20 children shot, killed, in one horrific instant by one
crazy person with a high-powered gun; think about that for a moment—20 precious little
lives gone, snuffed out forever; 20 children that will never run and skip and jump or build a tree house in the back yard, attend slumber parties or play baseball or sit on Santa's lap; 20 children that will
never dance at their prom, be on the honor roll, experience their first kiss, go to
college, or grow up to be scientists or explorers or artists or teachers or engineers or anything;
20 children that will not marry and have children of their own or grow old and
play with their grandchildren.
I have four granddaughters and the thought that they are not
safe at school is absolutely terrifying. I can't even imagine the immense grief the parents of those children must be experiencing today.
So sickened and saddened yesterday by the news that a gunman had entered an elementary school in Newtown Connecticut and senselessly killed 6 adults and
20 children ranging in age from 5 to 10, I posted an emotional question to my
Facebook status: Anyone ready for a conversation about gun control now? Considering how divisive the last election was, I guess I shouldn't have been terribly surprised by the responses I received. I was a little shocked, however, that some people
were more concerned about the government taking away their precious guns than
they were about the deaths of 26 human beings. It was the same tired knee-jerk
reactions: guns don't kill people, people do; a car can be used as a weapon,
we're safer if we are all armed, yada yada.
Just the mere mention of "gun control" and people immediately freak out. The truth is, gun control doesn't have to mean a full-scale de-arming of the public. In fact, there are many elements that should be part of the discussion, including fixing loopholes in the national system of background checks for gun buyers, such as requiring the checks at gun shows, and how about banning or limiting the use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines? A third part of the equation is the conversation we should be having about how programs for mental health care have been dangerously gutted.
I will be the first to tell you, I am not good at debate, but as a journalist, my focus is always on using factual data from reliable sources to get to the truth. And I am not talking about made-up facts and opinion that the faux news echo chamber spews, but real tools and resources for research and fact finding. Do I have my own opinion about things? Sure. Do I respect your right to express yours? Of course. However, I am more inclined to take your argument seriously if I feel like it's an informed one. With that said, I thought I'd share a few links to websites I consider to be good starting points for research and finding the facts.
- Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/) "The definitive Internet reference source for urban legends, folklore, myths, rumors, and misinformation."
- FactCheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org/) A project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.
- Journalist Express (http://www.journalistexpress.com/) A vast repository of informational links.
To conclude, I think debate and discussion is healthy and democratic and good, but perhaps we should put it aside for a day and focus on remembering that yesterday we needlessly lost 26 lives, and that 20 of them were innocent
children.
Such a tragic event, emotions are running high.
ReplyDeleteI've never understood the gun laws in the U.S.
Being from California, I thought all states had the same regulations, they're not!
I don't know what can be done about this issue.
Half want the guns to go away, and the others want to keep their guns to protect themselves from psycho's like this!
There are at least 5 states that require handgun registration... most of the other states don't have any requirement's at all.
In Tennessee, they all carry guns, and when they go into a restaurant, they check their gun with the hostess, like checking your hat & coat!
You can try to track guns, so you at least know where they've been.
I've heard of a program where they use "Ballistic fingerprinting" A database of all guns and rifles.
California, for instance, passed a bill AB 1471 which requires all new models of handguns to be equipped with micro-stamping technology by 2010.
Several techniques have been proposed:
Firearm micro-stamping is a process that engraves the make, model, and serial number on the cartridge and on the face of the firing pin, which stamps the primer as the firing pin impacts it.
My biggest concern, is no matter what law's you make, you're only affecting the law abiding citizen... the criminal does whatever they want.
Realistically, you'll never get rid of all of the weapons (Hell, you can print your own plastic one shot pistol)
So let's work on firearm safety... gun safes, trigger locks, classes.
And Never, Ever show the name or face of the killer in any of these tragedies!
Let them die anonymous... and just maybe they will stop trying to become infamous!
Very well put, Sharleen. The thoughts you had about those 20 children are the same that went thru my mind, and so many others. I don't know that anyone knows the answer to stopping this madness, but to me, it just makes sense that something needs to change.
ReplyDeleteI know getting rid of all guns isn't the answer. Stopping the sale of high powered assault rifles and multi-capacity clips, thorough background checks before selling, training, and like you said, a good look at our mental health issues. There are so many things that can be done.
I had an extremely difficult time hearing about the shooting. It isn't fair they were robbed of their lives. I also found it interesting (yet I guess it's obvious) that gun control might now become top priority on America's political agenda.
ReplyDeleteMy personal opinion, I believe the "right" people should be able to possess a weapon. Unfortunately it is very easy for the "wrong" people to access guns. But who's the "wrong people"? Those are the people with dirty background checks such as having previous jail time. It doesn't really consider someone's mental well-being or potential mental disabilities. With that being said, how could that be measured when someone new goes to purchase a gun? Would it bring discrimination to certain people who are mentally stable to not be able to purchase one?
Another issue is that certain guns shouldn't be able to be purchased easily. Yes a gun is a gun and does damage, but there's a difference between a handgun and an AK (which can be purchased at these gun shows with no background check).
I'm going to get my concealed weapons permit. That is something I've always wanted to do, as a peace of mind. I think people should be able to bear arms, but not with weapons that are used for military purposes. There also needs to be stricter guidelines. I found out for me to get my concealed, I have to take a day class at $65, then have a background check done by the county for $85. That's it, That's all it takes to be able to legally carry a gun. Pretty simple process huh? You'd think it would be much more difficult.
On the issue of our mental health system within this country-- it's obvious that social services are the first programs to go with budget cuts. I'm not sure when our country will learn that cutting these programs first leads to the demise of our society. I took a Soc of Mental Health class at UO, and it really gave me a good look at how society looks at individuals with mental health. They are thought of as a public nuisance, and not worth our time. The Newtown shooter was said to be austistic--aspbergers. This form of autism leads individuals to be quiet and socially awkward. If individuals are a public nuisance, or the exact opposite, unwilling to interact with society, they aren't "normal". American society, and many societies around the globe are very unwilling to deal with the mentally ill, when it should be a top priority.
Unfortunately children murdered was the consequences of someone who was mentally ill getting a hold of a gun. People will get a hold of guns if they really want to. I think putting a strict ban on the ownership of guns will only lead people to seek out more extreme weapons. At the same time, this country needs to more sensible gun control with more thorough classes (that are longer a day) and extensive background checks, questioning, etc.
We do have gun control, but too many loopholes, too many variations, and not enough "control". We don't allow automatic weapons. Outlawing true machine guns didn't lead to any slippery slope--it's been about 75 years--and I can't recall a single incident in the last few decades where criminals used a machine gun in a mass killing. It simply isn't true that if we outlaw "rampage-enabling" clips that only outlaws will have them. Bazookas are illegal, but I'm not afraid of a bazooka attack from some social outcast losing his/her mooring.
ReplyDelete