall crime rates several orders of magnitude LOWER than the general population--are compelled to leave their gun in the truck. That means the only people crossing the door's threshold are those carrying illegally.
Chains like Regal are increasingly militant in supporting this kind of madness, despite incidents like Aurora or Lafayette. It's all about self-delusion and kowtowing to pressure groups, while the security of the environment is impaired. At most, these chains will hire a security guard to stand watch on the box office at night (when there's the most cash to be stolen). There is not anywhere near enough security for the 3000 seats in the 20-plex, or the huge parking lot.
Chains like Regal are increasingly militant in supporting this kind of madness, despite incidents like Aurora or Lafayette. It's all about self-delusion and kowtowing to pressure groups, while the security of the environment is impaired. At most, these chains will hire a security guard to stand watch on the box office at night (when there's the most cash to be stolen). There is not anywhere near enough security for the 3000 seats in the 20-plex, or the huge parking lot.
2
Concealed gun permit holders are the "good guys"? Really? You mean "good guys" like the ex-cop from Florida who shot and and killed a man in front of him in a theater because he was texting on his cell phone a year or two back?
The "good guys" are the ones without guns.
The "good guys" are the ones without guns.
48
The gun rights vs. gun control debate is going nowhere. We need effective, i.e., evidence-based, action to curb gun violence. The gun violence bursts of killings in public settings, e.g., schools, movie theaters, military sites, commands media attention, but most of the gun violence is crime related and occurs in urban, low income areas usually populated by minorities, especially African-Americans. Focus there: Black Lives Matter. How about engaging the NRA in implementing there its dictum that what's required to stop a Bad Guy with a gun is a Good Guy with a gun. The NRA plan for action: In the target areas, identify the Good Guys (most of the folks) and enable them to have guns, training in proficient use and open carry permits so that an abundance of Good Guy gun power can be available 24/7. Let's then see whether the NRA's dictum transforms gun violent ridden communities into peaceable domains. Done on a large scale, an associated effect of this initiative could be transformation of the NRA from a mostly white membership to a membership more representative of the diversity of America: Black, White, Hispanic, Asian joined together with their array of guns, on display via open carry, for all to see.
1
Don't forget that bad guys steal things -- the more guns in a community, the more opportunities for the bad guys to get their hands on them.
The original statement in the linked article was made by Lisa Bloom, who said, "Americans are 20 times as likely to die from gun violence as citizens of other civilized countries." I guess Brazil, Venezuela and South Africa (and many other countries) aren't considered "civilized" as they had gun death rates greater than that of the US. In fact, the authors of that article concluded by saying that Bloom's statements (including the "20 times as likely" one) were "mostly true." Mostly true isn't good enough for me.
1
Two wrongs make a right? Because a few other countries have higher gun deaths, that means ours is OK? Why is even one violent gun death OK?
Wait, the murder rate in Chicago, which has the most stringent gun controls in Illinois, and among the most restrictive in the country, is lower than that of the remainder of Illinois? Statistics would beg to differ. Likewise, why does Washington, D.C., home of the nation's most restrictive gun laws, have one of the nation's highest murder rates? Similar stories can be found in Baltimore, Newark, and Camden, among other places with strict gun control laws and high murder rates.
Buried in the Richard Florida article was the most telling correlation: violence and poverty. Where there is poverty, there is gun violence.
Buried in the Richard Florida article was the most telling correlation: violence and poverty. Where there is poverty, there is gun violence.
31
Another overlooked statistic when comparing the US to other countries is the overall murder rate. Gun deny-ers like to compare the US gun deaths to other countries who have banned guns (or limited them); however, in those countries we do not compare equally the number of civilians killed by rocks, hammers, shovels, knives, etc.
As an NRA member I am fully supportive of a responsible legal person's right to own a firearm if they choose. However if that person has committed felony crimes, is violent, is mentally handicapped, mentally unstable, etc then they should be denied. I also believe that it is over the line for a "normal" gun owner to own excessive firepower like an automatic weapon. However when you include semi automatic guns in the category, you are now including 60-70% of the handguns, semi automatic hunting and sporting shotguns and that is wrong.
As an NRA member I am fully supportive of a responsible legal person's right to own a firearm if they choose. However if that person has committed felony crimes, is violent, is mentally handicapped, mentally unstable, etc then they should be denied. I also believe that it is over the line for a "normal" gun owner to own excessive firepower like an automatic weapon. However when you include semi automatic guns in the category, you are now including 60-70% of the handguns, semi automatic hunting and sporting shotguns and that is wrong.
RT --Stringent gun control laws are not effective if guns are easily accessed from nearby sources -- in the case of Chicago, the state of Indiana. Furthermore, the point that the writer of this article makes is that "gun-free" zones are not gun-free unless that requirement is enforced by searches and/or metal detectors. Your point about city-by-city gun control laws is irrelevant to that.
Your argument is like saying, "Hey, my town has the strongest anti-precipitation laws in the country, so why is it so wet?"
The rights of the "average" citizen who only wants the freedom to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are secondary to the rights of gun owners to...own a gun. To "bear arms." There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment that prevents Congress from enacting sensible gun laws. The only thing preventing gun control is the fact that the NRA's and the gun manufacturers' toadies in Congress want their patrons to pay for their re-elections. That's it.
A sticker on a door is not going to prevent a determined shooter from gunning down people. Even right now, the so-called "good guys" like the glorified security guard, Ray Tensing, feel they have the right to hunt and kill African Americans on our cities' streets. How much longer before citizens decide to shoot the police before they're shot themselves?
In the meantime, I don't go to malls, to theaters, to movies, to a house of worship. I wait for gunfire to erupt at one of the schools near my house, so at this point I'm even afraid to walk in my own neighborhood. What kind of "freedom" is that when only some of us are "free" and the rest of us live in fear? Eventually, businesses will figure out they're losing customers because people are afraid to walk in their doors. When enough businesses are hurt by declining revenues, maybe local chambers of commerce will start to think that uncontrolled guns are not such a good idea. It all comes down to the bottom line, after all.
A sticker on a door is not going to prevent a determined shooter from gunning down people. Even right now, the so-called "good guys" like the glorified security guard, Ray Tensing, feel they have the right to hunt and kill African Americans on our cities' streets. How much longer before citizens decide to shoot the police before they're shot themselves?
In the meantime, I don't go to malls, to theaters, to movies, to a house of worship. I wait for gunfire to erupt at one of the schools near my house, so at this point I'm even afraid to walk in my own neighborhood. What kind of "freedom" is that when only some of us are "free" and the rest of us live in fear? Eventually, businesses will figure out they're losing customers because people are afraid to walk in their doors. When enough businesses are hurt by declining revenues, maybe local chambers of commerce will start to think that uncontrolled guns are not such a good idea. It all comes down to the bottom line, after all.
4
For goodness sakes, even the wild, wild West had gun control. Tombstone Arizona had a no carry law. Guns were to be turned into the sherriff on arrival and were kept locked up until the owner was leaving town. The shootout at the OK Corral was over illegal possession guns in Tombstone, at the time one of the richest and busiest of towns in the western US. Now any military or police force reject can become a rent-a-cop, strap a pistol on his hip over his look alike uniform and take on anyone driving near the university that he is employed by or the mall he works for. And Grandma with her arthiritis and bad vision can detect the threat of the guy in front of her at the grocery store, keeping her hand on her little 22 the whole time she's in the store. What a country.
8
Let us extend one of your thoughts further. Surprisingly, in 1973, when half of all American households owned firearms, the nature of those firearms was significantly different. Certainly, there were semi automatic weapons, but they were likely to be the venerable Colt Model 1911, a seven shot pistol, or one of the few semi auto hunting rifles, which typically held four rounds. The rest were likely bolt action rifles or revolvers. Today, those weapons are different. They are typically a Glock or H&K pistol with a 19 round magazine, and an 'AR' type semi automatic rifle with a 30 round magazine, though we can find non factory magazines in larger capacities.
As a gun owner during this period, I have seen this transition. It is curious. The only explanation I have is that the manufacturers of equipment in all hobbies must churn the market in order to keep people interested, and "buying new stuff." In fly fishing, this process creates new gear that does not catch fish any better, but fascinates fishermen in new ways, and separates them from their money anew each year. In firearms, it places in the hands of citizen shooters, of varying levels of training, expertise, and as we have sadly learnt, mental condition, a remarkable level of firepower. Perhaps the Second Amendment permits all these people to have all this firepower. It is a matter of which judges we buy on to the Supreme court.
As a gun owner during this period, I have seen this transition. It is curious. The only explanation I have is that the manufacturers of equipment in all hobbies must churn the market in order to keep people interested, and "buying new stuff." In fly fishing, this process creates new gear that does not catch fish any better, but fascinates fishermen in new ways, and separates them from their money anew each year. In firearms, it places in the hands of citizen shooters, of varying levels of training, expertise, and as we have sadly learnt, mental condition, a remarkable level of firepower. Perhaps the Second Amendment permits all these people to have all this firepower. It is a matter of which judges we buy on to the Supreme court.
5
Regarding airports as safe places, maybe it should specify that they are some of the safest places once you get past the security checkpoint.
1
No question that the NRA has effectively destroyed legitimate gun ownership by making it into an incredibly divisive issue. The one interesting comment is when one looks at the twitter feed @nyscanner one sees people getting shot, not always killed, in NYC almost every day. The question is how does the ratio of shooting to population compare to NYC with its strict control laws to other parts of the country including the South as referenced. The mass shootings that are not gang related seem to be crazies who may or may not use the goofy rhetoric of the right wing.
2
I'll never give up my guns. Submit to potential bullying, personal attack, and pack behavior?
And really, I can't take anyone seriously that uses the phrase "packing heat".
And really, I can't take anyone seriously that uses the phrase "packing heat".
3
Guns are the problem, but not the answer.
3
You forgot another gun free zone, the halls of Congress and the Supreme Court. Senators, congressional representatives, and majority justices may not be looking out for us much but they aren't crazy. They are looking out for themselves. KA
4
Amen. Make the Supreme Court live with any law that they impose on the rest of us. Then see how long it takes them to back gun control.
1
Bang. You're dead. Did you have time to pull out your gun and fire in time it took to read those three words? No? Then you should be able to see the idiocy of "the-solution-to-a-bad-guy-with-a-gun-is-a-good-guy-with-a-gun" argument. The bad guy (and it virtually always is a guy) picks the time and place to begin shooting. No one can watch everywhere all the time. Consider the example of American Sniper Chris Kyle, perhaps the most highly trained gun owner in the country. He picked up a similarly trained former soldier and then a third vet, who was having mental problems. They all went to a guy range, everyone had access to plenty of firepower. The mentally disturbed vet to one gun and killed the two others. The "bad guy" chose the time and place and there was nothing the "good guys," despite having access to weapons, could do. Not to mention the idea of 10 people pulling out guns in a darkened theater in response to one nut opening fire (or one prankster lighting a firecracker) is terrifying. We need reasonable gun regulations that keep weapons out of the hands of the unstable and away from public spaces. Period.
4
Here in Philadelphia, the relentless gun violence preceded those events which Egan and the Times concern themselves with - shootings with narratives which it believes it can manipulate on behalf of its political posture. It will continue long after those parties turn their attention elsewhere.
Nice wave metaphor.
Nice wave metaphor.
1
Please...."more guns easily obtained by the mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti-government extremists", where are your statistics to back this up? This group you reference probably accounts for a tiny number of gun deaths. How about focusing on the illegally obtained guns. As to going to a state with strict gun laws, are you joking? Look at the homicide rate in Chicago and the number of gun related crimes in NY, Washington, DC, Los Angeles. How about focusing on facts rather than your false assumptions. You are just as bad as the NRA
1
There is something wrong when it is harder to obtain a driver's license than it is to obtain a firearm.
Just saying........
Just saying........
10
What I don't understand is why isn't the NRA taken on directly? Why aren't there any groups or organizations whose sole mission is to stand up to the NRA? I haven't heard of any. It appears that most politicians and others in leadership positions are intimidated by the NRA. I expect more from our leaders who should be standing up bravely against something that will do its best to intimidate in all manner of ways, from legal arguments to social fear-mongering to making it seem "fun" to shoot and own a gun.
3
One group that stands up to the NRA, including at the NRA annual convention: Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.
The Moms (and their other supporters) are having an impact across the U.S.
The Moms (and their other supporters) are having an impact across the U.S.
1
Why isn't the NRA taken on directly? Because NO American politician--at any level, or of any party--has a spine.
1
California may be one of the safer states. Especially if you live at least 100 miles away from larger cities as I do. Interestingly enough, while our little town is a red pocket in otherwise blue state, the gun nuts do not seem to be crazy here and, as far as I know, we do NOT have gun shows where guns can be sold to everyone.
Also, we do NOT have gangs although a lot motocycles are passing in front of my house.
It is futile to complain, though. The Supremes declared the right to arm yourself a 'basic right' and will most likely to confirm it under a future Republican president even if his name is not Trump...
In any case, there are so many guns in circulation here that even a totally liberal Supreme Court cannot do anything about it...
The situation is, of course, worse in the Southern (former Confederate) state, as Egan writes.
Also, we do NOT have gangs although a lot motocycles are passing in front of my house.
It is futile to complain, though. The Supremes declared the right to arm yourself a 'basic right' and will most likely to confirm it under a future Republican president even if his name is not Trump...
In any case, there are so many guns in circulation here that even a totally liberal Supreme Court cannot do anything about it...
The situation is, of course, worse in the Southern (former Confederate) state, as Egan writes.
1
The cure is worse than the disease. Consider what happened in the land of Mozart and Kant in the lifetime of my parents. Subcontracting out personal security to the government, or anyone, is a 'sucker deal'.
1
Your comparison is not apt. What about the modern countries that do not have this sick gun fetish? Present-day Germany, The Netherlands, the UK have all "subcontracted out personal security to the government" and I don't see anything like the Third Reich arising there. Besides, providing security is a basic function of the government -- one of its reasons for being.
An earlier commenter posed the question "Who are we?"
We are the people who elect those who do the bidding of the gun lobby. if we don't get off the couch and vote we have to wear the splattered blood.
Are we too deluded to accept this?
We are the people who elect those who do the bidding of the gun lobby. if we don't get off the couch and vote we have to wear the splattered blood.
Are we too deluded to accept this?
3
Thank you Mr. Egan for saying what the majority of Americans are thinking.
4
Just this week, a three year old was killed in the DC area by her seven year old brother who found a loaded gun at home. Killings like this happen year after year in this country. They are so common that they don't even make the news, except locally.
Simply put, guns are designed to kill with greater efficiency - and they are built solely to kill. NRA is flat out lying with its tag line guns don't kill people. As any three year old can tell you: Guns. Kill. People.
Maybe columns like Mr. Egan's will change people's minds, but I am not holding my breath. If the murder of 20 six and seven year-olds in an elementary school days before Christmas doesn't move the needle, nothing will. There are too many idiots in this country who think it is sane to allow anyone to walk around toting AK-47s, Glocks and even bazookas.
Simply put, guns are designed to kill with greater efficiency - and they are built solely to kill. NRA is flat out lying with its tag line guns don't kill people. As any three year old can tell you: Guns. Kill. People.
Maybe columns like Mr. Egan's will change people's minds, but I am not holding my breath. If the murder of 20 six and seven year-olds in an elementary school days before Christmas doesn't move the needle, nothing will. There are too many idiots in this country who think it is sane to allow anyone to walk around toting AK-47s, Glocks and even bazookas.
6
Here's a partial solution and it has the virtue of splitting the gun rights movement. The gun rights movement draws its strength from guys who are getting older who feel the need for protection. What can they realistically carry around though? A small caliber handgun with no spare ammo and obviously no body armor. Along comes another guy with an assault rifle(s), hundreds of rounds and body armor. Ever notice how they dress up in camo or SWAT black fatigues even when going out to gun down first graders? There's an answer right there. Ban those fantasy-inducing assault weapons, ban anything semi-automatic that takes magazines including pistols. Revolvers and for rifles and shotguns it's bolts, pumps, levers, singles, doubles only and nothing that takes magazines. That'll literally slow 'em down and give the concealed carry citizen a fighting chance when these lunatic Rambos show up spraying lead everywhere. (Oh, and ban lead bullets, too, it'll be better for the environment and make bullets more expensive).
2
Every time there is an article in the NYTimes about our ridiculous gun culture, hoards of commenters express their views. Most of us want change and recognize that the status quo is untenable.
If all the commenters and readers would consider donating to one of the groups that are working hard to counter the message of Guns for Everyone i.e NRA, GOA, we might come closer to solving this problem. These groups include Moms Demand Action, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Brady Center, Violence Policy Center and others. In addition, imagine if we all contacted our legislators with the same enthusiasm as the guns-for-all crowd do, telling them we want change.
I am not so naive to believe that change will be happen in the near future. I understand that we live in two Americas, one of those America's is being fed a constant diet of fear from numerous sources, and their guns give these folks a sense of power and control against this fear. We need our leaders to actually lead, and we need a cultural shift where education and critical thinking again becomes more valued more than brawn and celebrititis.
If all the commenters and readers would consider donating to one of the groups that are working hard to counter the message of Guns for Everyone i.e NRA, GOA, we might come closer to solving this problem. These groups include Moms Demand Action, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Brady Center, Violence Policy Center and others. In addition, imagine if we all contacted our legislators with the same enthusiasm as the guns-for-all crowd do, telling them we want change.
I am not so naive to believe that change will be happen in the near future. I understand that we live in two Americas, one of those America's is being fed a constant diet of fear from numerous sources, and their guns give these folks a sense of power and control against this fear. We need our leaders to actually lead, and we need a cultural shift where education and critical thinking again becomes more valued more than brawn and celebrititis.
2
Guns blew out the brains of this nation long ago. Shoot first and then ask questions is the American Way.
2
Good article. America is sounding more and more like a plot that's a cross between The Road and The Wild Bunch.
Please wake up. A significant part of this fantasy is that the gun owners and the NRA might have to "take our county back" from...well, liberals, black people, people who advocate for abortion rights, people who support medicare, some sort of left-wing commie big government bogeyman who persists in imposing upon these multiple gun-owning victims of the modern world. Wayne LaPierre's dog whistle is about who controls this country and how those right thinking right wingers can retain and regain that control when the right time comes.
6
Yesterday in Southern California, a four year old boy playing with a toy in his aunt's front yard was killed by a random bullet. At least pause and remember his name for just a moment: Daniel Munoz. What happened to his "right to life"?
165
Freedom?
1
The idea of everyone arming themselves is ridiculous......please consider the number of shots fired by policemen versus the number that actually hit a target! Or look at rounds fired by combat troops in combat and look at the number of casualties...And some idiotic politicians think the average gun owner could do better!
6
Yes guns are a problem. BUT. We are experiencing something sadder and scarier I fear. Little by little the US is fragmenting and there is more 'crazy' than there used to be. There is so little voice of cohesion. Add guns to the cocktail of aggrieved, lonely, baiter, hater and general wingnut and you have the current state of play.
3
One other place that is gun-free is, ironically enough, the Senate and House chambers.
So our "representatives" get to be safe while the rest of us just live in hopes that we don't run into some well-armed militia man with a rage on. Or a baby reaching into his/her mother's purse and firing her gun while shopping.
That we are all at risk everywhere we go is insane.
So our "representatives" get to be safe while the rest of us just live in hopes that we don't run into some well-armed militia man with a rage on. Or a baby reaching into his/her mother's purse and firing her gun while shopping.
That we are all at risk everywhere we go is insane.
2
Don't get me wrong... I like guns. I learned to shoot when I was a kid from old geezers who smoked pipes, had duck decoys in their den and subscribed to Field & Stream (I don't recall anyone saying they needed a gun for "home defense"). I was a member of the NRA in those days which was all about gun safety at the time... The NRA these days seems to have a significant element of folks who fantasize about overthrowing the democratically elected government by force (Ask the NRA why they lobbied to stop commercial explosives manufacturers from adding taggants to their products).
More people commit suicide with a gun (>20,000 per year) than are shot and killed in any other circumstance. I guess we should call it "NRA Assisted Suicide".
I watch a lot of YouTube gun videos (As I said, I actually like guns) and am frequently bemused by the culture... The other day I heard one of the video hosts (a very nice, apparently level headed guy) say that he concealed carried a 15 round semi-automatic pistol in case someone tried to carjack him. And I am thinking... Really... In most parts of the country you have a better chance of being struck by lightning than being carjacked... But we don't all carry around little portable lightning rods!
And for home defense... Unless you live is South LA, I don't see how anybody needs more than a pump shotgun... If you need multiple 30 round mag's, you should really consider moving, dude.
More people commit suicide with a gun (>20,000 per year) than are shot and killed in any other circumstance. I guess we should call it "NRA Assisted Suicide".
I watch a lot of YouTube gun videos (As I said, I actually like guns) and am frequently bemused by the culture... The other day I heard one of the video hosts (a very nice, apparently level headed guy) say that he concealed carried a 15 round semi-automatic pistol in case someone tried to carjack him. And I am thinking... Really... In most parts of the country you have a better chance of being struck by lightning than being carjacked... But we don't all carry around little portable lightning rods!
And for home defense... Unless you live is South LA, I don't see how anybody needs more than a pump shotgun... If you need multiple 30 round mag's, you should really consider moving, dude.
1
The 2A is never going away. Get used to it.
We have a natural right to self-defense and natural rights do not come from man. As such, man cannot take away these natural rights, period.
With freedoms there are always risks, but the main problem with gun violence in this country (which has been going down since it's highs in the 90s) is that is almost always involved with gang activity and drugs.
Most illegal weapons (hey why don't those criminals obey the 20,000+ gun laws?) come from our southern borders, as well as the drugs that fuel the violence.
The NRA Is not a Republican organization. There are plenty of Democrats who love their guns just as much and only identify as Democrats because they disagree with the GOP on single issues such as abortion or gay marriage.
I find it enraging that most of the people calling for gun right restrictions, confiscations, whatever are the types that never have to worry about security because they can either afford their own private security, have their SS protection, or live in wealthy, gated communities away from the rest of us.
No life is important than another, whether you're an average Joe construction worker or POTUS. Either we all get to defend ourselves or no one does.
Also, we have about 300 million guns in this country to 310 million (plus 20-30 million illegal aliens), so good luck trying to get them. We will never register them. Ever.
We have a natural right to self-defense and natural rights do not come from man. As such, man cannot take away these natural rights, period.
With freedoms there are always risks, but the main problem with gun violence in this country (which has been going down since it's highs in the 90s) is that is almost always involved with gang activity and drugs.
Most illegal weapons (hey why don't those criminals obey the 20,000+ gun laws?) come from our southern borders, as well as the drugs that fuel the violence.
The NRA Is not a Republican organization. There are plenty of Democrats who love their guns just as much and only identify as Democrats because they disagree with the GOP on single issues such as abortion or gay marriage.
I find it enraging that most of the people calling for gun right restrictions, confiscations, whatever are the types that never have to worry about security because they can either afford their own private security, have their SS protection, or live in wealthy, gated communities away from the rest of us.
No life is important than another, whether you're an average Joe construction worker or POTUS. Either we all get to defend ourselves or no one does.
Also, we have about 300 million guns in this country to 310 million (plus 20-30 million illegal aliens), so good luck trying to get them. We will never register them. Ever.
1
I love your description of Democrats as merely people who don't agree with Republican principles LOL. Yep, that's right, they don't!
But I am concerned that you say it is "enraging" that the people calling for gun controls are not the people most vulnerable to violence. First of all, I don't agree with you -- walk through any gang-infested area and talk to the mothers and families of people murdered by guns. You'll find plenty of supporters of gun control -- they may simply not have the ear of the media.
Second, "enraging" is a scary term.
But I am concerned that you say it is "enraging" that the people calling for gun controls are not the people most vulnerable to violence. First of all, I don't agree with you -- walk through any gang-infested area and talk to the mothers and families of people murdered by guns. You'll find plenty of supporters of gun control -- they may simply not have the ear of the media.
Second, "enraging" is a scary term.
1
Where are the facts to back up your rants?
We'll just lock you up, friend. And they you won't have any guns to play with.
Gun owners will always act outraged and insulted that you think they can't handle a gun responsibly, that you think they are incapable of locking up their gun or keeping it safe from toddlers.
Then when you point out all the people who are mentally ill who kill school children, or toddlers shot by siblings, they say, "Ah yes, well, those people weren't responsible like me." And when you say that there will always be "those people," they explain that you have to break a few eggs to make a freedom omelet.
The right to own a weapon -- a weapon that is 10 times more likely to end up used on yourself or a member of your family than on a stranger -- the right to cling to the fantasy that you'll use it somehow, someday, when some scary person turns up, even though your guns are safely locked away and therefore useless if a scary person turns up -- is apparently more important than the right of a schoolchild to live.
But I don't expect the people who love their guns to care. The whole point is that facts and reason don't matter as much as emotions. They simply don't care about facts as much as fantasy. Period.
Then when you point out all the people who are mentally ill who kill school children, or toddlers shot by siblings, they say, "Ah yes, well, those people weren't responsible like me." And when you say that there will always be "those people," they explain that you have to break a few eggs to make a freedom omelet.
The right to own a weapon -- a weapon that is 10 times more likely to end up used on yourself or a member of your family than on a stranger -- the right to cling to the fantasy that you'll use it somehow, someday, when some scary person turns up, even though your guns are safely locked away and therefore useless if a scary person turns up -- is apparently more important than the right of a schoolchild to live.
But I don't expect the people who love their guns to care. The whole point is that facts and reason don't matter as much as emotions. They simply don't care about facts as much as fantasy. Period.
3
Repeal the 2nd Amendment and replace it with one that gives Congress the power to regulate the ownership, possession, and use of firearms.
1
Not needed, just go back to the way it was written " a well regulated militia"
Half the homes in 1973 had guns. A third do now. Less shootings back then. Huh.
See the other comment on this point -- the guns were different.
I would like to mention something a bit outside of the article, regarding amendment rights to carry a firearm. This supposes that democracy does not work through voting ( such as a vote of non confidence seen in other western countries), and so we have the right to assassinate a President. Think of it, it is insanity. It also presupposes that a sitting president can enable the national Guard to stop this, and the answer to that, from the right, is that we can defend ourselves from the National Guard. So, we are willing as a nation, to shoot our own children and neighbors children, defending a sitting President.
I think we need to counter this thinking, by enabling a Vote of Non Confidence in the President ( I am speaking generally, not of THE President). So, if the President gets a vote of perhaps 60% non confidence, a new National election is held in 90 days, or, if he/ she gets a vote of Confidence, the President sits in office for an additional term, stopping this from occurring too often.
I think we need to counter this thinking, by enabling a Vote of Non Confidence in the President ( I am speaking generally, not of THE President). So, if the President gets a vote of perhaps 60% non confidence, a new National election is held in 90 days, or, if he/ she gets a vote of Confidence, the President sits in office for an additional term, stopping this from occurring too often.
My problem with the Second Amendment absolutists is their failure to read the first three words of the 2nd; a Well regulated.... Case closed firearm ownership can be regulated. Of course many think the only way to dissuade a Bad Guy with a gun is a Good Guy. In real life the line between 'Good guy" and 'Bad Guy' is not so clear our obvious. That some are 'Good' and some are 'Bad' and that they can be easily differentiated is a foundation of conservative thought. It is also childish.
5
Repeal it and rewrite it to eliminate the silly arguments over what we think it meant.
1
Mr. Egan seems quite angry in this column. The use of labels such as "nuts" and "crazies"reveal an anger and a bigoted phobia on his part and represents a huge problem when parties are trying to have a productive discussion on the issue. Further, Mr. Egan is using the tired "evil GOP" line all the while failing to mention the millions of Democrats who own guns and who pressure their Democrat Comgressmen to act in their favor. Mr. Egan also seems to have a bigoted animus towards poor southerners as well as rural residents. Egan and his ilk gush with admiration and support when the President or Vice President is seen playing with a gun but seems unratio ally angry when a one hundred ten pound woman Ina rural southern area wants to be able to hold off a bad guy until a cop can travel twenty miles to save her.
Perhaps Mr. Egan needs a refresher on the Constitution which was not written solely for the purpose of an illegal rebellion but for the purpose of protecting citizens and non citizens alike from overreach and abuse by any government.
Yes, there are avenues to address gun violence but blind anger and rage are not part of a productive process. Rather those are the qualities that produce hatred which all too often results in violence or oppression. Perhaps Mr. Egans freedom of speech and freedom of the press might need some restrictions as well?
Perhaps Mr. Egan needs a refresher on the Constitution which was not written solely for the purpose of an illegal rebellion but for the purpose of protecting citizens and non citizens alike from overreach and abuse by any government.
Yes, there are avenues to address gun violence but blind anger and rage are not part of a productive process. Rather those are the qualities that produce hatred which all too often results in violence or oppression. Perhaps Mr. Egans freedom of speech and freedom of the press might need some restrictions as well?
5
A nice, reasoned argument that falls flat considering the threats and intimidation that have been the hallmark of the NRA and its affiliates.
Fearmongering and dismissal of well-researched positions have been the hallmarks of the pro-gun lobby.
The Constitution has been used by gun advocates as both an unthinking defence and excuse to turn blind eye to the devastation that their "harmless hobby" has wrought.
Fearmongering and dismissal of well-researched positions have been the hallmarks of the pro-gun lobby.
The Constitution has been used by gun advocates as both an unthinking defence and excuse to turn blind eye to the devastation that their "harmless hobby" has wrought.
5
Why wouldn't Egan be angry about the carnage wrought by guns in this country? And "crazy" and "nuts" are appropriate terms for people who are so monomaniacal about guns that they won't even consider reasonable regulations [as in well-regulated] on how guns are distributed in this country.
1
Mr. Fournier I have no love for the NRA, however, it would be foolish to destroy an amendment because one does not like those who use that ammendment for protection. I could list many groups that abuse many parts of the constitution but that does not mean the constitution should be tossed. If the NRA is indeed using intimidation and threats then possibly the Justice Department should get involved. If they are using regular political pressure, well, that is another issue entirely. All groups use political pressure and that is sadly enough part of the system. If politicians bow to one group or another then that is more of an indictment against the politician, Democrat and Republican alike.
Ironically, The NRA does promote the enforcement of many many laws, it seems that the current and past administrations have chosen to reject their responsibility and duty to enforce those laws. Those laws would lower the rate of gun crimes but it would appear that might not be the actual goal of the anti gun movement. Instead, the power to alter the constitution to suit ones individual political or personal beliefs appears to be the real motive. Which right will be next in line?
Ironically, The NRA does promote the enforcement of many many laws, it seems that the current and past administrations have chosen to reject their responsibility and duty to enforce those laws. Those laws would lower the rate of gun crimes but it would appear that might not be the actual goal of the anti gun movement. Instead, the power to alter the constitution to suit ones individual political or personal beliefs appears to be the real motive. Which right will be next in line?
Compared to other developed countries, the U.S. doesn't have a crime problem; the U.S. has a violence problem.
While the shootings in public settings, e.g., schools, movie theaters, military recruitment, most of the gun violence killings and injuries are criminal violence and occur in urban areas populated by lower income minorities, mostly African-Americans. Exclude these areas and the gun violence in them, and the U.S. gun violence rate compares favorably to that of other developed nations. So, what we need is identification and implementation of evidence-based interventions for whacking down criminal" gun shootings, e.g., paying those at high risk for gun violence to not kill, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/w...
While the shootings in public settings, e.g., schools, movie theaters, military recruitment, most of the gun violence killings and injuries are criminal violence and occur in urban areas populated by lower income minorities, mostly African-Americans. Exclude these areas and the gun violence in them, and the U.S. gun violence rate compares favorably to that of other developed nations. So, what we need is identification and implementation of evidence-based interventions for whacking down criminal" gun shootings, e.g., paying those at high risk for gun violence to not kill, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/w...
7
There are basically two kinds of people, those who carry a gun (or keep one available) and those who would never own one or allow it in their home. The first kind of person understands they are the first line of defense against criminal aggression. When a threat occurs their first thought is to take action to nullify the threat. The second kind of person relies on the police. Their first action is to call 911. It comes down to a difference between self sufficiency or dependency on a public agency. Do I take matters into my own hands or let someone else do it (after all, that's what I pay them for). As long as the majority of Americans equate themselves with the self sufficient further gun control will not occur. When the majority believes in the protection of the state it will change. In the meantime millions of people will carry guns, not because they live in fear, but because now they don't have to.
2
Wrong - the very fact that you carry a gun means you live in fear: fear of other citizens (they might attack me!); fear of the government (they might attack me!); fear of the night (my house might get broken into!); fear of being impotent (I'll defend myself! I can't trust others to help me!). I have a neighbor who has lived in his home for over 30 years, never had any security issues (well, his dogs constantly get out and come visit us) and he is building a "security" building. Of course, he has guns. It must be harsh to live in such fear. Me, I don't believe the US is the most criminal nation on earth, and I can't be bothered living in constant fear. I hope someday you can wrest yourself free of yours.
1
Kudos to Timothy Egan for this editorial. As rising inequity hits more and more Americans, armed citizens and private militias offer "protection", the raison d'etre, to its citizens in the absence of equitable government gun control. The public spaces that are gun free are bought and paid for by entrance fees. Why not institute a quite literal, fair and sane gun control? Guarantee a SAFE Act and safe places for all Americans.
As a teacher I am sickened by the drills we now put our children through in public school to "protect" them. We guarantee the rights of everyone to buy and use guns at the expense of children in every classroom. I shudder to think of my comments to them as i think of ways to keep them quiet in dark and cramped back rooms and closets as police drill bang on doors outside the classroom to imitate intruders. We are all confined in that dark place with our children, fearful of the armed madmen. Open those doors to the real freedoms that guarantee our children will not have to face this fear. Pass strong laws that guarantee gun owners are responsible and trained and that only specific on duty officers of the peace can carry weapons in public.
As a teacher I am sickened by the drills we now put our children through in public school to "protect" them. We guarantee the rights of everyone to buy and use guns at the expense of children in every classroom. I shudder to think of my comments to them as i think of ways to keep them quiet in dark and cramped back rooms and closets as police drill bang on doors outside the classroom to imitate intruders. We are all confined in that dark place with our children, fearful of the armed madmen. Open those doors to the real freedoms that guarantee our children will not have to face this fear. Pass strong laws that guarantee gun owners are responsible and trained and that only specific on duty officers of the peace can carry weapons in public.
10
In order for me to give up my means to defend my family, I would have to trust that the entity taking the guns is worthy of trust and respect; and would make a reasonably good effort to protect my family. I wonder how many educated citizens in the USA really believe that this government has earned that trust and respect. So long as the American government refuses to defend our borders - allowing millions of illegal aliens to commit crimes (many violent) and catastrophically drain our limited financial resources; so long as this administration takes the head-in-the-sand approach to admitting that we now have Islamic terrorists plotting against us in our own back yard; so long as the federal government cherry-picks which laws it will enforce; this government is not worthy of the trust and respect of any citizen.
22
Are you saying "they did it first" is an excuse for nihilism?
3
Your statement reinforces my disinclination to visit the armed crazy zone.
3
When do you expect to have to "defend" your Family? Or are you more interested in "defending" your possessions? Burglars are usually unarmed, and know when you're not home. Has there been any gun violence near your home? Are you afraid of anyone IN your family? Should you move to a more peaceful place? Do you enjoy killing defenseless animals? Do you take your gun to restaurants and church? I think you're looking for an excuse to shoot someone. You're hoping something will happen, just like all these whacked out cops. And, I will wager that you will use as much judgement as they have.
4
Is no place safe? Actually, yes... Any building or venue where the same elected representatives refusing to pass gun legislation have hired security guards, installed x-rays and metal detectors, and passed stringent regulations to insure no one can bring kind of weapon anywhere near them.
34
The reasoning for the "no gun free zone" advocates is that the mere presence of a (hopefully) concealed firearm by law-abiding people is a deterrent to anything happening. The logic is murderers will avoid such places and choose "soft targets", killing as many as they can before any resistance arrives. This is a reasonable position until an unknowable number of people are armed, with little/no training in firearm safety or use, or training in tactical situations where they may need to actually engage an active shooter. I own a firearm and a concealed carry license. I rarely carry because I am not confident in my ability to react to the rare and myriad scenarios where I may need to use the weapon.
An older man walked into a restaurant last weekend with an open carry 9mm on his belt. I felt no threat from him, but wondered how easy it might be for a younger, stronger man to disarm him.
An older man walked into a restaurant last weekend with an open carry 9mm on his belt. I felt no threat from him, but wondered how easy it might be for a younger, stronger man to disarm him.
8
What was the ethnicity of the older man openly carrying a gun, around whom you felt safe? I'm guessing he wasn't Black.
I would definitely feel threatened by any stranger openly carrying a gun, regardless of ethnicity - how on earth am I supposed to know the difference between a "good" guy with a gun and a "bad" one? In my state, we've already had two mass murders (not counting the Ludlow Massacre) and that's two too many for me.
I would definitely feel threatened by any stranger openly carrying a gun, regardless of ethnicity - how on earth am I supposed to know the difference between a "good" guy with a gun and a "bad" one? In my state, we've already had two mass murders (not counting the Ludlow Massacre) and that's two too many for me.
1
While Congress and many state legislators and governors are happy to allow ordinary workers to be victimized by gun violence in their workplaces, the U.S. Capitol building and the state capitol buildings in which these legislators work are secured gun-free zones. Paid for by taxpayers. If these legislators and governors think guns everywhere is such a great idea, why do they forcibly exclude guns from their own workplaces? This fact should receive greater attention in the gun debate.
28
Our lawmakers evidently are not constrained by the threat of having to live under the laws they enact for us.
Despite the continued attempts to whip up hysteria about the "epidemic" of violence, the firearm homicide rate is actually one of our rare societal success stories - a definite trend of longterm improvement - it has fallen around 50% since peaking in the early 1990's. This while the number of people legally carrying concealed weapons has risen dramatically.
Does that prove causality? Of course not, but gun alarmists don't even attempt to explain the phenomenon, they just ignore it. And focus on banning scary looking "assault" weapons even though the number of people killed by any type of long gun is fewer than the number killed with blunt instruments...
Sure, the prospect of mass shootings is unnerving, but your chances of being the victim in one are on a par with being struck by lightning.
And while there is certainly no guarantee that the presence of armed citizens will always be able to stop an active shooter it doesn't help the credibility of gun control advocates at all when they claim that it never happens as there are documented situations where this has occurred. In the Charleston shooting the shooter reloaded five times! The idea that there would have been no opportunity for an armed individual to stop him is ludicrous.
Simply, my right to self defense trumps your right to feel comfortable.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
Does that prove causality? Of course not, but gun alarmists don't even attempt to explain the phenomenon, they just ignore it. And focus on banning scary looking "assault" weapons even though the number of people killed by any type of long gun is fewer than the number killed with blunt instruments...
Sure, the prospect of mass shootings is unnerving, but your chances of being the victim in one are on a par with being struck by lightning.
And while there is certainly no guarantee that the presence of armed citizens will always be able to stop an active shooter it doesn't help the credibility of gun control advocates at all when they claim that it never happens as there are documented situations where this has occurred. In the Charleston shooting the shooter reloaded five times! The idea that there would have been no opportunity for an armed individual to stop him is ludicrous.
Simply, my right to self defense trumps your right to feel comfortable.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-sinc...
3
Here we have an example of the narcissism fertilized by the born with a gun and armed till you abuse it firearms policy of the US.
3
And my right to go about my business without fear of being shot by you, for whatever reason you concoct, or anyone else with a gun, trumps your right to "self defense".
1
You certainly make gun ownership look paranoid by pointing out how unlikely it is to be attacked on the street by gunmen.
1
I was raised in California, but my father had an interest in guns, so I grew up with them in the house. He taught us a healthy respect for deadly weapons, and we didn't fool around with them. Now I live in rural Texas, and virtually every household out here has guns. The neighbors, a broad-spectrum mix of ages, races, and economic circumstances are, by and large, a responsible bunch - not a murderer among them. Property crime is quite low in this area, and I surmise that a general knowledge that people here have guns that they know how to use is a strong deterrent, in circumstances that would otherwise be quite tempting to a criminal, i.e., low population density. Does that make this 57 year old, 122 lb female living on 40 acres feel safer when she is alone? Yes, it does; that, and the fact that neighbors keep an eye out for each other. And, no, a baseball bat will not provide the same protection. I would probably feel differently if I lived in NYC, where I could expect a rapid police response.
I've never been an NRA member, and would like to see sensible limits on gun ownership, mandatory instruction, etc., but until gun control advocates recognize the extremists in their own ranks, I'm afraid the status quo will prevail. Gun owners are not all conservative, bible-toting, mental deficients with sexual inadequacies.
I've never been an NRA member, and would like to see sensible limits on gun ownership, mandatory instruction, etc., but until gun control advocates recognize the extremists in their own ranks, I'm afraid the status quo will prevail. Gun owners are not all conservative, bible-toting, mental deficients with sexual inadequacies.
7
"Gun owners are not all conservative, bible-toting, mental deficients with sexual inadequacies." Unfortunately, we do have to worry a lot about those who *are* conservative, bible-toting, mental deficients with sexual inadequacies. You see, just about anyone can get his or her hands on a gun and buy all the ammo he or she wants. Do you not see a problem with that?
I'll take a gun control extremist over a gun nut extremist any day.
I'll take a gun control extremist over a gun nut extremist any day.
27
One aspect of the 2nd Amendment debate troubles me. (Note: I do not accept Scalia's interpretation of it. To me it was intended to address the role of militias in a country that once had depended on them for defense but was transitioning to a permanent national armed force. However, that's not the part that bothers me.)
Accepting arguendo that the 2nd Amendment protects personal gun ownership, why would so many ordinary people in today's world think that it would be a good idea for them, personally to own and to walk around with a gun? As the article demonstrates, in most cases, it is usually *not* a good idea at all, and why should it be? Simply because something is constitutionally protected, it is not necessarily a good idea for every person and in every situation.
I believe that the kind of thinking that leads people to buy guns because they believe Constitution protects their right to do so is an abuse of the Constitution. People who think that way are treating the Constitution as a sacred text rather than what it is: basically a charter laying out ways for a handful of States to coexist in a federal structure.
The idea that the Constitution is a sacred text—some have even said they believe it to be divinely inspired—is at the root of a great deal of trouble in our country.
Accepting arguendo that the 2nd Amendment protects personal gun ownership, why would so many ordinary people in today's world think that it would be a good idea for them, personally to own and to walk around with a gun? As the article demonstrates, in most cases, it is usually *not* a good idea at all, and why should it be? Simply because something is constitutionally protected, it is not necessarily a good idea for every person and in every situation.
I believe that the kind of thinking that leads people to buy guns because they believe Constitution protects their right to do so is an abuse of the Constitution. People who think that way are treating the Constitution as a sacred text rather than what it is: basically a charter laying out ways for a handful of States to coexist in a federal structure.
The idea that the Constitution is a sacred text—some have even said they believe it to be divinely inspired—is at the root of a great deal of trouble in our country.
27
"The idea that the Constitution is a sacred text—some have even said they believe it to be divinely inspired—is at the root of a great deal of trouble in our country."
I couldn't agree with you more. However, some believe that it is our duty which extends far beyond any law made by man to be prepared to protect ourselves, our family, community and nation. To fulfill this duty, the idea of militias(abled body men of the community) was constructed. The constitution points this out this fact,
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State".
And to protect the ability of these militias to be able to fulfill their duty, it is proclaimed that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
In other words, we preserve our right to be armed in order to fulfill our duties. One of which is to be ready to defend the state.
You may say that right recognized by the second amendment is enshrined in that document because of the recognition of the need of a strong and ready militia. But the right that is recognized is much more broad than you wish to recognize.
I couldn't agree with you more. However, some believe that it is our duty which extends far beyond any law made by man to be prepared to protect ourselves, our family, community and nation. To fulfill this duty, the idea of militias(abled body men of the community) was constructed. The constitution points this out this fact,
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State".
And to protect the ability of these militias to be able to fulfill their duty, it is proclaimed that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
In other words, we preserve our right to be armed in order to fulfill our duties. One of which is to be ready to defend the state.
You may say that right recognized by the second amendment is enshrined in that document because of the recognition of the need of a strong and ready militia. But the right that is recognized is much more broad than you wish to recognize.
1
The problem with articles like this is the it includes illegal gun ownership. For all we hear about the "waves of mass shootings" they account for about 1% of all murder. And the "most violent states" are usually that way because of ONE city. Louisiana has the highest murder rate in the country at 11 per 100,000 but New Orleans is in the high 30's so that completely skews the stats.
I carry a gun for personal protection because if something happens, I could be dead or severely injured by the time police arrive. I've owned and carried guns for 23 years now. No one has ever been injured by them and I genuinely hope I never have to use them
But, it's always better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it
I carry a gun for personal protection because if something happens, I could be dead or severely injured by the time police arrive. I've owned and carried guns for 23 years now. No one has ever been injured by them and I genuinely hope I never have to use them
But, it's always better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it
1
Greg, you hit the nail on the head already with your first paragraph already.
I am bothered, though, that the supposedly learned members of SCOTUS from the right - while declaring themselves as being originalists- utterly ignore the 'A well regulated militia' clause.
That said, I am quite sure that the Founding fathers are turning around in their graves because of one little comma in the second amendment, put their in the 18th century writing style when no punctuations rules existed, that now supposedly gives every Tom, Dick and Harry the 'right' to arm themselves with war like weaponry.
I am bothered, though, that the supposedly learned members of SCOTUS from the right - while declaring themselves as being originalists- utterly ignore the 'A well regulated militia' clause.
That said, I am quite sure that the Founding fathers are turning around in their graves because of one little comma in the second amendment, put their in the 18th century writing style when no punctuations rules existed, that now supposedly gives every Tom, Dick and Harry the 'right' to arm themselves with war like weaponry.
Unfortunately all of these articles in favor of common-sense gun controls are merely feel-good exercises for us liberals. The reality is that the NRA has just as much control over Congress as does Grover Norquists's "No New Taxes" pledge. It must be obvious now that those against gun control are not primarily hunters or sportsmen, they are people who feel they need to be armed against the U.S. government. Everything else is just window-dressing. While it is clearly a cynical view, I believe that those fighting the hardest to avoid significant gun control (especially anything which would let the government know who owns weapons) are those horrified by the changes in our society that have permitted a Black President, and a population in which straight White people are becoming a minority. As if gun ownership could turn back the clock and avoid the passing of time.
14
The fanatical love of guns, which puts the profits of the gun manufacturers above the health and safety of the gun owners' own children, is America's collective mental illness. Fortunately in two years I can afford to, and have the right to, retire in a small stable country where guns and the culture of violence they feed doesn't exist.
18
Please share which country!
We should mention two more specific gun-free zones - the Capitol and the Supreme Court Building which, in session,contain the very people who have made our plague of gun violence possible. Personally, I'd love to see both become places where guns are allowed again. You know, live what you preach.
On the morning of the Lafayette movie theatre shooting I was listening on NPR to a BBC reporter interviewing a local reporter who had been first on the scene of the incident. He asked her if gun violence was an issue in Louisiana. Oh yes she replied; many in the state would say that lives could have been saved if there had been armed patrons to take on the shooter. The incredulous BBC man asked how safe it would be to have a bunch of armed patrons firing their weapons in a crowded movie theatre in the dark? Thus we see the chasm between American ideas of what is rational and the sanity that prevails in other advanced societies.
On the morning of the Lafayette movie theatre shooting I was listening on NPR to a BBC reporter interviewing a local reporter who had been first on the scene of the incident. He asked her if gun violence was an issue in Louisiana. Oh yes she replied; many in the state would say that lives could have been saved if there had been armed patrons to take on the shooter. The incredulous BBC man asked how safe it would be to have a bunch of armed patrons firing their weapons in a crowded movie theatre in the dark? Thus we see the chasm between American ideas of what is rational and the sanity that prevails in other advanced societies.
49
Another safe zone may be any NRA venue.
People own guns and carry guns because it makes them feel good. It is an emotional not a rational impulse. Arguing with irrational people is pointless. On the flip side, the NRA completely understands this : they only need to validate the emotional impulse, and to sneer at the rational arguments - which are clearly only for sissies. Why do people feel good having guns despite the self-evidence fact that more guns means more reckless risk? I believe that at the bottom of this behavioral garbage heap is the desire for covert superiority. What is this feeling? Something along these lines: you all can talk and argue all you like, but I've got the gun, so I don't care what you say or what you think of my ignorance, of my inarticulate irrationality, because my gun ultimately wins every argument. In short, we are fostering a huge minority subculture of cowardly losers who compensate for their inferiority complexes by holding guns. This explains many things: the vicarious superiority of audiences watching guns in movies, the behavior of police who execute motorists who they stopped for minor traffic infractions but then fail to obey conmands, and it explains the complete lack of correlation between the shame and tragedy of Sandy Hook and the movement for gun control. Cowardice and inferiority feelings are at the bottom of this garbage heap. It's as simple as that.
42
The state of constant worry over extremely low probability events looks very bad for their mental health to me.
As an immigrant from Europe (the UK) and now a citizen, I couldn't agree more. The rampant radical individualism that says 'I' am paramount, no matter the damage to 'We' is at the root of the whole gun culture issue. Carrying a gun make sthe 'I' supreme - just as the above describes.
Two other gun -free zones Mr. Egan forgot to mention - the halls of Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court building. No wonder neither institution has an appetite for reasonable gun control measures. I imagine if open carry was permitted in either the halls of Congress or in the Supreme Court building, there might be a change of heart.
28
The Missouri legislature pulled the same trick.
You might add any Federal building or courthouse. It is ironic that very people who oppose any restrictions on guns get to work in the very places where guns are totally restricted.
Another gun-free zone is the offices of the NRA.
Wonder what the NRA knows that other Americans don't.
Wonder what the NRA knows that other Americans don't.
1
These disturbing statistics are validated by a 2011 study by researchers of the Harvard School of Public Health and UCLA School of Public Health, a study which while based on earlier data is consistent with more recent trends. What is even more disturbing: that same study found that, while the United States had a homicide rate 6.9 times higher than those in the other high-income countries, driven by a firearm homicide rate that was 19.5 times higher than those in the other high-income countries, for "15 year olds to 24 year olds, the firearm homicide rate in the United States was 42.7 times higher than in the other countries." That's right-- young people in America are more than 40 times more likely to commit murder with a gun than in other higher income countries. Where is the outrage for this disturbing situation?
37
There is only one primary solution to the problem...
Goal: To prevent mass shooting deaths
Primary Solution: Have gun free zones. Use X-rays and Radar Scanners to detect metal and plastic guns at the entrance of all areas which have more than 20 people. These gun free zones will include Schools, Shopping Malls, Courts, Offices.
Secondary solution:
1 To invest more in mental health clinics: This is required to help people with mental health issues
2 To have background checks. Background checks help only to a small extent by preventing risky people from purchasing guns. But this does not prevent people from using guns which are already there. Also if someone steals a gun from existing gun owner it cant be tracked in the background check database.
3 Homeowners: Elderly people have option to keep gun in their house. That is their only option to protect themselves if any break in happens
God bless America
Goal: To prevent mass shooting deaths
Primary Solution: Have gun free zones. Use X-rays and Radar Scanners to detect metal and plastic guns at the entrance of all areas which have more than 20 people. These gun free zones will include Schools, Shopping Malls, Courts, Offices.
Secondary solution:
1 To invest more in mental health clinics: This is required to help people with mental health issues
2 To have background checks. Background checks help only to a small extent by preventing risky people from purchasing guns. But this does not prevent people from using guns which are already there. Also if someone steals a gun from existing gun owner it cant be tracked in the background check database.
3 Homeowners: Elderly people have option to keep gun in their house. That is their only option to protect themselves if any break in happens
God bless America
3
So what does God pack by way of a firearm?
In his view, echoing that of the fanatics who own the Republican Party by intimidation, everyone should be armed, everywhere. Once a shooting starts, the bad guy with the gun will be killed by the good guy with the gun, somehow able to get a draw on the shooter in a darkened theater, or behind a pew in church.
This scenario almost never happens.
===================
Actually, Mr. Egan, a study by the Centers for Disease Control issued in 2013 says you are completely incorrect:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=
But who wants to look at facts and criminology studies when you are in the middle of an emotional rant.
This scenario almost never happens.
===================
Actually, Mr. Egan, a study by the Centers for Disease Control issued in 2013 says you are completely incorrect:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=
But who wants to look at facts and criminology studies when you are in the middle of an emotional rant.
3
Unfortunately, a significant portion of these defensive gun uses are made in error, e.g. the man with Alzheimers who was murdered by a shot fired by a man from inside his home because he mistakenly assumed the accidental trespasser on his property had malignant intent. The majority of the defensive "stand your ground" killings in Florida and other states are committed by men who have prior gun convictions. Numbers are shallow, do not offer solutions. We must dig deeper if we truly want to prevent innocent deaths.
21
So this is what the study, which was not, in fact conducted by the CDC, but did receive some funding from the CDC, actually says
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all ... survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 ... violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field.
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all ... survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 ... violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field.
6
What the NAP study actually saysis that the estimates from various studies and surveys vary incredibly widely, and that in fact we have no good, reliable statistics for defensive use of guns in the U.S.
2
Excellent article. Thank you for speaking out. It takes courage to go up against the heavily armed promoters of gun violence.
26
The 2nd ammendment folks who insist on a well organized militia should use those militia members to stand guard at schools, churches, and theaters to protect civilians from folks who are crazy and not so well organized but who can buy weapons due to our lax laws. What is the point of these well organized militias if they cant protect us?
Perhaps people should show a valid militia id card to be able to buy weapons. That seems like it conforms to the constitution.
Perhaps people should show a valid militia id card to be able to buy weapons. That seems like it conforms to the constitution.
21
I don't have a problem with states establishing proper militias.
That does not do away with/override the fact that 44 of 50 state
constitutions (including Connecticut's) recognize the right to own weapons as an individual right - a fact that gun alarmists seem to be ignorant of, or willingly ignore:
Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17)
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm
That does not do away with/override the fact that 44 of 50 state
constitutions (including Connecticut's) recognize the right to own weapons as an individual right - a fact that gun alarmists seem to be ignorant of, or willingly ignore:
Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17)
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm
2
You mean like the idiot with the AR-15 who accidentally fired it while "guarding" a military recruitment office? Oh yes, we really need more of that!
There are safe places but consider also safe owners. Not mentioned in articles about the gun menace are gun owners who own guns for hunting. They carry their guns only during the hunting season. They are not gun-crazy or gun vigilantes. Hunters who I've met keep guns in secure storage when not engaged in hunting. The gun owners needing to pack heat in a restaurant or obtaining a gun illegally to be used with illegal intent are vastly different kinds of gun owners with more significant mental health issues than the hunter who carefully stows his guns when not hunting, using it only for that purpose.
7
Another safe place, of course, is the N.R.A. convention. There's a lot of rhetoric about guns making law-abiding citizens safer, but the N.R.A. doesn't believe it -- as the TIMES reported, they require that firing pins be removed from all guns at their convention. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/10/opinion/no-firing-pins-please-as-the-n....
16
Gun laws have become an important item on my daughter's list of what to look at when considering college application.
16
Mr Egan
You are factually incorrect. California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country but according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report we had 510 1,743 homicides in 2013. 510 of which were not gun related. To put that in context the 510 non gun related homicides is more than the combined total except for Texas (1,133) New York (648) Michigan (625) Pennsylvania (594) and Georgia (534) How do you explain that?
Are you aware that the number of mass shootings dropped from 42 in the 1990's to 28 in the 2000's?
Of the last 67 mass sho0otings 55 of the shooters had purchased their guns legally.
In 2010 the US imported firearms from these countries
Brazil 526,011 handguns 46,24 rifles 169,136 shotguns
Austria 431,118 2,759 497
Italy 129,509 16,393 139,181
Germany230,477 23,647 2,364
Croatia 239,021
Canada 154,953
Russia 90,854
You are factually incorrect. California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country but according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report we had 510 1,743 homicides in 2013. 510 of which were not gun related. To put that in context the 510 non gun related homicides is more than the combined total except for Texas (1,133) New York (648) Michigan (625) Pennsylvania (594) and Georgia (534) How do you explain that?
Are you aware that the number of mass shootings dropped from 42 in the 1990's to 28 in the 2000's?
Of the last 67 mass sho0otings 55 of the shooters had purchased their guns legally.
In 2010 the US imported firearms from these countries
Brazil 526,011 handguns 46,24 rifles 169,136 shotguns
Austria 431,118 2,759 497
Italy 129,509 16,393 139,181
Germany230,477 23,647 2,364
Croatia 239,021
Canada 154,953
Russia 90,854
3
God has issued a recall... you'll want to return to be restitched.
1
What are the per capita gun murder rates in those states? California just happens to be the most populous state in the land, by a good margin.
"Of the last 67 mass sho0otings 55 of the shooters had purchased their guns legally"
Couldn't have made a better argument myself for why we need to regulate and strictly limit gun purchases.
"Of the last 67 mass sho0otings 55 of the shooters had purchased their guns legally"
Couldn't have made a better argument myself for why we need to regulate and strictly limit gun purchases.
As long as guns can be used as a political tool, by the Republican Party to divide the country and gain votes from a parinoid base, there will purposely be no solution to this national plague.
A good first step to innoculate this country against disease is to shine a bright light on the people who fan the flames of the paranoia feeding this national disgrace. Name politicians, political parties and media outlets (Fox News) that allow the deaths of thousands of Americans to advance their political goals. Stop buying into the false claim of liberal bias. It is not a bias to call out a politician, political partyor media outlet, when they are so wrong that is damaging the nation.
A good first step to innoculate this country against disease is to shine a bright light on the people who fan the flames of the paranoia feeding this national disgrace. Name politicians, political parties and media outlets (Fox News) that allow the deaths of thousands of Americans to advance their political goals. Stop buying into the false claim of liberal bias. It is not a bias to call out a politician, political partyor media outlet, when they are so wrong that is damaging the nation.
15
I'll believe Rick Perry and his ilk aren't pandering hypocrites when they advocate concealed carry in legislative and government buildings, including their own offices. Won't that make them safer?
13
Cities like Chicago with stringent gun laws are not safer and in fact have high numbers of shootings. Gangs, mentally ill and criminals are the offenders. Cities and states do not report on a timely basis to the Fbi of convictions or mental incarcerations. Law abiding licensed gun owners are not causing these numerous murders and shooting. Gun purchases have increased nationally. Mr Egan's comment that fewer people own guns is fallacious. Fearfull of the Obama administration trouncing on the second amendment citizens are rushing out to buy guns . They want to protect themselves and their loved ones from the crazies and armed criminals who are rarely licensed.More people are killed daily by autos than guns. There are ample laws to protect us. People who falsely make claims on background checks are NOT being prosecuted. Properly licensed and trained gun owners are not the problem but a target of uninformed people like Mr. Eagan.
4
Don't you get tired of waiting for Obama to come for your guns? He is running out of time to do so. Since Obama has really done nothing about guns during his Presidency maybe, just maybe it is not a priority and Obama will leave office with guns laws bein g pretty much the same as when he was sworn in. Maybe when Jade helm ends and the citizens of Bastrop still have their guns the real crazies ( gun absolutists) will realize that Democrats know anti gun is not a winning issue. Guns look quite different to an urban family whose member was shot in a drive by or un intended shooting and to a rural family who have always had guns as a vital tool. Again two Americas.
1
The problem with Chicago's enforcing their gun laws is that anyone can wander across the boarder into Indiana to a gun show, purchase guns without any background check ad go home and sell them on the street corner. An island of reason can not succeed surrounded by a sea of the irrational
The two Americas are separated by mental health and guns. Of the 33,000 Americans who die from gun shots every year about 22,000 or 2/3rds are suicides. Mass shootings are rare. And mass shootings may also be rooted in mental illness. Most shootings involve family or friends or people from the same race color socioeconomic educational community caste class.
7
When Perry suggested that other armed people being the DARK theater would have been the answer,he proved that Trump actually got something right;that those eye glasses make Perry only LOOK smart.Because Perry's suggestion is the definition of asinine.
In the wake of this latest theater shooting I received last weekend a Facebook posting from a niece stating that when she sends her 10 year old sun to school she doesn't fear terrorists will kill,but some deranged,armed individual.Which means that her right to be free of such fears must be sacrificed to the NRA's insistence that we be the national equivelant to Tombstone.All because of an amendment ratified in the age of slow loading,slow firing flintlocks,by men who couldn't imagine today's rapid firing semi-automatics such as the ones used in the recent mass shootings.
Even Blue states like mine aren't entirely free of the more insane aspects of our gun culture,for Washington,my state,allows open carry of guns,except in bars.But the more asinine gun advocates want to extent open carry to bars.What could go wrong with that ? Not is anyone favoring such an idea too Perry like to possess guns,they need to be placed in a psychiatric facility,fast,for everyone's safety.Along with rights there are responsibilities.And recent events show that our nation's gun culture has become so irresponsible as to have invalidate it's right to bear arms.
In the wake of this latest theater shooting I received last weekend a Facebook posting from a niece stating that when she sends her 10 year old sun to school she doesn't fear terrorists will kill,but some deranged,armed individual.Which means that her right to be free of such fears must be sacrificed to the NRA's insistence that we be the national equivelant to Tombstone.All because of an amendment ratified in the age of slow loading,slow firing flintlocks,by men who couldn't imagine today's rapid firing semi-automatics such as the ones used in the recent mass shootings.
Even Blue states like mine aren't entirely free of the more insane aspects of our gun culture,for Washington,my state,allows open carry of guns,except in bars.But the more asinine gun advocates want to extent open carry to bars.What could go wrong with that ? Not is anyone favoring such an idea too Perry like to possess guns,they need to be placed in a psychiatric facility,fast,for everyone's safety.Along with rights there are responsibilities.And recent events show that our nation's gun culture has become so irresponsible as to have invalidate it's right to bear arms.
3
No answer, just a few questions. What in our society is feeding the gun violence? What attracts the young (including some Americans) to the Islamic
State? Why is there the fanaticism about the 2nd Amendment? If it's fear, fear of what? Are these trends some perverted search for values?
State? Why is there the fanaticism about the 2nd Amendment? If it's fear, fear of what? Are these trends some perverted search for values?
5
It is time to repeal the Second Amendment. It no longer helps to provide for the common defense or for domestic tranquility. There is no foreign entity that kills as many Americans every day as guns. This is the true threat to US .
10
Doesn't need to be repealed, but does need to be re-interpreted to stress the modifying clause "A well regulated militia ..." The meaning of "well regulated" seems clear on it's face and certainly should not be read as "un-regulated" or as somehow implying an individual right that is also un-regulated. Regulation is not equivalent to abridgement, a point apparently lost on the "textualists" currently sitting on SCOTUS.
It is time to regulate militias for the safety and liberty of the unarmed, as provided for in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.
If you want to cut unnecessary deaths in this country, start with tobacco, then alcohol, and then hospitals as mistakes in medication kill far more people than guns ever do by a huge margin.
1
Tim Egan references Rick Perry: "In his view, echoing that of the fanatics who own the Republican Party by intimidation, everyone should be armed, everywhere. Once a shooting starts, the bad guy with the gun will be killed by the good guy with the gun, somehow able to get a draw on the shooter in a darkened theater, or behind a pew in church." Many of us were and are still being raised with the myth that there is a big, good, obvious hero/rescuer with a gun out there ever at the ready to disarm and kill the bad guy. Of course, many of those who fire on people in crowds think they are the good guy firing on the proverbial bad guy and sometimes the bad guy is some metaphoric "other." As a culture, we don't value diversity, tolerance and/or life. We value idealized notions of righteousness - that feels a lot more personally powerful than self-reflective peace.
2
It's about time we have a discussion about the gun insanity that pervades the U.S. We wait for the "massacre of the week", then the next one... I sure wish I had emigrated to Canada or Australia when younger. Now I'm old and it's too late. I find I'm doing things like setting up a home theater so I don't have to go to the movies any more. Sporting event? Can't stand the lines as we go through security and are searched. I weep for the future generations.
6
Many of the mall cops at Mall of America are in fact just plain cops -- off-duty police officers from Bloomington, Minneapolis and surrounding communities. It's no wonder that the MOA places more confidence in its mall cops than in an armed militia.
1
Timothy must be living in a bubble. The nations airports are not gun free zones. A recent test showed that the TSA completely fails at the task of keeping weapons including firearms off planes. This resulted in the resignation of the TSA director in June. Are we to assume that the sports stadiums are doing a better job?
Your claim that one is less likely to be shot in areas of the country with tighter firearm restrictions is laughable to anyone with a pulse and an ability to discern. The city of Chicago is clearly irrefutable evidence to the contrary of Tim's absurd assertion, never mind that the article he cited article to support his claims tells us that Washington, DC has the highest deaths by guns per capita. DC is neither a gun friendly zone, nor is it in the south.
We are also asked to believe that gun ownership is in decline when US manufacturers are hitting record sales numbers and open carry permit applications are on the rise.
And finally, if you Google search, "person stops would be mass shooter" you will see many reports by reputable news sources, including one just three days ago, of heroes in action with their guns.
I don't know about gun free zones, but I found a truth free zone.
Your claim that one is less likely to be shot in areas of the country with tighter firearm restrictions is laughable to anyone with a pulse and an ability to discern. The city of Chicago is clearly irrefutable evidence to the contrary of Tim's absurd assertion, never mind that the article he cited article to support his claims tells us that Washington, DC has the highest deaths by guns per capita. DC is neither a gun friendly zone, nor is it in the south.
We are also asked to believe that gun ownership is in decline when US manufacturers are hitting record sales numbers and open carry permit applications are on the rise.
And finally, if you Google search, "person stops would be mass shooter" you will see many reports by reputable news sources, including one just three days ago, of heroes in action with their guns.
I don't know about gun free zones, but I found a truth free zone.
3
If you read the accounts of these persons who stop shooters, in most cases it is an off-duty or retired police officer or other person with years of training.These heroes were merely doing what came naturally or they were trained for when confronted with immediate danger. And I commend them. But allowing just the usual gun toting infant with a little manhood to get involved is a recipe for disaster. It will happen eventually, but the story of innocents being killed by a supposed vigilante will be altered by the gun lobby to prevent any backlash.
6
Welcome to the truth free zone. You fit right in.
"It will happen eventually..". Well said.
"It will happen eventually..". Well said.
Additional gun-free zones are the halls of Congress and state legislatures whose occupants have banned guns from their workplaces but voted repeatedly to allow guns everywhere else. Why are their lives more important than ours?
11
Robin Hood, Billy the Kid, the Colt Pacifier, the tamers of the West... We live and die by our myths.
1
What we need, I'm afraid, is for an armed citizen to attempt to stop a mass murderer, and merely add to the slaughter by hitting innocent bystanders. Only then we'll we be able to start REALLY examining the central myth of the NRA, and western folklore, that the only solution to bad men with guns is good men with guns. In every case that I can recall, the perpetrator of a mass killing would have failed a good background check, and the "gun show" loophole needs to be closed. So without taking on the "live free or die" "stand your ground" ethos that much of the hinterland believes in, you might still make a dent in the body count with some rigorous examination of the psyche of gun buyers.
6
What would Jesus pack?
147
His bags, probably in utter despair.
"Blessed are the peacemakers".
The answer is obvious.
The answer is obvious.
A Colt .45 peacemeaker. (Sorry, I couldn't help it)
1
Although by force incomplete, a fairly accurate account of our violent demeanor, apparently not diminished by today's sophisticated living, where we are supposed to accept diversity, obey the laws, be nice to our neighbors, and mind our own business. The N.R.A., for instance, continues to operate blame-free, in spite of its call to arm citizens as if we were still in the 'wild west' and a colony trying to repel the British; all the while in the business of advertising the selling of arms to today's 'militia' (apparently everybody). The U.S. is seen by other civilized countries as a violent society, to stay away from, if life is valued for what it is, invaluable. What Obama said, once upon a time, that some gun owners do resent government in spite of its benefits, and holding tight to their guns and religion, may have some truth to it.
6
This gun-owner, who hunts and is trained to use a gun in a "tactical" situation, does not understand the paranoia of other gun-owners. I never carry a firearm except to hunt. I cannot stand the tactics of the NRA. Yet around here, in areas without any violent crime (rural and affluent suburban areas) you'd think the white folks are ready for a revolution.
And that is what I do fear: the firebrands of the Right suddenly refusing to pay taxes, putting up barricades, and trying to force the issue as they have done out west on the Bundy ranch. That *can* happen here.
And that is what I do fear: the firebrands of the Right suddenly refusing to pay taxes, putting up barricades, and trying to force the issue as they have done out west on the Bundy ranch. That *can* happen here.
4
What amazes me is the paranoia they create in otherwise normal people over the government coming to take away their guns. Ain't gonna happen, but some friends are apoplectic about Obama repealing the second amendment and forcing them to give up their guns. Talk about brainwashing your audience. It's ridiculous.
6
Obama is smart enough to realize that there is no chance of rounding up the 300 million firearms now in civilian hands. He has gone after ammunition; first with a scheme to have all "once fired" military brass shredded and sold off for a fraction of its value. The two senators from Montana (Democrats) put a quick halt to that. The administration's latest play is to simply buy billions of rounds for DHS and other agencies to restrict the supply available to the law abiding public. You might also ask why some many Federal agencies now have their own SWAT teams.
The study cited on state gun violence does not break down the statistics below the state level to include cities, rendering it misleading and useless. Illinois is listed as having low gun violence. It reality it is Chicago which has the tightest restrictions on gun ownership and a high rate of gun violence.
Where do all those guns in Chicago come from? From the areas that are more permissive
Bravo! So well stated, so well perceived. But one point is left out: the gun crazies want their guns not to thwart a would be bad guy shooter from killing others...they want to carry their guns to protect themselves. If a bad guy sees them wearing a gun, this bad guy will think twice about going after them. Ironically, as more people, including the bad guys, get guns and get to carry them with them, this increases the risk, and hence the rationale to carry a gun.
A vicious circle, more guns, leading to more threats, leading to more guns. Once the Supreme Court creatively altered the Second Amendment to include self protection with a gun at home, now it logically follows that self protection with a gun should be extended to outside the home. If self protection is a God given and universal right, and if danger can appear anywhere, and if a gun is a valid tool for self protection, then as the Beatles sang, guns will be "Here, There, Everywhere."
A vicious circle, more guns, leading to more threats, leading to more guns. Once the Supreme Court creatively altered the Second Amendment to include self protection with a gun at home, now it logically follows that self protection with a gun should be extended to outside the home. If self protection is a God given and universal right, and if danger can appear anywhere, and if a gun is a valid tool for self protection, then as the Beatles sang, guns will be "Here, There, Everywhere."
4
The main reason we suffer so much by comparison with other advanced countries is that way too many American buy into the idiotic mantra of the NRA: " a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun". Seldom happens. What does happen is that of the hundred million "Good guys with a gun" tens of thousands or hundred of thousands sell or give their guns to "bad guys". In those other countries, the good guys don't have guns to sell.
6
Can we please have a moratorium on the use of the word "feckless?"
Once that is achieved maybe we can also have a moratorium on gun purchases. Or maybe just make it so that MEN can't buy guns. Also, let's keep up the pressure for video cameras on policeman, but also give them all a substantial raise.
Once that is achieved maybe we can also have a moratorium on gun purchases. Or maybe just make it so that MEN can't buy guns. Also, let's keep up the pressure for video cameras on policeman, but also give them all a substantial raise.
3
If you really to cut violence, look closely at who is doing these senseless shootings. You can go back decades and there is one common thread; not gender, not age, and not ethnicity. No, all these high profile shooters were Democrats!
Ergo, the solution is to bar Democrats from possessing guns.
Ergo, the solution is to bar Democrats from possessing guns.
"...gun ownership is declining over all in the United States..."
If the reporting of gun ownership has been declining, might that not have something to do with the incessant calls for universal background checks, national gun registries, and even gun confiscation by legal authorities?
http://www.inquisitr.com/1511226/gun-confiscation-just-became-legal-in-c...
If the reporting of gun ownership has been declining, might that not have something to do with the incessant calls for universal background checks, national gun registries, and even gun confiscation by legal authorities?
http://www.inquisitr.com/1511226/gun-confiscation-just-became-legal-in-c...
I don't own a gun. I feel that these issues need to be resolved at local level and not by a dictate from the Federal level. If the citizens of a city or state want to be gun free that is there prerogative.
I have always wondered about the clout of NRA . I find that the NRA influence comes out of the citizens of this country and not a few men on its board. ( I don't know if there are any women on the board)
As to the violent south, people are voting with there feet, migrating from the peaceful north !!
I have always wondered about the clout of NRA . I find that the NRA influence comes out of the citizens of this country and not a few men on its board. ( I don't know if there are any women on the board)
As to the violent south, people are voting with there feet, migrating from the peaceful north !!
2
That's an absurd approach that's doomed to fail. Nobody lives local. We all travel from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I live in one county, work in a second county, and shop in two other counties, all within the same state. It makes sense to you that each county have its own gun ownership rules?
What I experience now is more a deep malaise that I am forever to be in danger from guns and there is nothing I can do about it. I see the outrage over the gunning down of Cecile the lion in Africa and wonder if that is the outrage seeping out of the corners of America where some of us are still not in favor of going back to the old West of the shootouts and innocent dead where everyone was armed. I despise guns and everything that goes with them including the hunting of innocent animals for sport. I long for the day when we are free from the gun nuts and go back to having a normal country.
6
More pointedly, we have another two Americas. The largely white, middle class and upper middle class areas of this nation where even mass shootings are deplorable news, but news only. And the poorer urban and old-suburb areas of this country where you get the news by opening the window at night.
5
Fine, Tim Egan, your metaphor of waves of mass shootings constantly hitting the American ship of state. Extraordinary mass shootings have now become ordinary. Demented shooters go where Americans gather, schools, colleges, malls, theatres, churches. Gun-owners are everywhere. If one region can be deemed the most violent in America, it's the US South. And Rick Perry running for the GOP nomination for POTUS from Texas posits that everyone should be armed - that gun-free zones are a bad idea. It is a bad idea that he is running for POTUS, but happily there are so many other Tea Party folk racing for the RNC's nod a year from now, that his candidacy is already toast. Rick Perry called the Charleston Massacre of 9 praying black folk in Mother Emanuel AME Church by a young white supremacist "an accident". Gun free zones aren't gun-free. They are meccas for concealed-carry weapons. This recent reality of cops killing innocent black men ("Driving While Black") at traffic stops every week or so, is as horrific in our society as the Second Amendment to the Constitution has proven to be. Written in 1789, referring to one-bullet, muzzle-loaded muskets, hideously outdated - assiduously clung to by the NRA and its klingons (addicts) - should be repealed as the 13th Amendment repealed slavery (1865), as the 19th Amendment permitted women to vote (1920) and as the 21st amendment repealed Prohibition (1933). America - e pluribus unum - is irreparably devastated by gun violence.
4
I find it the height of irony that the party of Abraham Lincoln wants to have more guns in theaters.
12
The usual hyperbole about guns and safety. We all know that more laws deter criminal activity. That's why NYC no longer needs policemen and women patrolling its streets. Ever since New York outlawed drugs and unlicensed forearms, the crime rate has fallen to zero.
Now let's talk about so-called free-fire zones, another NYT invention. I have lived most of my adult life in upstate NY and Maine. Now, where would I feel less comfortable walking to my car late at night? Pittsford, NY, Kennebunkport, ME, or NYC? Hmmmm, that's a tough one.
One year in Maine, I decided to take up deer hunting with a large caliber pistol. So I bought one in the usual manner- went to a licensed firearms dealer, waited for the computerized background check, earnest discussion with the clerk about the best ammo for target practice vs. hunting, and done. No arbitrary pistol license necessary, just a government-issued ID and no criminal history. I then proceeded directly to my town's police station to purchase the annual hunting license.
While there, I asked the police chief if I would be violating any game laws if while afield, I kept my holstered pistol under my hunting coat to protect it from the usual November sleet, ice and snow. He thought about it for a moment, then opened his desk drawer and took out a concealed pistol permit, which he signed and handed to me. "That should take care of it," he advised. "You can show that to the warden if he asks."
In Maine, that's called common sense.
Now let's talk about so-called free-fire zones, another NYT invention. I have lived most of my adult life in upstate NY and Maine. Now, where would I feel less comfortable walking to my car late at night? Pittsford, NY, Kennebunkport, ME, or NYC? Hmmmm, that's a tough one.
One year in Maine, I decided to take up deer hunting with a large caliber pistol. So I bought one in the usual manner- went to a licensed firearms dealer, waited for the computerized background check, earnest discussion with the clerk about the best ammo for target practice vs. hunting, and done. No arbitrary pistol license necessary, just a government-issued ID and no criminal history. I then proceeded directly to my town's police station to purchase the annual hunting license.
While there, I asked the police chief if I would be violating any game laws if while afield, I kept my holstered pistol under my hunting coat to protect it from the usual November sleet, ice and snow. He thought about it for a moment, then opened his desk drawer and took out a concealed pistol permit, which he signed and handed to me. "That should take care of it," he advised. "You can show that to the warden if he asks."
In Maine, that's called common sense.
4
I feel more comfortable walking to my car late at night in NYC compared to dark small towns like Pittsford.
In fact, in 12 years of living in NYC I have never even come close to being threatened by a gun, and I do not live in one of the more expensive neighborhoods.
What you call common sense is the exact opposite to me. Why even bring a pistol?
In fact, in 12 years of living in NYC I have never even come close to being threatened by a gun, and I do not live in one of the more expensive neighborhoods.
What you call common sense is the exact opposite to me. Why even bring a pistol?
Predominantly rural state.
A little different from living in the Greater Metropolitan Area.
Though I must note that NYC is likely as safe as Pittsford ... though Kennebunkport, where the Bush family often resides, no doubt has private security to complement its state and local police.
A little different from living in the Greater Metropolitan Area.
Though I must note that NYC is likely as safe as Pittsford ... though Kennebunkport, where the Bush family often resides, no doubt has private security to complement its state and local police.
Yeah, but you weren't hunting deer in a multiplex movie theater, school, or church.
Texas has recently become an "Open Carry" state although we are still new at it. A major hamburger stand, Whataburger, recently announced that it would ban "Open Carry" from its restaurants. That at least tells me there is one place I can have a hamburger in this state. It is my own personal decision that I will not do business with any store, restaurant or movie theatre which allows "Open Carry" and I will leave any establishment if I see guns anywhere. It is interesting to note that our state legislators, when discussing this issue, were so frightened about the actions of the proponents that they had " panic buttons" installed at their desks. But the rest of us--we are on our own.
5
This is somewhat off topic but something I personally find disconcerting. And maybe others do too. It's the fact that while we decry waves of mass shootings and violence in our culture we at the same time appear obsessed with violent (and sexualized) entertainment. And that includes movies, TV shows, and gruesome videos. Consider, also, the apparent popularity of prison shows that get a big audience for MSNBC and now CNN wanting a share of that audience with its "Death Row Stories." And toss into that mix news reporting that focuses infinitum on the nitty-gritty of humans behaving badly. Of course no one knows for sure if there is a cause and affect relationship between what we focus on and how we overall behave. And most who turn to any of that for enterytainment, don't act out. Yet, I believe there are those who are influenced. Especially some with untreated mental illness who commit copy crimes and perhaps some on the outskirts of society who are powerless, fearful, and insecure and who might be influenced to pick up a gun or two to achieve a sense of power and influence. Therefore, in our attempts to stem the tide of violence, I believe it might be wise to examine the impact, if any, on what our society uses for entertainment and focuses on and acts of violence.
22
"violent (and sexualized) entertainment"
Violent and sexualized are two completely different facets of entertainment, as violence and sexuality are two different facets of life. One can even argue that they are polar opposites (you know, make love, not war, etc.) I think that to conflate the two as somehow related misses the point when it comes to violence: I am unaware of any studies that show that sexualized (in your words) entertainment leads to increased gun violence.
Violent and sexualized are two completely different facets of entertainment, as violence and sexuality are two different facets of life. One can even argue that they are polar opposites (you know, make love, not war, etc.) I think that to conflate the two as somehow related misses the point when it comes to violence: I am unaware of any studies that show that sexualized (in your words) entertainment leads to increased gun violence.
1
There is so much propaganda attacking Hollywood for being liberal, but what have movie, television, and, now, games, taught us for decades? That that world is divided into heroes and villains, that it is okay for heroes to do anything necessary to accomplish their good ends, and that villains will always be villainous, and the only way to deal with them is to kill them. That respecting the rule of law, the rights of the accused, etc., is always a bad thing to do when dealing with villains. Blow them away the first chance you get -- if you don't shoot first you'll be dead.
This glorification of violence goes on relentlessly in our media. (Not to mention blatant sexism, and somewhat less blatant racism.) Trust no one, fear everyone, keep you gun handy, etc. etc. etc.
Yet it is like pornography. It sells. And I don't favor censorship. I only wish this manichean world view was eschewed by more movie-makers and story-tellers, and that we, as the purchasers of these entertainments, would not encourage this.
This glorification of violence goes on relentlessly in our media. (Not to mention blatant sexism, and somewhat less blatant racism.) Trust no one, fear everyone, keep you gun handy, etc. etc. etc.
Yet it is like pornography. It sells. And I don't favor censorship. I only wish this manichean world view was eschewed by more movie-makers and story-tellers, and that we, as the purchasers of these entertainments, would not encourage this.
1
I want more, many more, columns and letters to editors around this nation. Nothing will happen until the public becomes more than temporarily annoyed. Egan needs to be encouraged and supported by more of our statements and actions. Letters to paid legislators is one thing and a necessary thing. Public shaming and outrage is another.
There's one more safe place to mention: the capitol steps in every state of this nation. Although I'm glad that these statesmen and women are safe, I'm hoping there's room within those halls for the rest of our citizens.
There's one more safe place to mention: the capitol steps in every state of this nation. Although I'm glad that these statesmen and women are safe, I'm hoping there's room within those halls for the rest of our citizens.
18
Umm, there are citizens with guns in a number of state capitols - doesn't that mean they must be dangerous, too?
Oregonians and Texans, among others, don't appear to be having problems with the practice.
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/gun_rights_advocate...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/us/guns-get-a-pass-at-texas-capitol.html
Oregonians and Texans, among others, don't appear to be having problems with the practice.
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/gun_rights_advocate...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/us/guns-get-a-pass-at-texas-capitol.html
And a person cannot get anywhere near the Supreme Court, gun or no gun. Harassing innocent women at abortion clinics, fine, go ahead, if you have a gun with you and get really upset with these women, well.....
17
Many of my overseas friends don't want to visit anymore, largely because of our gun violence and the resulting fear and lack of freedom. We get a disproportionate number of thuggish, racist and rude police bullies because of our gun violence. Other western countries get more polite, well-educated, smiling police because they're not afraid of being shot. What a huge price we pay for our NRA-owned government. I am ashamed and I miss the freedom I feel when I travel.
16
Yes, especially if they are English. They are too busy dodging knife attacks in London to visit.
All that will happen is that movie theatres will slowly shut down as they cannot afford the insurance, guards, and law suits.
Our attachment to our guns will narrow our lives.
Guns are also a threat to freedom of speech, as who wants to argue with someone who might have a concealed weapon.
Our attachment to our guns will narrow our lives.
Guns are also a threat to freedom of speech, as who wants to argue with someone who might have a concealed weapon.
16
The problem seems intractable to me, but at the very least, we should be requiring gun owners to have significant amounts of insurance to cover the harm their guns may cause to others.
12
Or an operator's license, as with a car!
I live in a very small New England town, and no one I know owns a gun. One day I was walking my dogs on trails that had been marked as safe during hunting season. As we came around a bend, I saw a man behind a tree with a gun. He was very nice and tipped his hat, but I was still scared.
I can't imagine what it must be like to run into people carrying guns every day. What happened to our right to feel safe and we move through our days?
I can't imagine what it must be like to run into people carrying guns every day. What happened to our right to feel safe and we move through our days?
13
If you look at the graphs in the link regarding gun deaths, it is clear that the South has the highest rate due to the large percentage of blacks. Look at the graph, and you can see that the vast majority of gun victims are black.
It is amazing that the author failed to mention that.
It is amazing that the author failed to mention that.
5
Not quite. There was no graph featured that tried to compare the two. I'd be interested to see that analysis, but also with income level to see if it's really racial or more socioeconomic.
Does the south also have the largest percentage of poor people? How about the largest percentage of agricultural workers? How about unemployment rates? How about education levels? The south also has the largest percentage of Baptists, and most African Americans in the south are Baptists. What percentage of killers were raised Baptist? -- Correlation is not causation. -- Anyway, what difference does it make? I would be happy to concede that higher levels of gun ownership do not automatically lead to higher levels of homicide. Perhaps guns are more popular among people who are already disposed to be violent, in communities where violence is more acceptable. And interestingly, 46% of killers in the US are white; but 66% of mass killers are white. Blacks commit more crimes, but blacks are also much more likely to come out of bad circumstances, to be poor, to be unemployed, to have received a poor education, to have done time in a jail for a petty offense on which a nice white boy would have been given a pass, etc. etc. --- And remember the best statistical predictor of violent behavior, murder, etc. is being MALE. Males are less than half the US population, and commit 90% of the violent crimes. Saying that violence isn't a Southern problem, it is a black problem (as you suggest) makes less sense than saying violence isn't an American problem (as the majority group of Americans hardly ever commit violent crimes) it is it a male problem.
It is the same exact thing in New York City, as well.
Even among many police officers, the belief persists that their can be no infringement on 2nd Amendment rights, ( I know, I spent 25 years as a law enforcement officer in California). Attempts at rational discussion elicits the same ridiculous responses that the NRA espouses.
11
There is no Mass Murderers lobbying group in Washington because the NRA has that covered. Whether it’s unlimited bullet clips, semi-automatic weapons, open carry, limited background checks, the NRA is there to help out the mass murderer. And the Republican party, with its very limited audience of the super rich and corporate executives, is more than willing to adopt the NRAs demands in exchange for votes from the common man.
The idea that we’d all be safer if we all had guns is not born out by any even remote analysis of reality. Remember, congress has explicitly not funded any research into gun violence, at the request of, who else, the NRA, because they don’t want to hear the answer. More guns equals more gun deaths. The south proves this. You are much more likely to be killed by a gun in the south than in the more civilized parts of the country.
The American Sniper, Chris Kyle, was shot to death while heavily armed and traveling to a gun range. Having a gun does not protect you unless you happen to anticipate that someone is planning to point theirs at you.
Every one of these mass shootings is blood on the hands of the GOP who would rather have the votes of the gun owners, a majority of who want sensible gun limits, than face the wrath of the NRA.
The idea that we’d all be safer if we all had guns is not born out by any even remote analysis of reality. Remember, congress has explicitly not funded any research into gun violence, at the request of, who else, the NRA, because they don’t want to hear the answer. More guns equals more gun deaths. The south proves this. You are much more likely to be killed by a gun in the south than in the more civilized parts of the country.
The American Sniper, Chris Kyle, was shot to death while heavily armed and traveling to a gun range. Having a gun does not protect you unless you happen to anticipate that someone is planning to point theirs at you.
Every one of these mass shootings is blood on the hands of the GOP who would rather have the votes of the gun owners, a majority of who want sensible gun limits, than face the wrath of the NRA.
42
Please tell me what these "sensible gun limits" are. There are currently over 20,000 state and federal firearms laws and regulations on the books. Are none of them sensible? How many new laws or tweaks to current laws are necessary to solve the problem of crazy people obtaining weapons? One, ten, twenty?
Please enlighten me RB!
Please enlighten me RB!
I am visiting in Germany....and I find myself, yet again, trying to explain to Germans why America is so gun-crazy. Since I have supported gun control for about 50 years, I certainly have no answers for the madness of our culture! The last time I was here was right after the Ct. school shootings. Complete strangers spoke to me about the murder of the children in school. "How can this be in America"? was the constant question. Good question. I really thought the slaughter of children would change our consciousness. Wrong. Other than immigrating to any country other than our own---which I do not want to do--I have no answers. Just sorrow. In our belief that just about anyone should be able to own all the guns they want we are becoming international pariahs.
24
Two things to think about - if being armed and trained was all that was needed, then no cop would be shot (but they are, a lot) and the NRA does not allow guns at its gun shows or meeting and neither does Congress (for the rest of us it is a free-fire zone)
226
And not only would no cop be shot at but no cop would ever miss as the NRA believes everybody who carries a firearm and has any experience in its use has the accuracy of Annie Oakley. A few years in Times Square the NYC cops confronted a man with a gun and shot at him multiple times managing to hit an innocent bystander.
Certainlyh! "[I]f being armed and trained was all that was needed, then no cop would be shot ...." and it then must follow that no unarmed civilians would by shot by cops - but many more are.
Wait. You forgot to add in the Supreme Court, which also does not allow guns in its building. They apparently believe they are exempt from the Second Amendment.
Egan's excellent article really nails it in his last paragraph when he calls out our Supreme Court for its strained ruling on the Second Amendment that flies in the face of the framers own views on the right to bear arms.
186
Strained ruling? The stretch for me would be that the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights apply to the individual citizen..but that somehow the 2nd Amendment does no? The SCOTUS didn't buy into that bilge nor the claptrap that the Framers didn't support the idea of an individual right to arms. Revisionists would have it be otherwise, but right to arms was there at the start and is here to stay.
When you see someone wearing a gun in public, how do you know if it is a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun?
Coupled with stand-your-ground laws, I wonder what will happen when a good guy with a gun is killed because some other good guy with a gun felt threatened.
Coupled with stand-your-ground laws, I wonder what will happen when a good guy with a gun is killed because some other good guy with a gun felt threatened.
262
Or "felt threatened"?
As soon as you're dead you become the bad guy with a gun, so it works out.
This happens a lot. I used to work for the courts and one of the most common reasons giving for killings not related to other crimes was that two men would get into an argument often when they were drinking or using drugs and one used a gun thinking that if he had a gun the other person must have one too and they'd better shoot first. Sometimes they did, sometimes they didn't.
Are these truly the source of most violence -- including gun violence -- that occurs in the United States: "mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti-government extremists." Color me skeptical. Extremely skeptical.
1
No, it's not an exhaustive, complete list of all possible reasons someone might perpetrate gun violence.
The reasons for violent acts, though important in stopping them from happening, is not the most important aspect of the gun control debate. Regardless, it is impossible to stop all violent acts from taking place (baring a Minority Report situation, which opens another can of worms). The issue is mitigating their impact when it happens. Guns amplify the damage done during a violent act, period. There is no way to argue against that. Hence, it makes sense to make it very difficult to obtain one.
Then, the next, arguably more important step is to make changes to our society and culture that would mitigate the reasons why people are driven to violence in the first place, at least as much as we can.
The reasons for violent acts, though important in stopping them from happening, is not the most important aspect of the gun control debate. Regardless, it is impossible to stop all violent acts from taking place (baring a Minority Report situation, which opens another can of worms). The issue is mitigating their impact when it happens. Guns amplify the damage done during a violent act, period. There is no way to argue against that. Hence, it makes sense to make it very difficult to obtain one.
Then, the next, arguably more important step is to make changes to our society and culture that would mitigate the reasons why people are driven to violence in the first place, at least as much as we can.
Actually, this probably does cover most mass shootings. Most women who are killed are killed by heretofore law-abiding husbands, lovers, or exes: probably doesn't apply to those cases. But then nobody suggests that more stringent control over deadly force will make people absolutely safe from violence and murder. The question is, how to minimize the amount of mayhem. Especially for children and people who act prudently and avoid places which are predictably dangerous.
...and let us not forget that easy access to guns contributes to the statistics of suicide by gun. More than 60% of gun deaths in the United States are caused by suicide. Suicides outnumber murders by more than 2 to 1. Be very afraid if there is a weapon in your own home because you may be setting yourself up for your own demise during an episode of deep depression. Oh, and let's not forget spousal murder/suicide.
Let's be cleared that it's not just "the gun crazies" who want everyone armed and pressure the Republican Party not to back down from this weirdly antisocial guns-above-people fanaticism. The NRA is behind it -- and behind the NRA are the gun manufacturers themselves. They want to make sure their market stays strong. And if, as Egan says, only 1/3 of American households now own guns, as opposed to 1/2 in 1973, themanufacaturers have to fight harder and more desperately to do so, even while innocent people die.
If slaughtered 5-year-olds in Connecticut won't change the politics of the situation, nothing will. And by that I mean: Nothing will.
If slaughtered 5-year-olds in Connecticut won't change the politics of the situation, nothing will. And by that I mean: Nothing will.
37
I've often thought the same thing, and wondered WHAT have we become. And yet, the NRA shills in Congress ignore the will of the people. If this isn't corruption, what is?
There is no physical evidence from autopsies, blood-work, DNA, ballistics, etc. to substantiate the stories and video of this wave of mass killings. In every single cited and associated story there is nothing physical to prove even a single death. Stories without evidence fail in every case.
So you're saying that none of the recent events (Sandy Hook, Aurora, Santa Barbara, Charleston etc) that were covered extensively by local, national, and international media actually happened? Or are you saying they don't constitute a wave? Your point is unclear.
Is this some sort of a parody of a gun fanatic? I have absolutely no idea what you seem to believe you are arguing.
Seriously? What do you think the kids in the Connecticut school died from? Old age?
Why must 21st-century Americans be held hostage to an 18th Century law that no longer serves any purpose?
The Second Amendment is obsolete. It is time to repeal it and debate the proper way to regulate firearms so that we can live in a safe society free of the threat of gun violence and secondarily, allow citizens who want to use guns responsibly for hunting or target practice to do so. We can no longer afford the hysterical all-guns-all-the-time mentality that comes from twisting the Second Amendment into a guarantee of gun marketing with no restrictions. Guns should rare, the manufacture of them should be tightly controlled and like other civilized nations have decided, guns should culturally disgraced, not celebrated.
The Second Amendment is obsolete. It is time to repeal it and debate the proper way to regulate firearms so that we can live in a safe society free of the threat of gun violence and secondarily, allow citizens who want to use guns responsibly for hunting or target practice to do so. We can no longer afford the hysterical all-guns-all-the-time mentality that comes from twisting the Second Amendment into a guarantee of gun marketing with no restrictions. Guns should rare, the manufacture of them should be tightly controlled and like other civilized nations have decided, guns should culturally disgraced, not celebrated.
90
I guess the 1st Amendment is obsolete as well since we did not have Twitter, Facebook, or cell phones in the 18th century?
Natural rights are non-negotiable. If you don't like that, then leave to one of the many statist utopias abroad.
Natural rights are non-negotiable. If you don't like that, then leave to one of the many statist utopias abroad.
Once again, look at the terminology in this article and in some of the comments - crazies, nutjobs, etc. The mentally ill are to blame. Someone needs to do some real research - mentally ill people, by the numbers, are more likely to be the targets of violence and less likely to act violently, and there are huge differences between diagnoses. We don't accept racial slurs, homophobic slurs, religious slurs, but slurs about people with significant illness that causes massive suffering? No problem. I wish the mentally healthy would try to actually talk to people who suffer from mental illness - maybe that would stop the endless drumbeat of slurs that contribute to that suffering, and maybe people could develop some empathy for what day to day life is like for those of us who suffer from these illnesses, or what it is like to see or hear slurs on almost a daily basis about a condition one has through no fault of one's own.
And when is someone going to truly examine how many murderers really suffer from diagnosable mental illness? How many do not?
And when is someone going to truly examine how many murderers really suffer from diagnosable mental illness? How many do not?
7
Read today's column by F Zakaria:
He makes a great point that conflicts with your theory:
"The United States has a gun homicide rate that is at least a dozen times higher than those of most other industrialized countries. It is 50 times higher than Germany’s, for instance. We don’t have 50 times as many mentally disturbed people as Germany does — but we do have many, many more guns.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-give-up-the-fight-to-reduce...
He makes a great point that conflicts with your theory:
"The United States has a gun homicide rate that is at least a dozen times higher than those of most other industrialized countries. It is 50 times higher than Germany’s, for instance. We don’t have 50 times as many mentally disturbed people as Germany does — but we do have many, many more guns.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-give-up-the-fight-to-reduce...
Mental illness is such a mushy term. It means one thing to the medical community, quite another to the general public. Is a high-functioning sociopath mentally ill? He may be perfectly able to function in society, and no one may ever know what is missing in his make-up. How about the man who is over-stressed, or has very poor anger control? Is he mentally ill? Some would say that any person who would kill another for any reason other than immediate self defense is crazy. That sort of crazy is not the same as having a diagnosable mental illness.
Mr. Egan demonstrates the fallacy of "gun free." There is no such thing in a country where guns are legal except where extreme measures are taken.
Most gun owners not only follow the laws but all safety rules. The problem with guns is their usage by criminals and mentally ill individuals. That this is more prevalent geographically seems to indicate that those states need to get better at keeping guns out of the wrong hands.
In the US, guns will never be outlawed. We need to focus on those who use them illegally and improperly.
Most gun owners not only follow the laws but all safety rules. The problem with guns is their usage by criminals and mentally ill individuals. That this is more prevalent geographically seems to indicate that those states need to get better at keeping guns out of the wrong hands.
In the US, guns will never be outlawed. We need to focus on those who use them illegally and improperly.
7
"Most gun owners not only follow the laws but all safety rules..." No, they refuse to allow the enactment of even basic safety rules. The herd mentality afflicts this crew as much as any other.
Which is the point of a rigorous regimen of background checks and licensing: not to disarm people generally, but to do a little more to ensure that those with guns can be trusted with them.
Mr. Egan, thank you for your depiction of two Americas, one of which is only a little safer than the other. I've always thought that people who want everyone to be armed all the time should live like that, but in their own region -- their own bubble, without encroaching on the rest of us who think that's an insane way to live. (The big problem with that, of course, is that children growing up in such a world are much more likely to be killed and never see adulthood.) I guess that is what is happening, at an ever-quickening rate since mass shootings have become an almost daily occurrence and the NRA et al. have called for looser and looser gun restrictions. Ever since the VA Tech massacre, I have seriously considered immigrating to a country with strict gun laws. In America now, it's become more and more likely that someone in my family or I will end up in the wrong place at the wrong time.
18
Here in Maine, the Legislature just passed a law allowing gun owners to carry
a concealed weapon without a permit, one of the few laws our veto-loving governor signed in the midst of all of the recent shootings. No one as yet
has explained why any common law-abiding citizen who wants to carry a
weapon needs to conceal it. Now I can wonder as I enter the local
supermarket or walk the streets of my small town if the person next to me
is carrying a weapon and is sane enough not to use it. Before this law it
would have at least been possible to choose to get as far away as possible from the visible weapon.
a concealed weapon without a permit, one of the few laws our veto-loving governor signed in the midst of all of the recent shootings. No one as yet
has explained why any common law-abiding citizen who wants to carry a
weapon needs to conceal it. Now I can wonder as I enter the local
supermarket or walk the streets of my small town if the person next to me
is carrying a weapon and is sane enough not to use it. Before this law it
would have at least been possible to choose to get as far away as possible from the visible weapon.
34
Mr. Egan's article, clearly against gun ownership, cites statistics and case studies from publications that may, or may not, be questionable. I wish there was a way to prevent the people, who are mentally unstable or full of hatred to some others, from having access to firearms. But as far as firearm ownership is concerned, the Article of the Constitution apart, one may wonder, why the famous phrase from Schiller's "Willhelm Tell" has never found its way into the lore of the supporters of gun ownership. I think that the reason is a poor translation into English of the German original: "Mir fehlt der Arm, wenn mir die Waffe fehlt", translated as "I want my right hand, when I want my bow" -- the verb want is not unambiguous in this sense.
2
Wrong translation. I feel like my arm is missing if my bow is missing.
"I wish there was a way to prevent the people, who are mentally unstable or full of hatred to some others, from having access to firearms"
There is. It's called a Universal Background Check system. I'm sure the currently system has it's flaws and could be improved, but even in its current state if it were actually used, then it would prevent guns from getting into the hands of people with a documented medical history of mental illness. There are many loopholes in this system. We need to close those loopholes at the Federal level, not State.
There is. It's called a Universal Background Check system. I'm sure the currently system has it's flaws and could be improved, but even in its current state if it were actually used, then it would prevent guns from getting into the hands of people with a documented medical history of mental illness. There are many loopholes in this system. We need to close those loopholes at the Federal level, not State.
It's not mental illness. It's not the influence of music or film. It's guns, as Mr. Egan proves and has been proven time and time again. There are steps no rational, Constitution-minded person should object to that we can implement now - universal background checks, limits on high-capacity magazines, etc. It's guns. And we will ultimately accept that and act. But after how much more tragedy?
26
Wish you were right but I do not think you are. If Newtown resulted in more gun sales and more legislation to reduce gun regulation, it is preposterous to think that any tragedy will result in change for the better.
This issue is beyond solving. Case closed. There are hundreds of millions of weapons in the US and millions more being produced every month. I predict that within a decade, there will be significant areas of the U.S. where it will be a common sight for hundreds of fellow citizens to be going through their day-to-day lives carrying machine guns. Mass shootings will be a weekly occurrence and will no longer be reported any differently than a car accident.
This issue is beyond solving. Case closed. There are hundreds of millions of weapons in the US and millions more being produced every month. I predict that within a decade, there will be significant areas of the U.S. where it will be a common sight for hundreds of fellow citizens to be going through their day-to-day lives carrying machine guns. Mass shootings will be a weekly occurrence and will no longer be reported any differently than a car accident.
2
The idea of keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill has a catch-22. Mental health records are confidential, and identifying someone as mentally ill would break this confidentiality. Are Republicans expecting mentally ill persons to confess when buying a gun?
3
So how do you define mental illness? Panic disorder? Mild depression? Attention deficit disorder? In my opinion as a psychiatrist, focusing on access for "mentally ill" avoids the much more important underlying issue of the fascination of Americans with Guns and the misinterpretation of the Second Amendment
And it further stigmatizes a population that is essentially vilified every day in countless ways. United States needs to have less guns. Period.
And it further stigmatizes a population that is essentially vilified every day in countless ways. United States needs to have less guns. Period.
35
As a psychiatrist you know that, with all the guns in the world melted down in beat into ploughs, the mind that commits these murders will still exist. These are things that don't get discusses when we focus on inanimate objects and political agendas.
Agreed, but any steps forward are good steps. A Universal Background Check system doesn't need to divulge to the person running the check WHY the application was rejected, just that it was. This would protect the privacy of the applicant and lesson any increased stigma as well.
It is not that I disagree that our culture has to change and we also just need to have fewer guns in the country, but those are much harder problems to solve, that will take decades to come to fruition, when an improved Universal Background Check system can be done relatively quickly.
It is not that I disagree that our culture has to change and we also just need to have fewer guns in the country, but those are much harder problems to solve, that will take decades to come to fruition, when an improved Universal Background Check system can be done relatively quickly.
New York is undoubtedly safer than it was 25 years ago. The question is how that came to pass. It was a combination of illegal search and seizure (stop and frisk - I know it's no longer in force, but the effects linger), rampant gentrification, suppression of free expression and undesired entrepeneurs (suppression of strip clubs, etc.), and a massive rise in property tax incomes to support the infrastructure to make all this possible. Essentially, New York is an ultra-rich police state. It has a police force larger than many small country's armies. Most of the United States is neither capable of replicating those conditions, nor willing to live under them. I for one would rather live in freedom, with all the risks and responsibilities that condition entails.
You could also ask our fellow Americans in the African American community what they think of the idea of a police state as described here and in many of these comments. Many of them already live under one and find it quite dangerous. Proof that authority unchecked leads to corruption.
I won't even bother to requote Ben Franklin's thoughts on trading liberty for safety to you.
And no, I'm not a member of the NRA (specifically because of their stance on background checks), I am an atheist, pro-marriage equality and I think what happened to Cecil the Lion was an utter tragedy. Just because one believes in freedom does not make one a right wing nutjob.
You could also ask our fellow Americans in the African American community what they think of the idea of a police state as described here and in many of these comments. Many of them already live under one and find it quite dangerous. Proof that authority unchecked leads to corruption.
I won't even bother to requote Ben Franklin's thoughts on trading liberty for safety to you.
And no, I'm not a member of the NRA (specifically because of their stance on background checks), I am an atheist, pro-marriage equality and I think what happened to Cecil the Lion was an utter tragedy. Just because one believes in freedom does not make one a right wing nutjob.
4
Canada is not a police state, nor some vast island of wealth. Yet we manage not to go around shooting ourselves too much...
Several weeks ago I posted a comment after the shoutout at the mall in Texas with th motorcycle club. My comment was that I was developing a do not travel list. Somebody responded and said they would never do such a thing. Since then we have had the killing in Charleston (the South), Chattanooga (the South) and Louisuana (the South). Ideally, people will vote with their feet and go to places which are relatively safer. The usual uproar occurs after every one of these incidents, the killer is mentally ill, so it's the fault of the health system, the background check system failed, if indeed it was mandatory. I have come to the conclusion that there are just a lot of people out there who are dangerous to others, and they are armed because they are allowed to be because it's good for business. Capitalism at its finest.
36
The last time I traveled in the Deep South was a month before the release of Easy Rider. It's been a no-travel zone for me ever since as actual events continue to validate my decision.
10
Don't go to California (Oakland and Santa Barbara)
"In Greed we trust."
As someone who has survived a gunshot wound, I have always believed that the wording of the Second Amendment to our Constitution was deliberately misread by the Supreme Court in its "liberal" finding that anyone is entitled to own a gun. How a group of "learned" conservative men (I doubt any women on the Court approved it) determined that "A well regulated militia" does not limit the right to bear arms, is alarming.
America is more violent and aggressive today than I would have anticipated as a child particularly with such easy access to guns. But underlying all the mayhem we have come to regard as almost "normal" is the belief by many politicians, that defense of the country or the safety of an individual citizen can only be achieved through military force or use of firearms. So we currently face a possible war with Iran rather than a diplomatic, negotiated agreement because of the "bring 'em on" mentality of our military/industrial complex and their sponsors in Congress all too willing to supply the weapons needed for our next war or to provide military grade weapons for "sportsmen" who might prefer to indulge their deranged egos by decimating a group of school children, or a matinee crowd. Is this a civilized country or not?
America is more violent and aggressive today than I would have anticipated as a child particularly with such easy access to guns. But underlying all the mayhem we have come to regard as almost "normal" is the belief by many politicians, that defense of the country or the safety of an individual citizen can only be achieved through military force or use of firearms. So we currently face a possible war with Iran rather than a diplomatic, negotiated agreement because of the "bring 'em on" mentality of our military/industrial complex and their sponsors in Congress all too willing to supply the weapons needed for our next war or to provide military grade weapons for "sportsmen" who might prefer to indulge their deranged egos by decimating a group of school children, or a matinee crowd. Is this a civilized country or not?
52
Welcome to the Feral Republic of North America #FRNA
No, it is not a civilized country. As Oscar Wilde observed a century ago, "America is the only country that passed from barbarism to decadence without ever passing through civilization." More true now than ever.
The "bring-em on" attitude isn't solely the purview of lawmakers and the military. Ordinary gun-rights advocates have it, too. Read comments posted by people who are just sure that guns are necessary to prevent a tyrannical government from taking over, and who believe they are the only barrier between us and the new Nazis or Pol Pot.
The politicians who are most likely to call gun violence a mental health problem (Republicans) are the ones most likely to vote against funding for mental health initiatives.
The politicians who are most likely to say that we don't need any new gun laws, that merely enforcing existing laws would be sufficient (Republicans) consistently vote to cut aid to local law enforcement, refuse to fully fund the background check system and pass laws to prevent the scientific research necessary to improve prevention and enforcement.
Two recent mass shootings, Charleston and Lafayette, were committed by people who were able to obtain guns due to failures within the background check system. Has any politician who claims to desire better enforcement of existing laws made any proposal, or even proposed to hold hearings, on how to fully enforce these laws?
Claiming that we have solutions to these problems and then doing everything within their power to prevent implementation of these solutions makes these politicians (Republicans) complicit with the problem.
The politicians who are most likely to say that we don't need any new gun laws, that merely enforcing existing laws would be sufficient (Republicans) consistently vote to cut aid to local law enforcement, refuse to fully fund the background check system and pass laws to prevent the scientific research necessary to improve prevention and enforcement.
Two recent mass shootings, Charleston and Lafayette, were committed by people who were able to obtain guns due to failures within the background check system. Has any politician who claims to desire better enforcement of existing laws made any proposal, or even proposed to hold hearings, on how to fully enforce these laws?
Claiming that we have solutions to these problems and then doing everything within their power to prevent implementation of these solutions makes these politicians (Republicans) complicit with the problem.
97
Imagine... a SCOTUS that thiinks we keep guns to create a "well-regulated militia"?
Imagine women with pistols in their purses while on the bus to school.
Imagine kids in school, armed at 6 years old.
Imagine people carrying AK-47s in crowded airports.
Imagine legislators opposing gun laws.
Imagine armed citizens fearing our military is about to invade us.
America is not working toward "justice for all", just gunplay for all. We lack imagination, faith in society, and the knowledge that the free Wild West, the New England love of the Indians, and the Happy Slaves in the South were fiction. Imagined, never experienced. And that the safer countries like the Scandinavian ones, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are real. Guns do not protect anyone if everyone has them.
Imagine women with pistols in their purses while on the bus to school.
Imagine kids in school, armed at 6 years old.
Imagine people carrying AK-47s in crowded airports.
Imagine legislators opposing gun laws.
Imagine armed citizens fearing our military is about to invade us.
America is not working toward "justice for all", just gunplay for all. We lack imagination, faith in society, and the knowledge that the free Wild West, the New England love of the Indians, and the Happy Slaves in the South were fiction. Imagined, never experienced. And that the safer countries like the Scandinavian ones, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are real. Guns do not protect anyone if everyone has them.
25
Why is someone's right to pack a gun paramount over someone's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
We Americans need a new Congress and a new Supreme Court.
We Americans need a new Congress and a new Supreme Court.
33
The Constitution, the law of the land, affirms the right to self-defense AKA gun rights.
The Declaration of Independence, judged by the legal authority of it's time, AKA the British Crown, to be a criminal document, affirms the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After the Treaty of Paris and the adoption of the US Constitution, the Declaration became legally moot.
The Declaration of Independence, judged by the legal authority of it's time, AKA the British Crown, to be a criminal document, affirms the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After the Treaty of Paris and the adoption of the US Constitution, the Declaration became legally moot.
Great piece Tim, you forgot to mention the jurisdictions that allow one to pack heat in bars. How insane is that???
33
Right up there with armed on-campus frat boys on a Saturday night.
The model we should all follow is Chicago. Illinois has the strictist gun laws. Now check the stats of the gun violence on the south side as we call it. Point is you can obtain a gun anywhere if you want one, same as drugs. We have some long core issues where most violence occurs we cannot seem to do much about. How we can keep guns out of the reach of nut cases, and gung ho cops is a tough one. Our cops are well armed as we move toward a police state. We should recall however they are not military, even if armed like the military.
4
Let's not forget that a large percentage of the guns used in crimes in Chicago were purchased from the gun stores that rim the edge of the city. The human garbage that sell weapons to anything with a pulse belong in prison. They are just as culpable as the shooters.
"Nationwide, if you want to lessen your chances of getting shot, stay out of the South" as in South Chicago, South L.A., South Boston, South Washington D.C. and other southern locations predominately propulated by minorities. Chicago celebrated the 4th with 17 homicides - but whose counting when spouting allegations.
Of course the mentally ill shouldn't have access to guns - and maybe they shouldn't be freely roaming our streets too. Well, which Party let them out? Which Party is most opposed to incarcaration of recidivist criminals - after all it's these criminals committing most of the murders. If there is greater danger in the US thanks go to the Democrats.
Of course the mentally ill shouldn't have access to guns - and maybe they shouldn't be freely roaming our streets too. Well, which Party let them out? Which Party is most opposed to incarcaration of recidivist criminals - after all it's these criminals committing most of the murders. If there is greater danger in the US thanks go to the Democrats.
4
Which party let them out?
It was the Republicans starting in the 1960s who emptied county hospitals for the mentally ill and bussed them to large cities where they were dumped. It was the start of the tsunami of homelessness that trashed our biggest cities. How much did it save commissioner?
It was the Republicans starting in the 1960s who emptied county hospitals for the mentally ill and bussed them to large cities where they were dumped. It was the start of the tsunami of homelessness that trashed our biggest cities. How much did it save commissioner?
36
The party that "let them out" is that of Reagan, who wholesale defunded mental health institutions and turned 10s of 1000s into the streets. Look up trends in mental illness among the homeless.
36
From your words, which I seriously doubt, I take it Charleston's homeless problem started only after Mr Obama was elected President of the United States of America - you must hate reading and hearing that name with that title following it, don't you? Well, I can compare Chicago in the 60s and 70s - a dirty city with virtually no homeless problem - to the Chicago of the 80s and 90s - a relatively clean city with a clinically insane homeless problem - and I know that I can place blame squarely upon the back of the Regan administration and its policies toward the mentally ill. We will not improve as a country until the sins of St Ronnie are revisited, reexamined, understood, and corrected. And one of those sins is the Republican near total embrace of the NRA as a political partner and advisor.
Put Charleston, South Carolina on my do-not-travel list.
Put Charleston, South Carolina on my do-not-travel list.
13
Cities with restrictive gun control laws are safer? Tell that to the people of Chicago.
10
You stubbornly refuse to see that the illegal guns of Chicago came from legal but immoral gun sales in the good ole' Bible Belt. Unless the large cities of the US become like medieval city-states with strict border controls, we can't keep out the filth of guns sold for profit.
Unfortunately Chicago is in Cook county and there are plenty of gun stores on the city line who sell lots of guns and operate with very limited regulation.
Chicago does not have a high rate of gun deaths per capita. Cities with high rates of gun deaths per capita are Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, New Orleans and Oakland. Many of the guns used in Chicago come from nearby Indiana, which has relatively lax gun laws. In fact, Indianapolis has a higher rate of gun deaths per capita than Chicago.
"...a freedom that has become a tyranny in itself...."
George Orwell would have likely understood quite perfectly what you mean, Mr. Egan. Orwell also wrote: There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.
George Orwell would have likely understood quite perfectly what you mean, Mr. Egan. Orwell also wrote: There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.
16
Thanks, Tim. Sometimes the sanest reaction to an insane situation...is Insanity.
We may be an "insane time"...feeding the Paranoia in some. How else can I understand a Country's preoccupation with a Bellicose Billionaire Pretending to
run for President?
We may be an "insane time"...feeding the Paranoia in some. How else can I understand a Country's preoccupation with a Bellicose Billionaire Pretending to
run for President?
Guns in the hands of every citizen, sane or no, keeps the citizenry--We the People--wary. A fearful population, unable to freely affiliate, discuss and agitate, remains fragmented and easy to govern. Big Brother loves the Second Amendment.
The so-called "patriots" don't get the irony that they are the biggest tools of a repressive state.
The so-called "patriots" don't get the irony that they are the biggest tools of a repressive state.
39
This is the best essay I've seen on the bankrupt logic of the NRA and its republican fellow travelers. A good bumper sticker, if one were daring (or foolish) enough to put it on ones car, would be "NRA=terrorists". They've terrorized more americans than any other organization, and it's time to start calling them out. Gun ownership in this country was once primarily tied to longstanding traditions of hunting in rural areas. The NRA was once a somewhat laudable organization that concerned itself with gun safety. No longer. Now gun ownership is tied to a deranged "don't tread on me" machisimo, which if taken to its logical conclusion (as Egan points out) would create a dystopia as dark as anything Orwell imagined. And the NRA has become the lobbying arm of survivalists, gun nuts and the companies that are more than happy to provide them with more, increasingly deadly, toys.
159
Well said. The primary, perhaps the only, function of today's NRA is to look out for the financial interests of companies in the gun trade. It's the executives at Smith & Wesson who are the NRA's real constituents. Gun ownership rights and second amendment protection are smokescreens for ensuring that gun manufacturers and others who make a living off of arming Americans continue to turn a huge profit.
23
This is a problem for the Legal system to resolve. Unfortunately, Congress fueled by the NRA has shielded the gun industry from legal action that would demand compensation for the damage wrought as a result of putting a lethal product into irresponsible hands.
How that makes sense when the same government can come down so hard on the auto industry when a defective product results in a handful of deaths (as compared to the thousands of people killed by guns)? Or the forced recalls of so many products where accidental death or injury occurs at a rate that is a mere fraction of the carnage wrought by gun play.
Until the corruption of Congress as a result of the massive lobbying influence of the NRA is ended, there will be no sane outcome when it comes to these glaring imbalances.
How that makes sense when the same government can come down so hard on the auto industry when a defective product results in a handful of deaths (as compared to the thousands of people killed by guns)? Or the forced recalls of so many products where accidental death or injury occurs at a rate that is a mere fraction of the carnage wrought by gun play.
Until the corruption of Congress as a result of the massive lobbying influence of the NRA is ended, there will be no sane outcome when it comes to these glaring imbalances.
5
I've often wondered why gun "rights" legislators haven't pushed for allowing concealed weapons in the halls of Congress. Do they know something they aren't willing to speak aloud?
Documentaries show the people loving their guns the most are from Northern Ireland/Scotland. A very distinct profile of a warrior they were useful in the American Revolution as they hate authority as much as did the liberals. Unfortunately, this use guns first and worry about everything else later still pervades our domestic and foreign policy.
To take guns away from this warrior profile digs deep into their basics beliefs. The large migration of the Northern Irish/Scottish to the south results in the majority needing guns to be real men, opposite from wussy cooperation thinking people. The thinking is the good guy with the gun retains that self-sufficiency so important to this group. In other words, at least to the intellectual, the Northern Irish/Scottish decent group kills two birds with one bullet. It's almost impossible in a modern American context to take guns away from this warrior profile group.
To take guns away from this warrior profile digs deep into their basics beliefs. The large migration of the Northern Irish/Scottish to the south results in the majority needing guns to be real men, opposite from wussy cooperation thinking people. The thinking is the good guy with the gun retains that self-sufficiency so important to this group. In other words, at least to the intellectual, the Northern Irish/Scottish decent group kills two birds with one bullet. It's almost impossible in a modern American context to take guns away from this warrior profile group.
8
"You want protection in a country that allows a deranged man to get an assault weapon to hunt down innocent people in a public space? Go to the airport..."
Well, maybe so, but not in Atlanta where it is, according to radical right wing "guns everywhere" governor Nathan Deal not only legal but encouraged to strap onto your shoulder an automatic rifle and bands of countless live ammunition while parading around the busiest airport in the world legally taunting fellow citizens. Of course, last I checked, all firearms are banned in the State Capital. Go figure...
Well, maybe so, but not in Atlanta where it is, according to radical right wing "guns everywhere" governor Nathan Deal not only legal but encouraged to strap onto your shoulder an automatic rifle and bands of countless live ammunition while parading around the busiest airport in the world legally taunting fellow citizens. Of course, last I checked, all firearms are banned in the State Capital. Go figure...
257
...but not in Atlanta where it is not only legal but encouraged to strap onto your shoulder an automatic rifle and bands of countless live ammunition... The marketplace has a solution for that problem, which the good people of that state may not like - or perhaps that's wrong and they prefer my kind doesn't come. Fine with me. People who fly around the country on business have a choice of hub airports and airlines that use those cities as hubs. I avoid Atlanta and avoid airlines that use Atlanta as a hub.
As Dave in New York noted some minutes ago it is easy to blame firearm violence on "mental illness", a facile explanation that guides us away from the much larger problem of easy access to firearms. And part of the underlying challenge is the extent to which firearm-based fantasies become the Walter Mitty response to growing social and economic insecurity, to an uneasy desperation, to a belief I will be violently pillaged by the undeserving even while I am being fleeced by the cunning and well-placed. Thus the idea of sturdy bands of patriots defeating hordes of federal troops, of valiant neighbors defending families from hordes of the "other", or of standing one's ground during a dispute over a mall parking space or loud rap music gives rise to a sense life will be better (or at least one will have the illusion of control over something) with a firearm to assert a don't-tread-on-me attitude.
It is this longing to assert control that drives much gun-carrying. Few people entering a fast food restaurant or stopping to buy soap really believe they are going to wander into a hold-up, much less thwart it. But the notion of control, or even power, that comes with the nervous deference of unarmed or more even-tempered individuals is satisfying when at work you have to deal with a jerk for a boss, when a clerk displays contempt for your hope for service, or the company managing your mortgage is both abusive and unresponsive. A gun will command respect and compliance, or else.
It is this longing to assert control that drives much gun-carrying. Few people entering a fast food restaurant or stopping to buy soap really believe they are going to wander into a hold-up, much less thwart it. But the notion of control, or even power, that comes with the nervous deference of unarmed or more even-tempered individuals is satisfying when at work you have to deal with a jerk for a boss, when a clerk displays contempt for your hope for service, or the company managing your mortgage is both abusive and unresponsive. A gun will command respect and compliance, or else.
12
This comment is very close to being a perfect statement of the heart of the matter.
Why are the shooters almost always white male losers?
Well, in this society, who gets taught that they should be "in charge" ? Yet they can't even be a success in an entry level job, can't get and keep a girlfriend, can't succeed in school, and spend their days smoking weed or hanging out with the few friends they do have, who are also losers.
Its all about the pain and anger of being totally ineffectual and realizing that's what life holds for you. So go get some respect, some notoriaty, and a place in the history books. Make "them" remember who you are.
Why are the shooters almost always white male losers?
Well, in this society, who gets taught that they should be "in charge" ? Yet they can't even be a success in an entry level job, can't get and keep a girlfriend, can't succeed in school, and spend their days smoking weed or hanging out with the few friends they do have, who are also losers.
Its all about the pain and anger of being totally ineffectual and realizing that's what life holds for you. So go get some respect, some notoriaty, and a place in the history books. Make "them" remember who you are.
As Dave in New York noted some minutes ago it is easy to blame firearm violence on "mental illness", a facile explanation that guides us away from the much larger problem of easy access to firearms.
========================
Actually most firearm deaths are due to mental illness as 2/3 of them are suicides.
========================
Actually most firearm deaths are due to mental illness as 2/3 of them are suicides.
You shocked me about the decline of households with guns over the last 40 years; but hold on. The firepower has increased exponentially so don't be lulled into optimism by that statistic. And guns are not the only issue creating essentially two Americas, how about climate change, abortion, public spending on the safety net, federal investment in infrastructure, etc. At the bottom of gun ownership and all the others, and again, mostly in the South sad to say, is a deeply, historically rooted embrace of Individual rights. The common good has been feared since the Constitutional Convention.
5
The south is only considered more violent because it includes Maryland.Maryland has the 5th worst maybe this year THE worst) homicide rate in the country.
YTD Baltimore has already had twice as many murders as Dallas, and Dallas is 3x bigger.
All thanks to Bloomberg, Vinnie "the shill" DeMarco and Daniel Webster and their 2013 ("minorities cannot live in a free society make them get fingerprinted") gun laws.
YTD Baltimore has already had twice as many murders as Dallas, and Dallas is 3x bigger.
All thanks to Bloomberg, Vinnie "the shill" DeMarco and Daniel Webster and their 2013 ("minorities cannot live in a free society make them get fingerprinted") gun laws.
7
Among the gun-free zones not mentioned here are the government buildings and legislative chambers where such brilliant laws as campus-carry and permit-free handgun toting are hatched and passed. The only reasonable conclusion is that the NRA's legislative carrier pigeons are quite keen to protect themselves while simultaneously exposing their constituents to perpetual gunfire risk in the churches, schools, streets, theatres and colleges mentioned by Mr. Egan.
If any ordinary citizen should ever feel unsafe, a quick trip to the respective state house should improve the sense of security. These buildings, after all, belong to the people rather than to the ciphers who occupy the chamber chairs.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
If any ordinary citizen should ever feel unsafe, a quick trip to the respective state house should improve the sense of security. These buildings, after all, belong to the people rather than to the ciphers who occupy the chamber chairs.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
30
You missed one place! The NRA will not allows guns at their convention.
Their fear - who old white guys getting into an argument, pulling their guns, and then everyone else pulling their guns and shooting each other?
What would Perry say then?
Their fear - who old white guys getting into an argument, pulling their guns, and then everyone else pulling their guns and shooting each other?
What would Perry say then?
You're right, Les. I missed the NRA convention venues. Thanks for mentioning them. Either way, the gunnie-lobby hypocrisy is mind-bending.
Actually, if you have a concealed carry permit in Texas, you can bring a firearm into the capitol building there.
https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/cap/index.htm
https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/cap/index.htm
Interesting feedback going on in the South. Its more violent, which creates more demand for guns, which makes it more violent, which creates more demand for guns.
Culture which worships violence, fails to address mental health and makes it easy to access guns isn't a safe culture.
Culture which worships violence, fails to address mental health and makes it easy to access guns isn't a safe culture.
13
The NRA is an absurdly powerful lobbying group. They have obscene spending power in elections, both for and against candidates, and obscene influence in crafting legislation, like "stand your ground" laws. Our Congress is sewn deeply into their pockets. And when leaders like Bobby Jindal keep addressing NRA conventions, it's impossible to trust that their priorities rest with citizens' best interests, not with the NRA's. I remember that after the Newtown tragedy, Wayne LaPierre said that the problem lies with mental illness, not with guns. Since then, I have not heard a peep from him or his organization about addressing mental illness and another deranged person just took innocent lives. We would be better off without them corrupting our nation.
16
I agree with all that Mr. Egan has to say, except "echoing that of the fanatics who own the Republican Party by intimidation,". The fanatics own, or at least intimidate into submission, almost all politicians in this country, not just Rebublicans. There is no longer even a discussion. Shootings like the most recent one in Louisiana merely result in more fund raising opportunities for the IRA, as they sound the alarm that Obama and liberals will be coming for their guns.
The paragraphs about the 'good guy with the gun' stopping 'the bad guy with a gun' remind me of the incident outside the Empire State Building in August of 2012, when two NYC policemen wounded nine bystanders while firing at an armed man. Presumably policemen, though they rarely actually use their weapon in the line of duty, are better trained and equipped to handle a situation like this, yet look at the results. It doesn't inspire confidence in the 'good guy with a gun' scenario.
The paragraphs about the 'good guy with the gun' stopping 'the bad guy with a gun' remind me of the incident outside the Empire State Building in August of 2012, when two NYC policemen wounded nine bystanders while firing at an armed man. Presumably policemen, though they rarely actually use their weapon in the line of duty, are better trained and equipped to handle a situation like this, yet look at the results. It doesn't inspire confidence in the 'good guy with a gun' scenario.
19
Airports are not gun free zones, until you get to security.
Sports stadiums are full of my friends, off duty and retired cops, with guns, doing security.
The theater where the last shooting took place was a gun free zone.
Sandy Hook was a gun free zone.
The only way safety can work, is all guns or no guns.
Scrum bags and psychos will get guns or other weapons, like cars or meat cleavers. Psychos need to be in green meadows, that are fenced in with 10 foot walls. We have one here in White Plains, called NY Hopt. It is essentially empty, because we don't do that any more. We give them pills and protect their privacy.
The Times does not publish my comments. It's just typing practice.
Sports stadiums are full of my friends, off duty and retired cops, with guns, doing security.
The theater where the last shooting took place was a gun free zone.
Sandy Hook was a gun free zone.
The only way safety can work, is all guns or no guns.
Scrum bags and psychos will get guns or other weapons, like cars or meat cleavers. Psychos need to be in green meadows, that are fenced in with 10 foot walls. We have one here in White Plains, called NY Hopt. It is essentially empty, because we don't do that any more. We give them pills and protect their privacy.
The Times does not publish my comments. It's just typing practice.
5
With psychos given just pills and have their privacy protected, you obviously refer to the mentally ill.
Pray tell, why are despite the fact that women often suffer in greater numbers from depression and certain other mental illnesses than the 'stronger' sex, it is always white guys that commit these mass shootings? And white guys that proudly pack heat openly in open carry states?
Pray tell, why are despite the fact that women often suffer in greater numbers from depression and certain other mental illnesses than the 'stronger' sex, it is always white guys that commit these mass shootings? And white guys that proudly pack heat openly in open carry states?
4
Well then Rick, open your hospital & help the mentally ill, which we need to do in this country along with strict gun control. Gun should really be useless in a free society, except for war. But today there are a lot more angry people out there with very short fuses! The answer is not to sit there and do nothing because we will just keep killing more people until there are few left.
1
In the course of walk around the modest residential neighborhood of a city in center of the country -- my ancestral home -- I came upon a neighbor who had posted a used gun target (in the shape of a person) on his front door. Evidently this person considered such a viable strategy to discourage unwanted visitors. I had to venture up and take a picture. Two cultures indeed!
7
Suppose the cigarette manufacturers said that the problem of lung cancer and other health conditions made worse by smoking could be solved by buying and smoking more cigarettes.
Suppose the right-wing religious fanatics had said the way to reduce abortions is to ban contraception.
Suppose a US president said the way to have a healthy economy and "freer" society is to slash the taxes for the super rich, the benefits of which will assuredly trickle down to the middle- and working-class, and of course, the poor—eventually, maybe, perhaps.
Suppose the gun manufacturers and NRA said that the way for Americans to be safer from gun violence is to arm as many citizens and children with as many guns as possible, to block efforts to have background checks for criminals and mentally deranged individuals, and to implement stand-your-ground & open-carry gun laws in every state.
What kind of a political party would support these policies in the 21st century? Why the party of Trump, Christie, Cruz, Jeb!, Carson, Uckabee, Walker, and the guy with intelligent-looking glasses, among others.
Welcome to America, where you can fool many of the people much of the time.
And guess what? Public opinion polls are moving away from support for gun safety toward gun "freedom":
Favor stronger gun laws: 55% in 2013, 49% in 2015
More important to protect rights of gun ownership than control gun ownership: 49% in 2011, 52% in 2014
and so it goes (sadly), see http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
Suppose the right-wing religious fanatics had said the way to reduce abortions is to ban contraception.
Suppose a US president said the way to have a healthy economy and "freer" society is to slash the taxes for the super rich, the benefits of which will assuredly trickle down to the middle- and working-class, and of course, the poor—eventually, maybe, perhaps.
Suppose the gun manufacturers and NRA said that the way for Americans to be safer from gun violence is to arm as many citizens and children with as many guns as possible, to block efforts to have background checks for criminals and mentally deranged individuals, and to implement stand-your-ground & open-carry gun laws in every state.
What kind of a political party would support these policies in the 21st century? Why the party of Trump, Christie, Cruz, Jeb!, Carson, Uckabee, Walker, and the guy with intelligent-looking glasses, among others.
Welcome to America, where you can fool many of the people much of the time.
And guess what? Public opinion polls are moving away from support for gun safety toward gun "freedom":
Favor stronger gun laws: 55% in 2013, 49% in 2015
More important to protect rights of gun ownership than control gun ownership: 49% in 2011, 52% in 2014
and so it goes (sadly), see http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
82
Good column Mr. Egan, although I hoped from the title "Guns and the Two Americas" that you would address the perception that the 2nd is a "whites only" amendment. Sadly, recent headlines prove it is dangerous enough for people of color to use phones and automobiles, whereas belligerent white proponents of open carry are given a wide berth by the law. I believe nothing would advance the cause of sane firearm policy more than organized groups of African Americans practicing their right of open-carry with as much visibility and vigor as those of us of the Caucasian persuasion.
24
You might be interested to learn, Mr. Larson, that the NRA was founded, in part, to help recently freed slaves learn firearms skills, and safety.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RABZq5IoaQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RABZq5IoaQ
Most gun shooting deaths of black males are carried out by other black males.
Spencer, crime among citizenry is indeed a blight in whatever form it takes. Taxpayer-funded murder (assuming you refer to recent police killings of unarmed suspects) is tyrranny. Both are abhorrent, and one does not excuse the other.
There actually three Americas, namely places similar to where I live in truly rural America. Here, 90% of my neighbors (both Democrats and Republicans) have at least one gun, I don't recall seeing any of them carrying a weapon except during hunting season (unless they go to a city), don't mind that Mall of America prohibits guns and almost all of them support background checks for everyone, and do not belong to the NRA or GOA. This is a gun flooded zone and there has been but one murder in the last 15 years. It does bring up a question about gun free zones. Why do the legislators and judges not allow guns where they work? Just about every time I see the NRA push to expand the places to carry guns, the legislature rolls over but always carves out an exception for their workplace.
17
Government workplaces are usually guarded by armed police. The "why don't they allow guns there" argument seems to be most heard in cases like the Washington Navy Yard, or Fort Hood shootings.
Come out of the bubble sometime and visit north ave Baltimore: Wost month for homicide in 25 years. The Wild West.
But don't worry, Vinnie "the shill" DeMarco and Daniel Webster tell us that Maryland's 2013 ("minorities cannot live in a free society make them get fingerprinted") gun laws will work, tomorrow. Fortunately, they got paid to lobby in 2013.
Baltimore residents cower inside and lock their doors. Thank god city council ("we like to pose with gang members") helped O'Malley disarm all the right people. As Mayor he arrested all the right people.
O'Malley's presidential run is going about as well as those 2013 gun laws.
But don't worry, Vinnie "the shill" DeMarco and Daniel Webster tell us that Maryland's 2013 ("minorities cannot live in a free society make them get fingerprinted") gun laws will work, tomorrow. Fortunately, they got paid to lobby in 2013.
Baltimore residents cower inside and lock their doors. Thank god city council ("we like to pose with gang members") helped O'Malley disarm all the right people. As Mayor he arrested all the right people.
O'Malley's presidential run is going about as well as those 2013 gun laws.
6
Examining loose gun laws is only a small part of the problem. Globalism, a hyper form of the capitalism that we practically invented in the United States, and exported to the world, has us running to stay relevant in our own game. The first thing that gets cut, mental health funding. We literally have crazy people roaming the streets. The confluence of that and a communal sort of desperation that has cast a cloud over the country, people simply have lost faith that they can do something worthy with their lives, greed has contributed greatly to this. Bracing ourselves for more is tantamount to doing nothing. Take action, demand better from our politicians. Quit buying the "divisive" tactics they use to their own benefit. We can have guns and safety, yet we need mental health funding.
5
I feel worn out by the issue. I keep waiting for something to change, and for us to look up one day and say, "This is absurd". I think we had a moment like that with tobacco. I keep hoping that it will happen. There are solutions out there. Some of them deal with the mentally unstable and others deal with the extreme poverty that we see in our inner cities and our dying rural communities. The solutions have been successful in Australia and in Canada without impinging on the rights or privileges of lawful gun owners. I am waiting for the sea to part and for us to take that first step toward changing our bloody violent culture. I am not holding my breath, though.
38
Naw. Here in Ohio we now allow guns to be taken into bars. We are now working on open carry. When Kasich become President we will all have a Colt strapped to our hip. The NRA will see to it. It controls the legislature in Ohio, as well as Congress, I might add. I suppose Prosecutor Deters will receive death threats now that he is working on an indictment of a UC cop for the murder of a black man.
It seems ironic to me that, in the old-fashioned westerns, vigilantism was depicted as wrong. When civilization moved into town, the gunslingers had to deposit their guns in the sheriff's office. The marshal was a good guy who made sure there was a fair trial and those who wanted to take the law into their own hands were the bad guys. That was the mythology of an earlier time.
Today, we have a myth that ordinary people have to carry guns to protect themselves. Movie violence glamorizes killing. Gangs make the violence worse when people band together for perverse camaraderie and protection.
Today, we have a myth that ordinary people have to carry guns to protect themselves. Movie violence glamorizes killing. Gangs make the violence worse when people band together for perverse camaraderie and protection.
10
The person most likely to be killed with a firearm is the person holding the gun.
Twice as many people in the US use firearms to commit suicide than homicide and white people are about 3 times more likely to commit suicide than others.
That's the scary thing about having a gun around the house. Little too much to drink, maybe forgot the meds or got them mixed up, bills piling up... Some 21,000 people die from suicide by firearms, around 10,000 from homicide.
That's the best reason I can think of for the average person to stay far away from guns.
Twice as many people in the US use firearms to commit suicide than homicide and white people are about 3 times more likely to commit suicide than others.
That's the scary thing about having a gun around the house. Little too much to drink, maybe forgot the meds or got them mixed up, bills piling up... Some 21,000 people die from suicide by firearms, around 10,000 from homicide.
That's the best reason I can think of for the average person to stay far away from guns.
15
Nations with far stricter gun control laws than the US sometimes also happen to have higher suicide rates than the US. Apparently those determined to commit suicide will find a way.
Unfortunately, gun owners will never be convinced by statistics or any form of logic. They believe what they believe and that's that. Our only approach is to continue to strengthen existing laws to keep children, mentally ill people and felons from getting firearms.
14
Felons don't care about any gun laws, Mr. Layton. And if one is to go by recent evidence, many mentally ill people don't either, even when they have been legally disqualified to acquire guns.
And don't forget the most gun-free zones, the legislatures and courts where these lenient laws are enacted.
I'd love to see a 2nd amendment fanatic try to exercise his rights during a visit to SCOTUS. Oh, the irony.
I'd love to see a 2nd amendment fanatic try to exercise his rights during a visit to SCOTUS. Oh, the irony.
44
It is also true that any number of senseless killings have taken place in so-called, "gun free zones". And speaking of irony, spacetimejunky, it seems that, "gun free zones" patrolled by armed guards are the only safe, "gun free zones."
I happen to read the 2nd Amendment as it was written: in respect of the importance of militias and a post-colonial state's right to band armed people together for protection. Gun regulation for individuals is necessary and constitutional.
However, one of our biggest problems results from our lack of funding for (and attention to) mental illnesses. We would have a lot fewer gun crimes (and accidents, suicides, and domestic tragedies - all incredibly important to deal with) if we had serious gun regulation; however, our high-visibility mass shootings happen because we let mental illness go relatively unrecognized and untreated. We must deal with this problem also.
However, one of our biggest problems results from our lack of funding for (and attention to) mental illnesses. We would have a lot fewer gun crimes (and accidents, suicides, and domestic tragedies - all incredibly important to deal with) if we had serious gun regulation; however, our high-visibility mass shootings happen because we let mental illness go relatively unrecognized and untreated. We must deal with this problem also.
7
NRA definition of "gun free zone" : places where all are free to carry guns- in other words- as many places as possible.
5
Except their headquarters. They know very well what would happen, if they were not.
You are aware, Susan, that any number of senseless killings have taken place in clearly labeled, "gun free zones" where presumably no law abiding citizen was armed. Including, of course, off duty police officers.
My workplace has just become a concealed-carry zone.
Can't wait for the first shoot out. Personally, I prefer to
pack hand grenades - they are just so much more effective.
Imaging a crowded lecture hall - you'd get the bad guy for sure.
Can't wait for the first shoot out. Personally, I prefer to
pack hand grenades - they are just so much more effective.
Imaging a crowded lecture hall - you'd get the bad guy for sure.
10
Interesting but worrisome fact about the South. I seem to recall the recent cop shootings in NYC were by individuals who easily obtained guns in the South. Do you think Wayne LaPierre rides to work in a bullet proof car? Does he have armed guards protecting him?
5
IIRC, NRA headquarters is a gun-free zone.
Won't ever be able to take the guns away, but we could put a clamp on ammunition. How about regulating bullets, or is that absurd?
7
$ 1,000.00 per bullet, each bullet registered
On June 3rd of this year, a man named Jim Cooley strode through Atlanta's giant airport with an AR-15 and 100 rounds of ammunition to put his daughter on a plane. Police and the TSA could do nothing as Georgia's laws made Mr. Cooley's actions perfectly legal. Of course, had he been something other than Caucasian, or wearing a turban, the Great State of Georgia would have reacted as California did in may of 1967 when 30 young Black men and women walked heavily armed into the State Capitol totally legally. Then-Governor Ronald Reagan and the Legislature rushed to change the state's laws to prevent that happening again.
So Mr. Egan's assertion about airports being safe has a major hole in it as Atlanta's Hartsfield International is still the biggest airport in the US, if not the world. But it is, of course, in the South.
So Mr. Egan's assertion about airports being safe has a major hole in it as Atlanta's Hartsfield International is still the biggest airport in the US, if not the world. But it is, of course, in the South.
17
When Congress allows people to freely enter with guns, I will believe that a good guy with a gun is the best deterrent to a bad guy with a gun. When the Supreme Court allows ordinary citizens to bring guns on the premises, I will believe that Constitutional gun rights trump other rights.
Until our leaders put their money where their mouths are, I will continue to believe that common sense regulation of a tool - a lethal tool - is lawful and sane.
Until our leaders put their money where their mouths are, I will continue to believe that common sense regulation of a tool - a lethal tool - is lawful and sane.
95
To any number of gun control advocates, Cathy, the ultimate "common sense" gun law would universally ban their legal possession by private citizens.
I do not understand why we tolerate mass shootings as part of our culture. We have become a nation characterized by Dodge City and Al Capone shoot outs as American as apple pie. I was at a forum recently when the Attorney General of the United States, when asked by an audience member why we don't have a "Marshall Plan" for Chicago to stem the gun violence, that all sides in the gun debate have a legitimate "point of view." What "point of view" tolerates a culture where its citizens are 20 percent more likely to be killed by guns than in other first-world countries? When will politicians stand up and bravely announce that the king has no clothes? We spend billions on security to protect ourselves from jihadists, and at the same time allow angry young American men to secure deadly weapons and kill us at will. We are being terrorized by guns.
21
I think you meant twenty times more likely
According to the article, 20 times more likely, not 20 percent more likely (i.e. much, much worse). Otherwise good comment, though.
'What "point of view" tolerates a culture where its citizens are 20 percent more likely to be killed by guns than in other first-world countries?'
Its actually 20 times, e.g. 2000% more likely.
Its actually 20 times, e.g. 2000% more likely.
3
The more guns there are in circulation, the easier it is to obtain a gun, the more cavalier gun ownership becomes, the more people will be shot.
We flood our society with guns. Anyone can get a gun anywhere, legal or not. More guns don't solve problems, they just make our problems worse. More guns are like trying to control forest fires by burning down the forest.
One of the reasons the police are so on edge and shooting more people all the time is that they are filled with fear. They know that guns are everywhere. That fear is causing them to become more aggressive and to shoot first.
Conservatives always use the rational, responsible citizen argument. But people are not rational. They are often irresponsible, they make mistakes, they have fits of mental instability, they become enraged. With guns present, these failing become lethal in a second. Gun accidents alone kill thousands.
The gun supporters claim that guns keep us free. No they don't. Freedom is not living in fear. Freedom is not needing a gun. Freedom is having a society where instant death does not lurk at every turn. Have guns made Afghanistan a free society?
The gun enslaves us. It robs us of our freedoms. The fear guns produce also fuels the fear to own more guns. The fear feeds upon itself.
Holding the power of death in your hand is not freedom. It enslaves us to fear, the fear of all.
We flood our society with guns. Anyone can get a gun anywhere, legal or not. More guns don't solve problems, they just make our problems worse. More guns are like trying to control forest fires by burning down the forest.
One of the reasons the police are so on edge and shooting more people all the time is that they are filled with fear. They know that guns are everywhere. That fear is causing them to become more aggressive and to shoot first.
Conservatives always use the rational, responsible citizen argument. But people are not rational. They are often irresponsible, they make mistakes, they have fits of mental instability, they become enraged. With guns present, these failing become lethal in a second. Gun accidents alone kill thousands.
The gun supporters claim that guns keep us free. No they don't. Freedom is not living in fear. Freedom is not needing a gun. Freedom is having a society where instant death does not lurk at every turn. Have guns made Afghanistan a free society?
The gun enslaves us. It robs us of our freedoms. The fear guns produce also fuels the fear to own more guns. The fear feeds upon itself.
Holding the power of death in your hand is not freedom. It enslaves us to fear, the fear of all.
47
Armed citizens degrade democracy. One cannot engage in vigorous civil discourse with an armed man.
Saying that in cities like Chicago, which has strict gun laws, yet still has a high death rate by gun violence, does not argue that these measures are ineffective. Instead it points to the fact that most of the illegal guns come from outside the city, from neighboring counties, elsewhere in the state, ore from other states. This is why we need a national gun registration program, independent of what the states might impose.
15
Like the author, I am in favor of greater restrictions on access to weapons. However, do not make the mistake of blaming gun violence on mental illness. This is a meme that the pro-gun lobbies (the "gunaholics") want to promote.
Mental illness - any mental illness - does not create the ideas that seem to motivate the shooters in these incidents. Those ideas - racism, misogyny, xenophobia, religious extremism - come from somewhere else. They come from internet web sites that promote a "white-only America," or a "defense of western civilization." And they come from more conventional sources, like Fox News, right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh.
There is such a thing as hate speech, and when that is combined with almost unlimited access to guns that are nothing if not hand-held WMDs, well, we will be reading about these events over and over.
Mental illness - any mental illness - does not create the ideas that seem to motivate the shooters in these incidents. Those ideas - racism, misogyny, xenophobia, religious extremism - come from somewhere else. They come from internet web sites that promote a "white-only America," or a "defense of western civilization." And they come from more conventional sources, like Fox News, right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh.
There is such a thing as hate speech, and when that is combined with almost unlimited access to guns that are nothing if not hand-held WMDs, well, we will be reading about these events over and over.
24
Five members of an Oklahoma family were stabbed to death last week, presumably they are included in Mr. Egan's numbers. It was, after all, a mass murder.
When the 2nd Amendment was written the nation housed it's mentally ill in institutions. That was still true as recently as late last century. Now the mentally ill mostly wander the streets with a bottle of pills, and a pat on the head from the mental health profession. Sometimes they acquire guns illegally; and sometimes they acquire guns because of human error. The Virginia Tech mentally ill killer should not have been able to acquire guns. The
Aurora Theatre killer should not have been able to acquire guns. Charleston? Same story. The Lafayette killer had actually been involuntarily committed to a mental health program, but he too, "fell through the cracks".
Legal guns are all but impossible to own in New York City. And when the City also began to trample on 4th Amendment rights, the murder rate dropped to a multi-generational low. Yes, police states have fewer crimes.
Still, in NYC there have been about 5000 murders over the past decade.
Which brings up the example of the other two Americas. Most violent crime takes place in the big cities. Most of them being the places with the strictest, sometimes even prohibitive gun laws. Most of the places where shootings don't occur regularly? Away from the cities.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nyc-murders-2014-crime-pol...
When the 2nd Amendment was written the nation housed it's mentally ill in institutions. That was still true as recently as late last century. Now the mentally ill mostly wander the streets with a bottle of pills, and a pat on the head from the mental health profession. Sometimes they acquire guns illegally; and sometimes they acquire guns because of human error. The Virginia Tech mentally ill killer should not have been able to acquire guns. The
Aurora Theatre killer should not have been able to acquire guns. Charleston? Same story. The Lafayette killer had actually been involuntarily committed to a mental health program, but he too, "fell through the cracks".
Legal guns are all but impossible to own in New York City. And when the City also began to trample on 4th Amendment rights, the murder rate dropped to a multi-generational low. Yes, police states have fewer crimes.
Still, in NYC there have been about 5000 murders over the past decade.
Which brings up the example of the other two Americas. Most violent crime takes place in the big cities. Most of them being the places with the strictest, sometimes even prohibitive gun laws. Most of the places where shootings don't occur regularly? Away from the cities.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nyc-murders-2014-crime-pol...
7
Most violent crime takes place in big cities except when it doesn't.
"Most violent crime takes place in the big cities. Most of them being the places with the strictest, sometimes even prohibitive gun laws. Most of the places where shootings don't occur regularly? Away from the cities." Never been down South before, have you?
I am no fan of guns and believe gun control in cities or metropolitan areas of a certain size is a must. I grew up in this city and experienced first hand the lawlessness of the late 60s through and until Mayor Giuliani arrived on the scene. Yes we had gun control but the bad guys running amoke in a city with a non-effective and corrupt police force ruled the day that is until Bernie Goetz showed us why they is a double standard in this country. Rural areas don't have law enforcement coverage of huge territories and folks need to protect themselves - we don't all live in Park Avenue or East Hampton. The south has a gun culture because that's their heritage and it's difficult to move the needle to adjust this. I do laugh at the no-gun zones such as the NFL venues being mentioned in this article . Sad to say - as a Jet fan I have seen so much violence, criminal level violence because of alcohol and drugs that has left young and old adults alike pummeled, unconscious, broken facial bones etc that I stopped attending the games. Now there is the biggest fallacy of all - the NFL - a culture of player uncontrolled violence in and off the field - the networks never show fan violence inside the stadiums nor in their parking lots. I would not go back unless you give me a gun to protect myself. America wake up it's a dangerous world and I manage to go about my business without a gun... for how long?
2
The reason we're pushing for more restrictions on gun owners is that the rest of us don't trust them any more. Sure, they say they're law-abiding, but plenty of their fellow owners were law-abiding, too, untill they snapped and decided to take revenge on others because someone done them wrong. The bad actors might have gotten what they wanted, but in so doing, they've ruined things for everyone else.
9
Isn't this always the case? A few rotten apples in any activity ruin that activity for everyone else.
Americans love guns, they are part of our mythology of rugged individualism, that frontier spirit, the tall dark stranger administering frontier justice in an old Western movie.
Guns are equated with "freedom", seen as the great equalizer, the ultimate expression of "individualism".
They are our means of expressing our fears of the "other", that person that does not look, speak, or believe like us. those "others" who do not share our "values".
What do we expect after glorifying guns for so many years through advertising, movies, and wars. The mentally and socially deficient among us are not immune to the lure of the gun as that very expression of their fears, hates, and sense of isolation.
We keeping advocating more guns as the means to protect us from the "others". This obsession only results in more guns in the hands of those we fear. We have become victims of our myths of individualism and self determination. Instead of addressing the problems that create poverty and crime, we armor up like we did with the Soviets during the Cold War.
Only in America do we have such low regard for the common good.
Guns are equated with "freedom", seen as the great equalizer, the ultimate expression of "individualism".
They are our means of expressing our fears of the "other", that person that does not look, speak, or believe like us. those "others" who do not share our "values".
What do we expect after glorifying guns for so many years through advertising, movies, and wars. The mentally and socially deficient among us are not immune to the lure of the gun as that very expression of their fears, hates, and sense of isolation.
We keeping advocating more guns as the means to protect us from the "others". This obsession only results in more guns in the hands of those we fear. We have become victims of our myths of individualism and self determination. Instead of addressing the problems that create poverty and crime, we armor up like we did with the Soviets during the Cold War.
Only in America do we have such low regard for the common good.
13
The PEW data below indicates that blacks and Hispanics represent almost 75% of firearm homicides in the US. Black offending rates are even higher than victim rates so the numbers below understate offending rates a bit. Most of the states with the lowest rates of homicides in the US also have higher than average rates of gun ownership, such as in the upper Midwest and Northeast, while blacks and Hispanics in urban areas have some of the lowest rates of gun ownership. Mass shootings do not contribute much to the overall homicide rate so bans on items like assault weapons will not do much to reduce the rate. In addition most mass shootings are committed with handguns, the weapon used in the vast majority of firearm homicides.
As noted in a report to Congress almost two decades ago to significantly reduce firearm homicides in the US one needs to address violence among blacks and Hispanics in what are typically heavily segregated, low income urban areas.
http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/blacks-suffer-disproportionate-s...
Among racial and ethnic groups, blacks are over-represented among gun homicide victims; blacks were 55% of shooting homicide victims in 2010, but 13% of the population. By contrast, whites are underrepresented; whites were 25% of the victims of gun homicide in 2010, but 65% of the population. For Hispanics, the 17% share of gun homicide victims was about equal to their 16% proportion of the total population.
As noted in a report to Congress almost two decades ago to significantly reduce firearm homicides in the US one needs to address violence among blacks and Hispanics in what are typically heavily segregated, low income urban areas.
http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/blacks-suffer-disproportionate-s...
Among racial and ethnic groups, blacks are over-represented among gun homicide victims; blacks were 55% of shooting homicide victims in 2010, but 13% of the population. By contrast, whites are underrepresented; whites were 25% of the victims of gun homicide in 2010, but 65% of the population. For Hispanics, the 17% share of gun homicide victims was about equal to their 16% proportion of the total population.
10
and your point is? Why drag race into this discussion?
Facts like these are scary things for Mr Egan
“Why drag race into this discussion?”
If you read more carefully you will find that it is not just race, as we don’t see many middle and upper class blacks and Hispanics committing homicides. In addition we don’t see high, chronic levels of firearms violence among whites in rural areas with high poverty levels, in spite of high levels of firearms ownership. Even among Democrats the firearm ownership in rural areas is almost 60%. Most of the states with the lowest homicide rates are in the upper Midwest and Northeast, most having higher than average rates of firearm ownership. To significantly impact firearm homicides in the US one needs to address homicides committed with handguns in the segregated, low income black and Hispanic neighborhoods, areas which account for up to 90% of homicides in a number of major urban areas, and as previously mentioned almost 75% of firearm homicides in the US.
In looking at firearms violence in the US a good high school science teacher would have the students doing literature searches and identifying the attributes of the main contributors to the problem, something which seems beyond the capabilities of most people.
If you read more carefully you will find that it is not just race, as we don’t see many middle and upper class blacks and Hispanics committing homicides. In addition we don’t see high, chronic levels of firearms violence among whites in rural areas with high poverty levels, in spite of high levels of firearms ownership. Even among Democrats the firearm ownership in rural areas is almost 60%. Most of the states with the lowest homicide rates are in the upper Midwest and Northeast, most having higher than average rates of firearm ownership. To significantly impact firearm homicides in the US one needs to address homicides committed with handguns in the segregated, low income black and Hispanic neighborhoods, areas which account for up to 90% of homicides in a number of major urban areas, and as previously mentioned almost 75% of firearm homicides in the US.
In looking at firearms violence in the US a good high school science teacher would have the students doing literature searches and identifying the attributes of the main contributors to the problem, something which seems beyond the capabilities of most people.
2
Has America has a problem with manhood? It struck me while watching the fallout over the murder of Cecil the lion. It struck me years ago at the enthusiasm evident both Politically and in the media about the invasion of Iraq. It strikes me too at the huge amount of rapes in the Military and at Colleges and also with the police murders of innocent Americans. Why do American men want and need so many guns? What's going on? Why do so few men outside of America need guns?
67
A good article except for the last paragraph. Putting for that the second amendment was "designed to find off British tyranny" ennobles its origins and leaves aside the real driving forces in its creation, putting down local revolts, particularly by slaves.
7
Good point, Jevar. Slaves are never allowed ownership of firearms.
Why should the government have a monopoly on violence? Can't some Uber or Air BnB whiz kid come up with a 2nd amendment app for those of us who only want to rent a gun and a killer temporarily? Oh, wait. Mm. That would be the, uh, never mind.
2
This is the most twisted article on guns I have read in a while. Where to start?
- Violent crime is down to the lowest levels in generations.
- Being black and living in a city is the best way to get killed with a gun. By another black person.
How do you reconcile these facts with this article? Drumming up hysteria without talking about this is just dishonest
- Violent crime is down to the lowest levels in generations.
- Being black and living in a city is the best way to get killed with a gun. By another black person.
How do you reconcile these facts with this article? Drumming up hysteria without talking about this is just dishonest
16
"Mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti-government extremists"--aren't the last two redundant?
8
According to the right wingers who defend the indefensible sentence in the second amendment (more on that later) "everyone should be armed, everywhere." By their warped logic this will reduce the incidence of gun violence and gun deaths because "Once a shooting starts, the bad guy with the gun will be killed by the good guy with the gun." While reading this logic, I hope you did not fall off your chair laughing, crying or just exasperated. Do they not realize that "even if the bad guy with the gun will be killed" in the meantime there would have been many more good guys with a gun that would have been killed too. In other words, to catch one bad guy, we'll be sacrificing many good guys. Of course they know that, at least deep down. But they cannot say that publicly because that will not help gun sales. And that is the real reason why you see them inventing more and more ways, one weirder than the other, to defend the indefensible in the second amendment.
I have always had one suggestion for these right wing defenders of the second amendment. They are entitled to a gun, a manually loading musket. No more, no less. And they can also go on their horse and buggy to the village dealer to buy that musket and gunpowder.
I have always had one suggestion for these right wing defenders of the second amendment. They are entitled to a gun, a manually loading musket. No more, no less. And they can also go on their horse and buggy to the village dealer to buy that musket and gunpowder.
352
And freedom of speech only applies to the printing press or someone shouting on the street corner, not to telephones, television, or any other form of electronic communication, including this comment section.
1
In a CDC study, ordered by President Obama to focus on gun violence it found that guns are used defensively between 500,000 and 3,000,000 times per year. Often times there are no shots fired, so it is not particularly newsworthy. But to say that good guys with guns stopping bad guys with or without guns is laughable, it's not, it's ignorant.
I have what I think is a good short term solution until our congress comes to it senses or gets voted out. First fix the records concerning who can and cannot buy a weapon. Then anyone (person, company, corporation) who sells, donates or gives a gun to a person on that list who then uses that gun to hurt anyone, will be arrested and tried at the same level as the perpetrator. That will certainly slow the sales of guns considerably.
11
What too many advocates of gun toting don't realize is that those old western movies that still inspire them were just that: movies. John Wayne and their other heroes never had to worry about being shot, and the bad guys that he shot didn't really die.
18
The reality of two Americas is not measured only in gun ownership and usage, it is measured by ideology, education, and income. “Gunnistans” tend to be populated by people who, on average, have less money and education, and more religious fundamentalism and anti-government fervor than the non-Gunnistan areas. It may be that per capita gun ownership is decreasing but the sheer volume and lethality of personal weaponry remains astounding and the reality of a de facto “Gunnistan Nation” will be with us for a very long time.
8
I really agree with your assessment. Sometimes those "Gunnistans" populated with people who, on average have "less money and education" and might be more anti-government are reacting to a very real dichotomy in this country. There is many times less protection from government agencies in these neighborhoods. Fewer hospitals, fewer supermarkets, fewer police or police using tactics endorsed by the wealthy in their very well monitored neighborhoods. Also, many policies by the government do not take the needs of these "gunnistan" inhabitants seriously. They are looked down upon by those in the well gated well policed well hospitaled areas of the area.
The gunnistanians learn that they have to take care of themselves. That they are "done to" not "done with".
The Tea Party enthusiasts have grown out of some of this frustration.
The gunnistanians learn that they have to take care of themselves. That they are "done to" not "done with".
The Tea Party enthusiasts have grown out of some of this frustration.
Felons are not allowed to buy guns.
The mentally ill are not allowed to buy guns.
Morons, however, can buy and carry all the guns they want.
The mentally ill are not allowed to buy guns.
Morons, however, can buy and carry all the guns they want.
50
Tim, Good article. As usual. Gun Free will join Smoke Free as a value added component of market savvy venues and facilities.
10
Consider taking down the other icon born of the civil war -- the hand gun. Why do we not hate the hand gun more than the confederate flag? The last bastion of the rebel stand, the tool of the bushwhackers, continues to reign terror on the land. We are all Missouri now. We are all Charleston now. The confederate flag as symbol must not serve as cover for the real deadly legacy of a divided land, of good guys and bad guys whose identities are shaped by gun power.
6
Gun-lovers are usually insecure men and the low-life politicians who cater to them.
If we had better mental health care, there would be fewer gun-owners, and therefore fewer homicides in this country.
If we had better mental health care, there would be fewer gun-owners, and therefore fewer homicides in this country.
9
I recently drove from Reno to Las Vegas. Most of that trip was desert, desert, and more desert. Every 50 miles or so we came upon a "town" which was more than not, a rusted hulk of something or other. Or, one house/gas station(?)
If I had to live out there for some reason, I would own a gun, and/or an arsonel and a very big dog and very state of the art security system. Even if I called the police, it would take them almost an hour to get to my residence. Maybe in those circumstances, I would have to rely on myself to defend myself. Just a thought.
If I had to live out there for some reason, I would own a gun, and/or an arsonel and a very big dog and very state of the art security system. Even if I called the police, it would take them almost an hour to get to my residence. Maybe in those circumstances, I would have to rely on myself to defend myself. Just a thought.
1
Great conclusion: the freedom itself has become a form of slavery, imprisoning all those unfortunate enough to live in the wrong place to succomb to this new personal arms race.
I'm currently in NH, the live free or die" state. It's not as violent here as it could be..:maybe the influence of liberal MA has seen to that. But is chilling to think our country is self dividing according to gun policies. Just like political polarization,:we now can add to the list of of ideological differentiators, guns.
It's a scary place to be, particularly as racial and economic insecurity and tensions keep rising. There is nothing more scary to contemplate than a boatload of easy available weapons on a national sea of fear, doubt, and anxiety over our very future as a nation.
I'm currently in NH, the live free or die" state. It's not as violent here as it could be..:maybe the influence of liberal MA has seen to that. But is chilling to think our country is self dividing according to gun policies. Just like political polarization,:we now can add to the list of of ideological differentiators, guns.
It's a scary place to be, particularly as racial and economic insecurity and tensions keep rising. There is nothing more scary to contemplate than a boatload of easy available weapons on a national sea of fear, doubt, and anxiety over our very future as a nation.
35
I'm currently in NH, the live free or die" state. It's not as violent here as it could be..:maybe the influence of liberal MA has seen to that. But is chilling to think our country is self dividing according to gun policies.
=====================
Actually, I don't think the influence of "liberal Massachusetts" has anything to do with the level of violence in New Hampshire. MA is FAR more violent than NH, with a gun murder rate of 1.8 (per 100,000) versus 0.4.
If you are really that concerned, maybe you shouldn't go home
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
=====================
Actually, I don't think the influence of "liberal Massachusetts" has anything to do with the level of violence in New Hampshire. MA is FAR more violent than NH, with a gun murder rate of 1.8 (per 100,000) versus 0.4.
If you are really that concerned, maybe you shouldn't go home
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
2
This article runs together four different things: 1) mass killings; 2) gun deaths including suicides; 3) murders; and 4) murders with guns. It uses numbers and percentages for those interchangeably.
The worst mass killings have been done with bombs, except for the worst of all done with box cutters on airplanes. The worst school killing was in 1927, by bombs in Bath, Michigan.
Suicides are over a third of gun deaths. Some of those are a choice for how to die, and some are acting out of depression. Both require a medical solution. Those two problems are not guns. They'd find other ways for those decisions, in fact a majority do find other ways now. Those suicide decisions/needs are the problems.
Murders include many methods of violent death. More than half do not include guns. We have a problem of murderous violence. Too many who kill with guns would kill their victims in other ways too.
Murders with guns are about 2/3 of gun deaths, and about 1/3 of all violent deaths including accidents and suicides. Guns only contribute.
Too many of the solutions offered target just guns instead of the larger problems. Even total success with guns would leave most of the problems untouched. That is politics, not problem solving.
Sure, do something about guns. But don't use that as an excuse NOT to do something about the larger problems.
That should bring a focus back onto who is killing and being killed. It is disproportionately in a few poor neighborhoods. They need help.
The worst mass killings have been done with bombs, except for the worst of all done with box cutters on airplanes. The worst school killing was in 1927, by bombs in Bath, Michigan.
Suicides are over a third of gun deaths. Some of those are a choice for how to die, and some are acting out of depression. Both require a medical solution. Those two problems are not guns. They'd find other ways for those decisions, in fact a majority do find other ways now. Those suicide decisions/needs are the problems.
Murders include many methods of violent death. More than half do not include guns. We have a problem of murderous violence. Too many who kill with guns would kill their victims in other ways too.
Murders with guns are about 2/3 of gun deaths, and about 1/3 of all violent deaths including accidents and suicides. Guns only contribute.
Too many of the solutions offered target just guns instead of the larger problems. Even total success with guns would leave most of the problems untouched. That is politics, not problem solving.
Sure, do something about guns. But don't use that as an excuse NOT to do something about the larger problems.
That should bring a focus back onto who is killing and being killed. It is disproportionately in a few poor neighborhoods. They need help.
6
With all those claims, where's the footnotes?
3
Mr. Egan, you can't do any thing about Republican, er, stupid. For the fact is that Republicans are stupider on the average than non-Republicans. (Look at the correlation between McCain vs. Obama states in 2008, and college vs noncollege.) They are elementary beings, unable to achieve a nonsimplistic understanding of complex issues. For example, even when daddy didn't beat the Bible into the head, they don't believe in biological evolution because they don't understand statistics. Or that man is capable of dumping so much CO2 into the atmosphere as to change the very climate.
It is regrettable that one is forced to speak in generalizations* and ill of one's fellow man, but the sad fact is that Republican is a disaster in every sphere of life, and the only solution to our problems is to eliminate Republican. This, alas, is not going to happen quickly.
*Like all generalizations, it is false in the particular. Even a blind pig finds the acorn sometimes. And every now and then, a Yale student will be dumber than one who went to Oral Roberts.
It is regrettable that one is forced to speak in generalizations* and ill of one's fellow man, but the sad fact is that Republican is a disaster in every sphere of life, and the only solution to our problems is to eliminate Republican. This, alas, is not going to happen quickly.
*Like all generalizations, it is false in the particular. Even a blind pig finds the acorn sometimes. And every now and then, a Yale student will be dumber than one who went to Oral Roberts.
20
It's time to repeal the Second Amendment.
It's not the Framers' fault. The Amendment has been willfully misconstrued by those who dream of shootouts at Galt's Gulch, where Ronald Reagan rides to the rescue and Clint Eastwood makes an empty chair dance with his six-shooter.
I'm trying to see this from the point of view of the formerly unionized worker who is now trying to get by working a minimum-wage job that is classified "part-time" so that his employer won't have to provide health care or pension benefits. Network TV has hit the skids, and who has money for premium cable? Even bowling's gotten really expensive. The Governor wants to eliminate state income taxes (which don't affect our hero much) and ramp up sales and property taxes (which do).
Every which way, his economic freedom is under attack, but he is surrounded by those who shout FREEDOM!, offering him instead a bogus sop like unlimited gun ownership and ... the unlimited right to believe and broadcast any and all religious fantasies, including making young women's lives miserable by standing outside Planned Parenthood centers screaming bile into their vulnerable faces.
It's hard to justify a frontier mentality in a country without frontiers. Studies show that those who have inadequate gun training are more likely to hurt themselves than others when brandishing a weapon.
In short, a minority is addicted to fantasy, whether religious or civil, and the rest of us don't have the guts to take away their toys.
It's not the Framers' fault. The Amendment has been willfully misconstrued by those who dream of shootouts at Galt's Gulch, where Ronald Reagan rides to the rescue and Clint Eastwood makes an empty chair dance with his six-shooter.
I'm trying to see this from the point of view of the formerly unionized worker who is now trying to get by working a minimum-wage job that is classified "part-time" so that his employer won't have to provide health care or pension benefits. Network TV has hit the skids, and who has money for premium cable? Even bowling's gotten really expensive. The Governor wants to eliminate state income taxes (which don't affect our hero much) and ramp up sales and property taxes (which do).
Every which way, his economic freedom is under attack, but he is surrounded by those who shout FREEDOM!, offering him instead a bogus sop like unlimited gun ownership and ... the unlimited right to believe and broadcast any and all religious fantasies, including making young women's lives miserable by standing outside Planned Parenthood centers screaming bile into their vulnerable faces.
It's hard to justify a frontier mentality in a country without frontiers. Studies show that those who have inadequate gun training are more likely to hurt themselves than others when brandishing a weapon.
In short, a minority is addicted to fantasy, whether religious or civil, and the rest of us don't have the guts to take away their toys.
226
It's not like good paying Union jobs abound in the US. Talk about not having the guts to fight for economic rights. The politicians call it free trade. Get it? Freedom.
1
It wouldn't be necessary to repeal the second amendment, although I would absolutely support doing so, if those who obsess over it and their right to own firearms actually adhered to the obvious phrase "a well-regulated militia." None of the zealots who not only want to own but also carry their guns everywhere they go have any standing under that restriction in the second amendment.
Militias are composed of citizens, but few if any citizens are part of them. Militias, of course, are not simply groups of individuals simply deciding to form one. They are official bodies within the jurisdiction of government. Pretending otherwise is simply a combination of intellectual dishonesty and making it up.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
Militias are composed of citizens, but few if any citizens are part of them. Militias, of course, are not simply groups of individuals simply deciding to form one. They are official bodies within the jurisdiction of government. Pretending otherwise is simply a combination of intellectual dishonesty and making it up.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
5
"backed by politicians who think . . ."
You give them too much credit. Should be "politicians who bleat . . ."
You give them too much credit. Should be "politicians who bleat . . ."
10
This madness will not stop until some severe economic pressure is brought to bear on the "open-carry" areas of this country: no more tourism or conventions or new business ventures until laws are changed. I wish I had the dollars to advertise in Europe and South America asking people to stay away from these area when planning vacations. Loss of revenue means more to many of my fellow Americans than the loss of their fellow citizens in these bloodbaths, sad to say.
41
An interesting thing about Rick Perry's comment is that since he is under felony indictment, he can't carry a concealed hand-gun, can't buy ammunition, and can't receive such things as gifts:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rick-perry-indictment-guns-ammo
which probably makes it harder for Perry to go jogging:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/10/rick-perry-says-he-shot...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rick-perry-indictment-guns-ammo
which probably makes it harder for Perry to go jogging:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/10/rick-perry-says-he-shot...
36
Do you really think anyone took Rick Perry's guns away?
5
It is clear to me that we have decided in this country that the right of easy access to a wide variety of firearms is more important to us than the right to be free from gun violence. When, we, or a loved one, become victims of gun violence, we need to learn to accept it as a fact of life in these United States and not waste time sobbing and making statements like: I can't believe it happened here. If it hasn't yet happened at your 'here', it's only a matter of time. Get used to it.
195
True, Tom, but the "we" you mention really only includes the gun lobbyists and the right-wing. Nearly 90% of American supported gun safety restrictions after Newtown. The GOP made sure nothing happened.
4
Great phrase---“a freedom that has become a tyranny in itself.”
Let’s add racist fanatics to your list of the mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti govt extremists. What the rw ignores is that the easy access to guns feeds the fantasies of mentally unstable haters. And the regular publicity of public killings likely motivates them to plan.
It’s not just 1 factor. Hostile people without easy gun access might never act out their fantasies. The politicians pushing gun rights on TV with moral fervor actually fan the flames of anti govt fanatics.
But with every public massacre more sane people realize how unlimited gun possession is ruining public safety. The Gop right wing gun fanatics react the opposite—every massacre reinforces their fixation that guns are the best answer to more guns.
The right wing is out of step with most voters, who polls show want strict gun laws, as do even many NRA members. But the media doesn’t publicize this. It keeps interviewing the usual organizations for gun control.
The media should also publicize other countries with strict gun laws, lower death rates, and point out that their politicians and public seem to agree on this, regardless of party. These are positive roll models for Americans to strive toward.
Let’s add racist fanatics to your list of the mentally ill, religious fanatics and anti govt extremists. What the rw ignores is that the easy access to guns feeds the fantasies of mentally unstable haters. And the regular publicity of public killings likely motivates them to plan.
It’s not just 1 factor. Hostile people without easy gun access might never act out their fantasies. The politicians pushing gun rights on TV with moral fervor actually fan the flames of anti govt fanatics.
But with every public massacre more sane people realize how unlimited gun possession is ruining public safety. The Gop right wing gun fanatics react the opposite—every massacre reinforces their fixation that guns are the best answer to more guns.
The right wing is out of step with most voters, who polls show want strict gun laws, as do even many NRA members. But the media doesn’t publicize this. It keeps interviewing the usual organizations for gun control.
The media should also publicize other countries with strict gun laws, lower death rates, and point out that their politicians and public seem to agree on this, regardless of party. These are positive roll models for Americans to strive toward.
102
All the talk about the threat from ISIS, Muslim extremists and home-grown crazies, is just hot air and whistling through the cemtery. The real threat to this country is the NRA and their sycophant political arm, the Republican party, and the sooner the former is declared a terrorist organization, and dealt with accordingly, the sooner we can begin to reduce, if not eliminate this scourge in this country.
321
The unstoppable perceptions of public safety will be the way through the madness of promoting guns everywhere, all the time for all white Americans.
The madness became most visible when the United States Congress could not grasp a need of policy changes when even one of their own members, Gabby Giffords, was gravely shot and wounded. Then again, after 27 first graders and their teachers were massacred in cold blood, our United States Senators proudly brandished assault weapons high in their hands shouting freedom and their rights, while thousands of American are shot and killed each year, each month, and each day. Who are we? We live with a Congress who believes that citizens' lives in schools, movie theaters, parks, etc. are less important than common sense statutes for acquiring lethal weapons This is not changing. Normal people are helpless as the price of this terror escalates. I and my family pay very close attention to the gun laws across the Southern states, and any locality that allows open carry. No thank you. We will wave from afar. Very afar.
The madness became most visible when the United States Congress could not grasp a need of policy changes when even one of their own members, Gabby Giffords, was gravely shot and wounded. Then again, after 27 first graders and their teachers were massacred in cold blood, our United States Senators proudly brandished assault weapons high in their hands shouting freedom and their rights, while thousands of American are shot and killed each year, each month, and each day. Who are we? We live with a Congress who believes that citizens' lives in schools, movie theaters, parks, etc. are less important than common sense statutes for acquiring lethal weapons This is not changing. Normal people are helpless as the price of this terror escalates. I and my family pay very close attention to the gun laws across the Southern states, and any locality that allows open carry. No thank you. We will wave from afar. Very afar.
441
I used to think that as an American, I would like to visit all 50 states.
Now I know I won't. Stand your ground laws, concealed carry without permits, ownership without proof of safety training, or even sanity. I won't visit or patronize those states. I don't need to be anywhere the average person feels the imaginary need to pack heat anywhere, anytime.
Now I know I won't. Stand your ground laws, concealed carry without permits, ownership without proof of safety training, or even sanity. I won't visit or patronize those states. I don't need to be anywhere the average person feels the imaginary need to pack heat anywhere, anytime.
40
I used to think that as an American, I would like to visit all 50 states.
Now I know I won't.
==================
By all means, please stay "safe" there in Maryland, which has the third highest gun murder rate (for a state) in the country at 5.1 per 100,000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
Now I know I won't.
==================
By all means, please stay "safe" there in Maryland, which has the third highest gun murder rate (for a state) in the country at 5.1 per 100,000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
1
"promoting guns everywhere, all the time for all white Americans" Of course, you know that one of the founding principles of the NRA was to help arms freed slaves so they could defend themselves from the Ku Klux Klan. So what group are you referring to when you narrow the scope to white Americans?
Phemomenal piece of writing. Cuts directly to the chase.
Half of our country is nuts. The rest are sane, and desperately trying to find a way to simply live their lives worry-free on day-to-day basis without fear of being cut down by either a good guy *or* a bad guy carrying a weapon.
Don't we all have enough on our plates as it is?
Half of our country is nuts. The rest are sane, and desperately trying to find a way to simply live their lives worry-free on day-to-day basis without fear of being cut down by either a good guy *or* a bad guy carrying a weapon.
Don't we all have enough on our plates as it is?
185
Congress does not have the will to pass gun control legislation because their constituents do not want it.
Why is that so hard to understand? If the people wanted gun control they would demand their Congressional leaders to act.
Take a look at your local paper and follow those felons who are arrested in possession of an illegal firearm. Watch as they are arrested time and time again in possession of a firearm.
And you want to take mine away?
Why is that so hard to understand? If the people wanted gun control they would demand their Congressional leaders to act.
Take a look at your local paper and follow those felons who are arrested in possession of an illegal firearm. Watch as they are arrested time and time again in possession of a firearm.
And you want to take mine away?
49
Yes. Period
18
Yours, along with those of the felons.
12
A minority of Congress' constituents don't want it. The vast majority of Americans consistently agree that we need to do more. However, the gun industry has so many representatives in its pocket, the lawmakers can afford to ignore us.
17
A gun enthusiast club dictates the gun laws in this country. How crazy is that? Do we let we let coal and gasoline companies dictate our environmental laws? Do we let banks and brokerages dictate our monetary regulations? Do we let insurance companies dictate our medical costs? Do we let pharmaceutical companies dictate how much we pay for drugs? Do we let the military industrial complex dictate how our Armies are supplied? Do we let Israel dictate how we will deal with Iran? Do we let a small ethnic population dictate how we interact with Cuba? Do we let religious groups dictate our secular judiciary? Do we let the rich dictate our election rules? Do we let partisan politicians dictate our voting districts? No, of course not. That would be crazy.
1012
Sadly, in too many cases, the answer to those questions is yes. The power of lobbyists and special-interest groups means that all too odten the regulation that should be imposed on all of these groups is subverted and dismantled.
14
Gee, you just described how the GOP makes policy.
19
The answer to your questions is yes and it, too, is getting worse every year.
16
The tipping point on guns is coming. Just as we seemingly turned the corner on gay marriage and the Confederate flag seemingly overnight (even though both were decades in the making), so too will we turn the corner on guns. The defenders would do well to take the lead on reasonable gun reforms to head this off, for if they do not, the tipping will be far more drastic than it need otherwise be.
20
The tipping point on guns is coming.
========================
The tipping point on guns has already happened:
Growing Public Support for Gun Rights
More Say Guns Do More to Protect Than Put People at Risk
For the first time in more than two decades of Pew Research Center surveys, there is more support for gun rights than gun control. Currently, 52% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while 46% say it is more important to control gun ownership.
http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-ri...
The American people are finally understanding the basic facts that gun death rates are half of what they were 20 years ago and continuing to fall steadily. Also that defensive gun use is at least as common as as offensive use by criminals. A study by the CDC verified this
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=
========================
The tipping point on guns has already happened:
Growing Public Support for Gun Rights
More Say Guns Do More to Protect Than Put People at Risk
For the first time in more than two decades of Pew Research Center surveys, there is more support for gun rights than gun control. Currently, 52% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while 46% say it is more important to control gun ownership.
http://www.people-press.org/2014/12/10/growing-public-support-for-gun-ri...
The American people are finally understanding the basic facts that gun death rates are half of what they were 20 years ago and continuing to fall steadily. Also that defensive gun use is at least as common as as offensive use by criminals. A study by the CDC verified this
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=
3
Mr. Egan is right We have the "freedom" to be gunned down
in a theater, a bowling alley, a street, a church or anywhere these days.
Why? Because we have a Congress that refuses to protect "the
general welfare." Another shooting; a day ending in"y."
Governor Perry is "brain free." A fool in Warby Parkers is still a fool.
in a theater, a bowling alley, a street, a church or anywhere these days.
Why? Because we have a Congress that refuses to protect "the
general welfare." Another shooting; a day ending in"y."
Governor Perry is "brain free." A fool in Warby Parkers is still a fool.
114
You forget to mention another gun free zone: the US Capitol. I suggest getting rid of the metal detectors there to protect every citizen's right to go everywhere with a gun, something many senators pay lip service to yet in private still think: not in my back yard.
Oh, and according to the Daily Kos, the NRA staff is armed, while visitors are not allowed to brings guns into their headquarters.
Only in America, where a dollar bill is worth more than a human life, and logic is worthy of Alice's Wonderland.
Oh, and according to the Daily Kos, the NRA staff is armed, while visitors are not allowed to brings guns into their headquarters.
Only in America, where a dollar bill is worth more than a human life, and logic is worthy of Alice's Wonderland.
449
I totally agree! Congress and all state legislatures should be armed to the hilt (not by the politicians, but by the populace) until some sensible laws are enacted. That Congress is gun-free is inexcusable given their sensibilities. That the NRA bans guns that are not of their staff is the epitome of hypocrisy. THEY, of all people, should walk the walk--all guns all the time at the NRA. Maybe we should lay siege to their headquarters. One good shoot-out there might solve a lot of problems.
8
>
The parents of a girl that was shot and killed in Colorado last year sued an online gun company to try and change a gun law. The Court ruled against them and ordered them to pay $200K of legal expenses to the on-line gun company!!!!!!!!
This tells the true state of things.
The parents of a girl that was shot and killed in Colorado last year sued an online gun company to try and change a gun law. The Court ruled against them and ordered them to pay $200K of legal expenses to the on-line gun company!!!!!!!!
This tells the true state of things.
207
I thought protection from lawsuits was a violation of common english law?
Yeah right, the states with the most restrictive guns laws have fewer gun deaths, ever hear of Chicago or Washington DC ?
9
Yet the rate per 100,000 population in Chicago is lower than many cities; in fact Chicago doesn't even make the top 10. Try New Orleans.
And the state with the highest rate per 100,000? Gun-friendly Florida.
And the state with the highest rate per 100,000? Gun-friendly Florida.
76
Which does not change the fact the highest murder rates are in the cities, View from the hill. Please also note your extremely gun friendly state of Vermont ranks near the bottom in murder rates.
And Florida actually ranks around 15th over a recent multi-year period.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state
And Florida actually ranks around 15th over a recent multi-year period.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state
5
Neither Chicago nor Washington DC are states.
9
Thank you for a wonderful piece and keeping the spotlight on the huge cost in human lives of our insane gun policy.
28
Another verse in the Liberal theme song, "The Government Shall Keep Thee Safe." Sure they will when those sharp TSA protectors miss nine-tenths of weapons that inspectors were able to get into airports.
6
Different issue entirely.
17
America is a violent gun culture. The statistics don't lie. Is this solely a cultural phenomenon or would lack of gun availability really make a difference?
In an election season, is it possible to reverse the decline of an ailing culture through the electoral process? I think not.
As a former experimental psychologist, steeped in statistical analysis, I believe that just about any objective research on American gun violence will show , despite ebbs and flows, the trend for American gun violence can not be reversed.
That's why I live here and not there.
In an election season, is it possible to reverse the decline of an ailing culture through the electoral process? I think not.
As a former experimental psychologist, steeped in statistical analysis, I believe that just about any objective research on American gun violence will show , despite ebbs and flows, the trend for American gun violence can not be reversed.
That's why I live here and not there.
25
What utter nonsense. The implicit assumption that people cannot change values or attitudes defies everything we know about human behavior. Many once assumed that the smoking culture in America was too deeply rooted to be vulnerable to attack, and that the prevalence of alcohol consumption made drunk driving immune to any effective campaign against it. In both cases, the conventional wisdom proved to be false, and the current gun mania may also yield to a resurgence of common sense on the part of the American people. In its present form and intensity, our gun culture is fairly recent and championed by only a minority of the population. As it becomes clear to the 'silent majority' that this obsession entails intolerable costs, the same kind of reaction that curtailed smoking and alcohol consumption in cars will weaken the unhealthy passion to acquire an arsenal. The decline in the number of gun owners in the U.S. suggests that this may already be happening. The tragic question that remains is, how many more people must die before the American people say, enough?
10
James Lee...your comparing apples with oranges...smoking and alcoholism are self destructive behaviors with self survival a strong motivation to change...guns are not seen as self destructive but offer an adrenalin rush of emotions including control over others for individuals who feel threatened or powerless.
A gun is a wonderfully quick and efficient solution to a problem solved easily by releasing the John Wayne in all of us. It gives us an artificial and dangerous sense of power, an addiction much more difficult than drugs to overcome.
A gun is a wonderfully quick and efficient solution to a problem solved easily by releasing the John Wayne in all of us. It gives us an artificial and dangerous sense of power, an addiction much more difficult than drugs to overcome.
6
While it may be true that once you have passed Security at major airports you are in a gun free zone, the concourse, restaurant , and shopping areas where travelers and their families spend time together before separating are hardly gun free zones, they are public spaces. Despite police presence in these non-traveling areas, as far as I can tell, there is very little to prevent a determined shooter with a concealed weapon from opening fire at will. Imagine the delays and chaos if baggage carrying travelers and their families had to go through metal detectors when arriving at the airport. The only way to ensure gun free zones as much as possible is through stricter gun buying restrictions and changing the mentality of the NRA crazies who would have people armed in their daily life 24/7 and make it all too easy to for the unbalanced to slip through the loopholes.
10
Egan is right on the money...the Republican party is bought and paid for by the NRA.
Lots of middle aged white men in America need to grow up and dispense with the childish boost to their "manliness" provided by gun ownership.
Lots of middle aged white men in America need to grow up and dispense with the childish boost to their "manliness" provided by gun ownership.
220
The NRA and the gun manufacturers comprise a very small fraction of the population and commerce in our nation, so ascribing all this "influence" to them is disingenuous. There is a very significant minority percentage of us, however, who own firearms and even more support our rights to do so. It takes very big money and overwhelming sentiment to impose minority rule. The simple fact is that most of the people in this country are in favor of firearms rights, as codified and memorialized in law. Also codified are the means by which to change the laws, but they don't include caterwauling, or crying the sky is falling.
3
Codified in law is that in absence of a standing army, something the Founders were vehemently opposed to just after having defeated the mighty British one with a true people's militia, they established a 'Well regulated militia'.
And as Mr. Egan so correctly writes, that amendment was designed to fend of British tyranny. The very minute the US established its own armed forces, that oh-so-cherished second amendment didn't not apply to any Tom, Dick and Harry to arm themselves to the teeth.
And as Mr. Egan so correctly writes, that amendment was designed to fend of British tyranny. The very minute the US established its own armed forces, that oh-so-cherished second amendment didn't not apply to any Tom, Dick and Harry to arm themselves to the teeth.
14
Maybe the black gang members should do the same with their guns.
1
"Nationwide, if you want to lessen your chances of getting shot, stay out of the South." Sadly, if you want to lessen your chances of getting shot, the reality is you need to stay out of the U.S.
337
It is a fact. The murder rate has dropped dramatically and this without massive federal gun control legislation. You want to take guns out of the hands of people the Constitution protects their right to have one
I verified this with the LA County District Attorney
A LA Crip on my caseload was in gang was much smaller than surrounding gangs and they were in danger of being overrun. To level the playing field they broke into an armory to steal as many AR-15's as they could carry.They took 42. It was across the street from a police station and they set up snipers to pick off any police if they set off the alarm This is an extreme example but if they were willing to kill police. do you think any law will prevent that from happening?
Finally, what will you do if you are the victim of a home invasion? What will you use to defend your family? Is a gun control law going to protect you because I guarantee you, they will be armed
If you want to understand how criminals think read Stuart Samanow's " Inside the Criminal Mind" Then you'll know