Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
We have discussed the thousands who have been killed by guns in this country on several occasions on Professor Turley’s blog and we have seen some of the same responses from both sides of the discussions about reasonable restrictions on gun ownership and use. Some say that any restriction on gun ownership, no matter how small, is a violation of their Second Amendment rights.
Some of those who are in favor of reasonable gun control measures, point to the sheer numbers of women and children and men who die each day due to senseless murders and sorrowful accidents. Emotional arguments and reasons have been offered by both sides of the discussion, but yet not a single worthwhile National gun control measure has become law and the killings and deaths continue unabated.
To my dismay and shock, not even the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, where 20 small school children and 6 staff members lost their lives to an arguably mentally ill shooter, produced any resulting legislation that could be argued offers some relief in the ever larger numbers of gun deaths.
While researching this article I had trouble finding articles written on this subject after April of 2013. There were many articles, including articles on this blog from December of 2012 through April of 2013, but very little since. In light of the dearth of media interest since April of this year, I am curious about what it will take for the United States of America to decide it is time to stop killing itself?
In June of this year, I did find one article that discussed how little had been done since Sandy Hook and the article argued that the number of gun deaths since Sandy Hook has continued unabated.
“In the first week after the Newtown, Conn., massacre on Dec. 14, more than 100 people in the U.S. were killed by guns. In the first seven weeks, that number had risen to at least 1,285 gunshot killings and accidental deaths. A little more than three months after Newtown, there have been 2,244. The Huffington Post has recorded every gun-involved murder and accidental shooting death reported in U.S. news media since Newtown, revealing an epidemic that shows no signs of abating. The horrors cannot be contained behind yellow police tape or find resolution in a courtroom. For the victim’s families, the grief deforms all it touches. There’s the fear that the radio will play her favorite ballad. An airplane overhead, like the kind he flew, will strike panic. Home is not safe. One month, two months, two years, nine years since those fatal shots — the grief never leaves.” Huffington Post
The Huffington Post article that I have linked to above, discusses several shootings over the years and the damage it has done to families of the decedent’s and how difficult it has been to cope with their respective losses. It is always hard to lose a loved one, but it seems that losing a loved one to gun violence, misuse or accident is especially hard to recover from.
My intention with this article is not to argue the plusses and minuses of gun control legislation and to instigate partisan arguments as to who has the better argument about why Americans seems obsessed with guns. My intention is to discuss when will Americans do something, anything, to reduce gun violence?
The killing of 20 little children produced a hue and cry around the country and indeed, around the world. However, legislation to possibly ameliorate this epidemic of gun killings never materialized. You may blame Congress and its inability to pass any legislation on any subject. You can blame gun owners and gun manufacturers for their alleged stubbornness to back substantive gun control measures. You can even blame the conditions in the inner cities that seem to breed violence on the streets.
I submit the blame belongs in the lap of every American citizen. This epidemic of gun killings can’t be attributed to just one cause or one political party. It can’t be blamed on just one gun manufacturer or gun lobbyist. Only the collective pressure from an engaged citizenry can produce enough political power to attack the problem on all fronts.
Getting into politician’s faces, gun lobbyists faces, gang members faces and yes, our children’s faces and engaging and educating all concerned that if we do not take a stand after so many deaths, when will we? It may take reasonable gun control legislation. It may take reeducating our young people and it may take increased job opportunities to reduce poverty and the despair that goes with poverty. But without all of us drawing the line and saying that this country will no longer accept needless deaths, the change will never happen.
Stand up in your communities and let your fellow townspeople and city councils know that nothing will stand in your way to reduce the epidemic of gun deaths in almost every community. Educate your children about the dangers of misusing or playing with guns and make locking up your guns a reality. Let your legislators know that mental illness can’t be ignored. What do you think you can do to reduce gun deaths?
Can gun control legislation help reduce the number of deaths? Can Second Amendment advocates cooperate with gun control proponents to find a reasonable, yet effective middle ground? Are there any amendments to the Constitution that could somehow help reduce the number of gun deaths? Can America actually look to other countries for examples of a better way to handle guns in a civilized society?
Let’s hear how you would resolve America’s penchant for shooting its own people! This is a “war” that we cannot afford to lose.
ron,
Yes it was rhetorical, but it spurred you to find just how many on a daily basis are killed with guns. And we also had another school shooting since the article was written. And yet, no common sense gun restrictions from Congress.
rafflaw wrote: “And we also had another school shooting since the article was written. And yet, no common sense gun restrictions from Congress.”
I really do not understand the logic of how a federal gun restriction law would prevent a school shooting. Exactly what kind of federal law do you think would help?
The only law I could imagine is one that mandated all teachers and staff to be armed. We might also consider one that allowed students to qualify to carry firearms at school. The “safety patrol” could be armed. Then when a kid starts shooting, instead of the teacher walking up to him unarmed and getting killed, he can just shoot the armed kid and save everyone.
Incidentally, this was George Washington’s response to gun violence. The Militia Acts required all white males between 18 and 45 years of age to arm themselves and to report for training twice a year.
Where am I going wrong in my thinking?
@JAG, when you restrict gun ownership laws, the criminals and socially disheartened don’t follow them. Atrocities have happens throughout history, many before guns were even invented, so we must look for a real cure, rather than superficial ones that only place limitations on honest people wanting to protect themselves and family. If we take away the guns, the disillusioned/disenfranchised will only start using homemade bombs like the Muslim’s are doing. Guns restrictions make no sense to me for stopping atrocities such as mass killing or suicides. A bottle of pills appears to be the preferred method for suicides. I understand that people want to try to stop atrocities but that would require a book to show what would reduce them and there is no utopia so they will never be totally eliminated.
Rafflaw Q: “How many have died since this article was written last Sunday due to gunshots and how many could have been prevented??”
A: About 82.2 per day (according to National Safety Council’s 30,000 per year stat)
According to others, 6,850 times per day a gun is used to defend against criminals. (Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun,” 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995):)
Therefore, guns are used 80+ times more often for justifiable uses (if all the gun deaths are assumed unjust).
Maybe the question was rhetorical.
Hum, did my post jamb?
**rafflaw 1, October 19, 2013 at 11:45 am
How many have died since this article was written last Sunday due to gunshots and how many could have been prevented??
**
rafflaw,
You wrote a nice piece recently condemning JP Morgan actions and the corrupt wallst banks.
That piece is doing something long term against violence!
I continue to believe that by fixing the corrupt wallst Bank/insurance problem that that will cause the cascading effect of fixing numerous of other issues, including crazy shootings.
When young people have the social structure of secure families and the means to earn money to get the things they need I believe the stats show they’ll by showing up on their legal job in the mornings instead of hanging out committing crimes at night.
rafflaw,
You may never change your opinion, but you should know this, we shall never relinquish Any of our “Rights”!!!!!!
This is from today.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/alamo-armed-march-coverage-continuous-live-updates.html
How many have died since this article was written last Sunday due to gunshots and how many could have been prevented??
Oops,
A mistake on my last post, sounds like maybe this guy got shot but lived?
Don’t watch this.
It’s just another of the thousands of cases where basically cops show up & murder this guy right in the middle of the street.
I posted it here as evidence of why 1st we must disarm most patrolman/public servants. (End calling them officers)
Turn their weapons over to the local Sheriff Taylor unless far into rural areas….
http://www.prisonplanet.com/video-dallas-cop-shoots-mentally-ill-man-who-stood-perfectly-still.html
DavidM,
Thank you for the nice comment.
Oky1,
You are welcome.
One lives to be of service.
Thanks for posting OS, everyone.
I realize most everyone is very serious about these many issues & feel very strongly in their believes.
Yes, most of us have experienced some of the ugly dark side of the world & a bit of it’s beauties.
Ya, if we could have only remembered all those gals names & numbers. lol
Yesterday some of us were focused on the idiots in DC pretending to be leaders when we were reminded of a real humanist Hunter S Thompson.
I seen this quote from him that is the prefect description of Prez Obama & Congress:
**There is nothing more helpless and irresponsible than a man (congress) in the depths of an ether binge.
Hunter S. Thompson
Read more at brainyquote**
Anyway life is to short not to attempt a bit of fun, if you’re up late pop Hunter S Thompson’s name into youtube.
If we all end up half crazy over the mess the world is in maybe at least one of us will end up as competent as Hunter. 🙂
“If we all end up half crazy over the mess the world is in maybe at least one of us will end up as competent as Hunter. 🙂 ”
Oky1,
Words I live by:
“When the going gets tough, the weird turn pro.”
Bob, tell me how a high capacity magazine is anything but an inanimate object. You know they can be made by bending sheet metal or a 3d printer, right?
I didn’t say make murder legal. Murder infringes on the rights of another, and is therefore, criminal behavior. Possession of inanimate objects, on the other hand, not infringing on the rights of others, is not a crime, by any reasonable, civilized, sane standard. Murder is an act. Possession is passive. In fact, jailing the possessor is an infringement of the possessor’s rights, and is therefore, a crime.
People can’t simply be coerced into obedience. At some point, the coercion fails, and people disobey.
We’ve got 2.4 million USA prisoners today. Some prison systems are releasing inmates due to simple overcrowding. “Society puts those people in an environment where they can’t do it again, hopefully.”…Where are you going to put millions of gunowners who refuse to comply? Your “proposal” is unenforceable, as many in the law enforcement community have publicly stated that they will not enforce such laws.
Oakland, Detroit, many other cities that have been dominated by your beloved “progressives” (if that’s the term you’re comfortable with). Their stewards’ track record should give you pause to bring them up when bolstering your arguments.
I understand the passions on both sides of this issue. Most people reading this have never seen a dead body killed by gunshot. As for me, I have lost count. Having said that, I see this issue as whistling past the graveyard. No one knows how many firearms there are in this country, and there is no way to track all of them. That is problem number one. Some estimates exceed thirty million. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were twice that.
In our county, and in the surrounding counties, there are probably at least 2.5 firearms for every man, woman and child.
Most murders are committed with handguns by criminals. It is very seldom that a long gun of any kind is used in a crime. As for the semi-auto weapons, converting them to full auto is not easy and about as illegal as you can get. That is a non-starter issue anyway. Since the Federal Firearms Act of 1934, there have been exactly two documented murders with fully automatic weapons in the US, and both of those were with legally obtained weapons. Law enforcement agencies are allowed to have fully automatic weapons.The most recent murder with a full-auto weapon was September 15th, 1988. Officer Roger Waller, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, used a MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant.
Shotguns are for hunting, but are a much more devastating weapon than a rifle at close range. We had two home invaders shot by elderly citizens in the past several months. One of the home invaders was killed when the octogenarian resident shot the intruder with a 12-gauge shotgun when the intruder approached him with a weapon. The second home invader was not killed, but got his Darwin Award anyway. The 80+ year old homeowner shot him in the crotch with a 12-gauge.
In 1996, the mentally disturbed school shooter in Dunblane, Scotland killed 16 children and the teacher before turning one of his four handguns on himself. Keep in mind that the UK has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the English speaking world.
Addressing the issue of limiting magazine size, that would probably do little or no good at all. First of all, the average murder is committed with one or two shots. If more shots are fired, they are usually wasted ammo, because the target is already dead. The first gunshot murder victim I ever saw was a notoriously abusive husband. His long-suffering wife killed him with one shot right above his left eye while he was taking a Sunday afternoon nap on the couch. Her weapon was a single shot .22 rifle. BTW, she was acquitted after the jury deliberated only a few minutes.
An additional problem with limiting magazine size is the fact that with practice, a magazine can be changed in one second or less. I have posted the video below once before, but for anyone who has not seen it, here is is again. The person doing the demonstration is Cpl. Travis Thomasie. He is a firearms instructor who teaches the technique.
Finally, a pistol or rifle is not at all hard to make. Any good blacksmith can make one. I have a reasonably well equipped shop and have made several black powder weapons myself. Those include revolvers, a single shot pistol and one double-barreled derringer. Rough castings of large parts are available, but with the proper equipment, you can make your own castings. Additionally, black powder is surprisingly easy to make if you are careful and know what you are doing. Only three ingredients are needed, two of which are available at most farm supply stores. You can make your own charcoal; the best for gunpowder being from the Willow tree.
If you have a turkey fryer and a handful of tire weights, you can make your own bullets. Some people prefer to make their own because it is cheaper.
Did you know you can speed reload a black powder revolver? You do it by switching out the whole cylinder.
It has been pointed out that this is a losing issue for Democrats. That is true for a couple of reasons. Republicans are able to use it as a wedge issue to peel off single issue voters who might otherwise vote a Democratic ticket. It is political suicide in many rural districts for any politician to run on a gun control platform. Next, consider the fact the 2A is not going anywhere, and the chances of it being repealed or amended is somewhere between nil and none. Zilch. Recent SCOTUS decisions are in place which repealed local gun control laws as unconstitutional. Like it or not, that’s the law.
Here is Cpl. Thomasie demonstrating the speed reload technique with a semi-auto pistol. Anyone can learn it, given at least average eye-hand coordination.
OS – very nice review. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Thank you.
Roger Lambert,
[The semi-automatic handgun’s] “…very popularity, as I understand it, informs its Constitutional protection – the more popular a weapon, the more important it is to protect the right of citizens to own and use one for their personal protection.”
No, I don’t think you understand it. Popularity has nothing to do with Constitutional protection. If “machine pistols” (which is what we used to call fully-automatic handguns) were legal, they’d be more popular than semi-automatic handguns. Should the Constitution protect the right to own and use one for personal protection?
No, not really.
“Almost none of the guns, statistically speaking, in the United States are used in violent crime.”
“Statistically” doesn’t cut it. There are far too many fatalities and injuries caused by firearms, in this country. It needs to stop.
You could make the same argument for automobiles and fatalities. By far, statistically speaking, most automobiles are not involved in fatalities.
But automobiles are highly regulated, to avoid both irresponsible use, and unsafe mechanical conditions. Licensing, registration, and liability insurance come to mind. Why? Because they’re dangerous, even though they’re not designed to murder people, as guns are.
“…it would seem to me to a much smarter idea – both from a success standpoint and from a political standpoint – to lobby for the legalization of drugs, and an increase of social justice (especially in inner cities) since by far and away drug and gang-related gun violence is a huge percentage of all gun violence.”
Those are great ideas, which we should work on, while restricting the availability of murder weapons to fools and criminals. Like with background checks, licensing, registration, and liability insurance. Surely, this archetypal “law-abiding citizen,” if such a person exists, wouldn’t object, correct? Not if the citizen was really planning to use a firearm only in self-defense.
Or are we straying into the “I’m gonna hold off the U.S. army with my gun, molon labe!” fantasy?
For the uninitiated, “molon labe” is Greek for, “These beer-bellied freaks, waddling around with their manhood on their hips, are actually reincarnated Spartan warriors.”
hskiprob,
Exactly. Right now, the various agents of government are allowing fools to own firearms capable of mass murder. At the behest of firearms manufacturers.
We are the government. You can look that up.
We need to change it.
By the way, what’s the alternative to “progressive”?
“Reactionary”?
“Constipated”?
“Dead”?
I’ve always wondered how that word can be a pejorative.
The idea that progressives, or liberals, or whatever label, think that the agents of government are going to protect us at all times and under all circumstances (whew!), is a silly libertarian fantasy.
As is the rest of the philosophy of the Ayn Rand Paul Ryan crowd.
See what I did, there?
I mean, you do like labeling people, right?
In the 20th century alone, the governments of the world killed an estimated 225 million of their own Citizens. How are you going to take away their guns and who do you really needs to take the guns away from? The average IQ of a police officer is about 100 and the enlisted ranks in the military, based on my experience is lower. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM –
Most countries are really predominantly fascist, few just understand why? Hopefully you’re not one of those who actually believe, “that can’t happen here”.
Think of all statist theory, as just different methods of accounting. All end up with the ruling oligarchy stealing the wealth of the majority, just using different methods, until the society ends up one day, burning in the rubble of war and/or financial collapse. Wasn’t it really interesting watching all the fascists at work this last week, blaming everyone, except themselves. Neither side willing to give up the confiscation and redistribution of wealth, since it would then place the loser in a severe disadvantage, trying to compete for the money to maintain their positions within the money supply.
So they ended up just printing more money, hoping that the accounting nightmare will someday miraculously disappear. Think of it like having cancer, your doctors tell you they have no cure, knowing that someday your going to die. You just don’t know how soon, and then just as you go into hospice, someone says to you, oh, you didn’t know there was a cure for cancer or was it that you didn’t believe there was a cure.
ron,
How am I gonna stop criminals from disobeying the law?
Is the law going to make possession and sale of high-ammunition-capacity attachments illegal?
Well, if those attachments are really hard to get, that’d be one way to stop criminals from disobeying that particular law.
Criminals aren’t known for their patience, or intelligence, despite what you see on TV and movies. Read a police blotter. They’re the stupidest people on earth. I’ve known a few. They aren’t going to start massive manufacturing of illegal firearms and attachments. If they had brains, and skills, they’d be employed legitimately.
How are we going to stop murderers from disobeying the law?
Should we give up, and make murder legal? That’d cut down on the number of criminals, and lighten the load on our prison system.
Making laws assures that someone will break them…well, yeah…the law’s made to stop that behavior. Society puts those people in an environment where they can’t do it again, hopefully.
Murder by fist? Run around punching everyone in a crowded room. See how far you get. Hint: not past me.
Guns are for people that don’t have the stomach for real contact. If a fool swings his fist at me and misses, his fist doesn’t fly down the street and kill some kid playing, a block away.
Children are killed by guns, as innocent bystanders, really frequently in Oakland. I’m tired of it. Oakland punks largely get their guns from gun shows in Nevada and Arizona. You know, those libertarian paradises, where the god-given right to bear arms is not infringed.
Who’s giving the punks guns? Can’t tell where the guns came from. The NRA won’t let us track firearms.
Don’t get me started. Oh…too late.
The best way to massively reduce all crime is to have the govt stop committing those crimes & aid/abet those committing crimes!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57607918/deadly-drug-cartel-shootout-with-mexico-police-linked-to-grenade-walking-scandal/
BTW:
I’d post the latest on the govt cover of evidence from Sandy Hook, but I don’t believe evidence is of any interest to the Red Coat Gun Grabbers as they’ll hear not a word! Well fine, we see your heads in the sand.
People kill one another and the various agents of government are historically the worst perpetrators. Thinking they are going to protect us at all times and under all circumstances is the illusion many so called progressives do not consider or do not what to acknowledge.
“The guns that many people want tightly controlled, the semi-automatic and convertible to full auto guns…”
The semiautomatic handgun is the most frequently used weapon in rampage murders. It is also one of the most popular, if not the most popular, weapon owned by Americans for self-protection.
Its very popularity, as I understand it, informs its Constitutional protection – the more popular a weapon, the more important it is to protect the right of citizens to own and use one for their personal protection. Which means, I would think, that of all the guns out there, the semiauto handgun is the one gun that would be most difficult to put “tight controls” on.
Almost none of the guns, statistically speaking, in the United States are used in violent crime. If you are really serious about eliminating gun violence in the U.S., it would seem to me to a much smarter idea – both from a success standpoint and from a political standpoint – to lobby for the legalization of drugs, and an increase of social justice (especially in inner cities) since by far and away drug and gang-related gun violence is a huge percentage of all gun violence.
But, if you enjoy seeing Republicans elected, by all means keep talking about “tightly-controlling” the guns of law abiding citizens. Just don’t think for an instant that you are doing anything productive in the long view. Far from it, imo.
Roger, Well put my friend. We shall be comrades in arms if need be. If not hopefully, a good friendship will of preference.
@lottakatz…NRA supported background checks (wrongly, IMO). Furthermore, they’re wrong on the mental health / violent media angle. Gunowners.org has more appropriate positions on the matter.
@ Bob & katz…How are you going to stop criminals from disobeying the law?
@ Bob…even if “people with guns” kill people, so do “people with knives”, “People with pipes”, “people with fists” (http://www.onepunchhomicide.com/200%20list%20of%20OPH.htm) etc…what’s the common denominator here? Why attempt to jail the guns?