The word “insanity” gets thrown around during tragedies, but Professor Warren Blumenfeld (and many others) believe it goes far beyond the individual.
My grief and anger collide from that primordial place deep within the recesses of my being as I learn more about the horrific events recounted by close eyewitnesses and the loved ones of the numerous dead and wounded. Pictures abound of Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut, television interviews with young children and their teachers who talked about the horrific events that took the lives of 20 of their young classmates and seven adults at the school. This comes in the wake of similar images from a shopping mall in Portland, Oregon, a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, a grocery store parking lot in Tucson, Arizona, and so many more mass murders throughout our country.
Each time I hear of yet another incident, I think back to the very first thing that caught my eye as I entered the grounds of the Iowa Republican Party Presidential Straw Poll in the summer of 2011. Three young children, I would guess between the ages of 4 -7, sporting day-glow orange baseball caps with “NRA” [National Rifle Association] scrawled atop, and round stickers on their small T-shirts announcing “GUNS SAVE LIVES.”
There’s even a gun club in Scottsdale, Arizona, offering its members the service of sending out their Christmas cards with family, including infants, posing with Santa while holding pistols and military grade automatic weapons, fa la la la la, la la la la. Joy to the world?
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, though, gun related violence has reached epidemic proportions in our country by snuffing out the lives of upwards of 30,000 people and wounding many more annually. Each year, over 100,000 people are affected in some way by gun violence. Many of the guns used in these killings reach military level weapons power, guns which currently remain legal. Today in the United States, there are 88.8 firearms per 100 people.
Of the estimated 61 mass murders in the United States since 1982, most of the shooters obtained their weapons legally. Demographically, the shooters in all but one case involved males usually white, with an average age of 35 years.
Should any limits be placed on the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads: “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”?
I believe we must close loop holes such as buying a weapon at a gun show. We must increase the waiting period and make background checks more rigorous and effective. Furthermore, we need to limit the number of guns any individual can own. We must also rethink the “logic” of permitting concealed weapons, especially in places like houses of worship, colleges, bars, and political rallies. Moreover, all data bases monitoring gun ownership must interface to assess the gun owning population more accurately.
But as we all know, the chances for comprehensive gun control in the United States is only a pipe dream since the NRA controls Congress and state legislatures, for if they did not, we would have seen effective laws passed years ago resulting in countless lives saved.
Since Columbine, there have been 181 school shootings! Then, how many more Newtons, Portlands, and Oak Creeks; Columbines and Auroras; Fort Hoods; Virginia Techs; Northern Illinois Universities; Tucsons; Pennsylvania Amish schools; Santana High Schools; Springfield Oregon high schools; Jonesboro, Arkansas middle schools; Universities of Texas; Honolulu Xerox Corporations; Atlanta brokerage offices; US postal offices; Omahas; Red Lake, Minnesotas; Binghamton, New Yorks; Carthage, North Carolinas; Stockton, Californias; how many more dead on our streets and in our homes to urban and suburban violence; how many more gun-induced killings to domestic violence; how many more accidental killing; and how many more Gabby Giffords and Harvey Milks, Trayvon Martins and Lawrence Kings, the famous and the not-so-famous will it take for this country and its politicians to wake up to the reality that, contrary to the NRA’s assertions, guns in the hands of anyone, in any and all stations of life, kill people?
See also: “Incentivizing Violence: When Will the Insanity End?“
–Photo: Occupy/Flickr
About Warren Blumenfeld
.
I work with male adolescents, most of which have used a gun. Most of these kids are street kids who have criminal records. When “gun control” is discussed I ask them some simple questions.
If you know a person may have a gun on him before you attempt to rob him, would you proceed? The answer is no.
If you know the resident of the home you’re about to break into has a gun, would you proceed if they are home. The answer is no.
If guns were outlawed, would you still be able to get a gun. The answer is yes … all the guns they have are illegal.
“If you know a person may have a gun on him before you attempt to rob him, would you proceed? The answer is no.
If you know the resident of the home you’re about to break into has a gun, would you proceed if they are home. The answer is no.
If guns were outlawed, would you still be able to get a gun. The answer is yes … all the guns they have are illegal.”
Not to oversimplify, or evade the question, but guns or no guns, when we have kids asking themselves: ‘Would I rob him?’ , ‘Would I break into a home?’ , ‘Would I be able to get a gun?’ – then we’ve already failed… We need to get our kids asking different questions.
@ Mostly_123 … It’s all part of their recovery. When an adolescent doesn’t hesitate in answering these questions, we can get a glimpse of where their mind is at. In the same way, I’ve had young men tell me that they “bagged their first babe 18 year old baby sitter) at 11 years of age. Rather then his seeing this as sexual abuse, he sees it as a notch on his belt at a young age.
It’s not uncommon to see kids sneak the Sunday news paper ads which show guns sales. What does this tell us where their minds are at?
Of course, 3 months of residential treatment is nothing when it comes to changing the way they’ve thought, or have been taught to think for the past 13 to 18 years. But the managed care Gods say 3 months is enough …. No matter how well they’re progressing. It’s all about the $$$$
Prof Blumenfeld and All,
Why are we only looking at disarmament of people? We KNOW these horrors are going to happen. We have years of evidence. Even if we ban ALL guns, outlaws will keep their’s and these shootings will continue.
Please also consider giving our children and teachers more options than just hiding and hoping they get passes-by. To leave our children in this much vulnerability is flat-out incompetent and inexcusable!
People, teachers, admins or security Guards CAN in fact be trained to use a gun. If a cop can be trained, so can a capable teacher or staffer. Please! Include this in your ongoing rhetoric .
Are you seriously sugesting the answer is to arm teachers? Appart from anything else this puts a massive responsibility on teachers that they should not have.
Hey Johnny Boy,
Not ALL teachers you tard. I’m talking about SOMEONE in the fkg school who can help the avoidance of a fully uninhibited massacre. NO ONE should have nothing going for them except HOPE that the shooter overlooks her classroom.
Are YOU seriously suggesting my kids ball-up under their desk and HOPE for a pass-by?
YOU are too stupid to survive. Please don’t pull good people down with you, you bloody simpleton.
Yeah, I think that’s what he’s seriously suggesting, that’s also what I’m seriously suggesting. And here’s why:
Because unless your kids specific teacher has a gun, that’s what they’ll be doing anyways. Because teachers already have enough responsibilities without them trying to additionally learn to safely and accurately shoot a gun. Cops spend hundreds or thousands of hours a year maintaining their proficiency, and teachers don’t have that kind of time. Because having more people shooting more guns in a school/parking lot/crowded movie theater will cause more deaths. Because most schools already have reinforced doors, locks, and walls, with appropriate full lockdown drills established.
Instead of maintaining a special “hunter/killer” teacher or team of teachers at every school, on the off-chance a mass murderer shows up, we should spend that money on classrooms designed to resist violence. That way students and teachers can hunker down under their desk knowing the perp won’t get in and wait for the trained proffesionals (read: cops) to deal with the situation.
More people shooting more guns does not make schools safer.
BTW: All of this is simple rhetoric. The game is already fully over. Barry O. has made that clear that Blumenfeld has won.
Rob, Nice to see you perpetuating the “angry gun nut” cliche. Perhaps when you stop foaming at the mouth you can come back with a rational argument, reasond argument with clear points, without the swaring and personal abuse, we can begin a reasonable debate in to the pros and cons of having arms in schools.
You know what Rob, whatever. Your clearly set in the idea that you are right and anyone who dose not 100% agree with your insult hurling anger is wrong or do not have the skills to articulate your point in a cogent way without making stuff.
Your not interested in a disucssion or a debate, only holding on to your guns and living a fantasy. I would put good money on you having said something like “Well if I was there I’d have shot him”.
Your arguments just hurt both sides and lead to nothing more than gun owners being seen as irresponsible loons who just want to keep there guns above all else who live in a fantasy world where they see reds on every corner and themselfes foiling armed robberys and muggings.
John Smith. You know how gun owners feel? You’re telepathic?
If you were being taken seriously up to this point, it ended.
It is actually impossible for me to ever be vulnerable. I can’t and won’t. But that’s O K….and I’m O K with that.
Maybe YOU can man-up and bring some substance to your position.
I find the idea of teachers or principals armed with guns highly unpractical. If everybody knows that a man with a gun is coming, they take the necessary precautions. But usually this kind of people dont warn you. They just come and bang bang. The teachers dont have time for looking out at gunmen. They have they own job to do. They cant look out for dangerous people. Instead professionals are fittet to this. They have training they are equippet, they have guns and they know how to use them. I mean come on thats the most logical solution. Armed guards at school.
It will be close to class 1999 ( the movie) but at least, the crazy gunman know that if he do his psycho things he is the one who will get shot.
. The most/worst anybody is suggesting is that CCW people–already trained and certified–not be forbidden from carrying in school. That’s not “arming teachers”. If a teacher is a CCW holder, the training and thinking about responsibility exists already. Then there are other staff members, parents visiting for one reason or another, vendors.
The day my school district starts arming teachers, my kids are getting home schooled. They are just as liable to screw up with a gun than anyone else. Adding more guns to the equation won’t solve the problem. It will just amount to more people wielding guns.
REtard….I did not say “teachers in general.” The principal could be armed….someone in the fkg skool??? Or are you so suicidally retarded that you think the knuckle-dragging morons who become cops are the only people who can be qualified to carry?
YOU too are too stupid to survive. Please step through the Darwin door….ALONE!!!
How about letting private guards (professionals) guarding The schools instead? That makes lot more sence than armed teachers and principal
The chickens have greatly come home to roost for the unions and admins of our nations schools. They have bitched about not having enough money for toilet paper long enough.
With FULL prior knowledge that school shooting DO happen throughout this nation, none of these self-centered fktards has planned for these events. They will never go to bat to have their precious budget spent on the needs and wishes of parents and children.
But YES….it would be AWESOME for them to have trained and armed people on campus. Something, so that they have more choice and hope than my friends atop the World Trade towers did….jump or burn.
yes there are armed guards at banks, supermarkets, stages, walmart ect why not at school?
You would rather live in a state where everyone is armed than noone is armed? Better we all live in fear of each other?
That’s a ridiculous choice.
I fear anyone being vulnerable.
John, offer up a rationale that will protect schools.
A rationale? A reduction in private ownership of guns, greater restriction in gun ownership and carrying and a reduction in the “Gun cult” that exists in the US. Along side that the US needs to accept responsibility for the guns sold legaly within its borders that end up in the hands of criminals overseas.
I have never understood how at ease the US are with increasing the number of government workers with guns. It’s almost as if you want to hand them power whilst screaming “No big govenment”.
WAIT…..yer not a USA citizen? Why the fk am I wasting my keyboard on you. LOL.
” A rationale? A reduction in private ownership of guns, greater restriction in gun ownership and carrying and a reduction in the “Gun cult” that exists in the US. ”
Guns also save lives, you know
But more weapon controll would be good. Control doesn’t necessary mean a reduction of weapons. It means only that the owner will be checked more often. And perhaps you need a license similar to a drive license. In this way it will be easier for the authorities to know who owns a gun, how many they have and where they are. Much better than today.
Owner would also be mentally checked periodically, and if they suffer from some serious mental disorder, they get their weapon removed.
Gun control is a good thing. And IMO any responsible citizen should ask for more. But gun control doesent (as I said before) mean abolitionism or reduction of weapons, but just more responsibility involved.
Any how, as a stop gap, I think placing armed guards in a school is still the best thing to do. Arming teachers, coaches ect is not the way to go. Because usually nobody know who the gun man is and nobody expect him to shoot around. So the school personel would probably be the first target of the crazy murderer. Having professionals taking care of the security is a different matter. They are trained, prepared and they duty is actually to look for this kind of dangerous people.
Respectfully, I don’t think expanding the role of gun registries will do much. And I’d rather not have anyone (or a future anyone – not as well intentioned perhaps) have a list of the guns of law abiding citizens.
reduction in carrying?
Let’s see. How many mass shootings were done by people legally carrying?
Right. None.
How many victims and bystanders in mass shootings were disarmed by laws against carrying in the shoot-here-nobody-will-shoot-back–for-at-least-a-quarter-of-an-hour zones? Every one who could legally carry. How’d that work out?
I’ll just re post the ideas I put in an another thread:
A. More coverage for mental health issues. Often, even people who have insurance have trouble getting mental healthy therapy, and most coverage only pays enough to cover the issuance of psychotropic drugs.
B. Don’t popularize such things in the media as some of the killers do this stuff for attention. That doesn’t mean don’t report it, but it would be nice if news organizations informally decided to report only official statements for the first 5 days after an attack (to allow initial investigations to complete) and voluntarily agreed to publish no books nor do any tv special reports for six months after an attack.
Of course getting the news media to be this responsible would be a hard battle.
C. Someone at any large gathering SHOULD be armed. It might be a security guard or a principal, but the someone should be trained and have access to some sort of protective gun or weapon.
Oh, did I forget the biggest and most effective way to reduce fatalities, esp. firearms fatalities?
End or at least significantly reform our “War on Drugs”. Most firearms deaths in this country are between criminals killing each other over sex, drugs, or money.
The ironic thing is this kind of propagandist piece doesn’t really solve anything, with its historically illiterate attacks on “gun culture” (actually gun ownership rates were higher in the past and we didn’t have this stuff. Heck, when I was a teen we had a shooting club in my High School) and demonization of gun owners. I’ll take my own state , Maryland, as an example as I’m well aware of crime statistics here. The conservative counties tend to have much higher gun ownership rates than the suburban counties or the city, yet they have a fraction of the murder rate. Baltimore city (where I live and not in a “yuppie” neighborhood) has some of the strictest firearms regulations in the country yet accounts for most of my states firearms deaths due to illegal guns and the drug trade. Meanwhile, in this crime-ridden city I can’t :
A. Buy a bullet proof vest. Yes, somehow passive protection is outlawed.
B. Buy pepper spray
C. Buy a taser
And I’m well aware that the cops not only have no legal duty (meaning they can’t be sued for refusing or screwing up) to protect me but they don’t have the manpower to do so even if they wanted to.
I’m afraid that I’m more afraid of Mr. Blumenfeld than I am of “gun culture”.
“A. Buy a bullet proof vest. Yes, somehow passive protection is outlawed”
I think the reason for the outlawing may be that the criminals will buy them enmasse to protect themselves from gunfire from other gun owners, gang members and police force.
@ Clarence .. Mental health appears to be a common thread. And I agree, insurance coverage for mental health is limimted at best.
It’s easier for society to blame a “gun” for these deaths then to admit that many Americans have mental health problems that are not being addressed. Curious as to how well Obamacare has addressed mental health .. anyone know?
The thing about a law is that for it to work it has to 1. be enforced and 2. be followed by citizens, combine that with some people’s willingness to sell and buy things illegally and the “laws fix everything” mindset alot of people have looks very foolish.
Canada, just a few miles north of the US. We regulate gun ownership, and don’t think “a militia” (wtf does that mean in 2012, a gang?) needs to “bear arms” because they’re in serious danger of being forced to fight against their will against they’re home country. (ie what chances are that England is going to invade the US and force even a few people to fight against fellow US people?? none Chances are none that countries would invade Canada to do the same).
We have WAY less murder per capita, and also way less prisoners per capita (privatizing prisons is probably the worst thing ever btw – companies want profit, more prisoners = more profit – ergo companies want more crime, not less).
good point Schala
How nice for you, Schala.
Not that I’d expect you to understand a the US definition of the citizens militia or how the 2nd at all ties into the common law rights to self-defense. It’s really not the legal regime you live under.
However, I trust you can see that culture and other factors arguably play a more important part when it comes to crime and murder than does the presence or absence of guns.
Canada can shut the f up any time now. We don’t need your noise in a USA issue.
Canada will shut up when you gun-loving fanatics stop making it easy for criminals to smuggle weapons into Halifax. We have enough problems as it is, here.
Oh, and a few words of wisdom. If you are prepared to shoot at people, than you better damn well be ready to be shot yourself.
Wow! Except at American schools huh??? You keep stepping all over the lunacy of your or lack of logic and survival instinct.
OH….guns STILL find their way into Canada despite the gun laws? Hmmmmmmm.
In Northern Ireland, you can’t even draw a pitcture of a gun (legally). Tis amazing how guns find their way there from the UK, Italy, The Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Brasil, Mexico…
“In Northern Ireland, you can’t even draw a pitcture of a gun (legally).”
What are you talking about? That is an out and out lie.
Very few guns in NI come from the UK. Most of them come from Libya and, supprise supprise, the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army_arms_importation
This is why the rest of the world has an interest in US arms regulation. A large amount of the illigaly heald small arms in the west come from the US.
And NI has total gun bans! Imagine that!
Please, stop making stuff up. NI dose not “has total gun bans!”…
Really? What type of gun can I carry under my jacket, loaded? What rifle may I own in NI?
Professor Blumenfield does not mention stripping away guns from law abiding citizens. Rather, he is suggesting that we discuss this topic intelligently and that we take more responsibility to ensure that law abiding citizens can still have their weapons while we work collectively to better keep them out of the hands of criminals and those deemed lacking responsibility/capacity to own or acquire firearms.
Furthermore, the hostility displayed in this comment thread only further supports the other side’s emotional reaction to guns and the fear of those who want to own them. When we verbally and irrationally berate and/or curse at people who disagree with us, it comes across as irrational and “insane.” How are we supposed to have a community discourse if we call people “retards” or ask a contributing discusser to “shut the f up”?
And while I know this particular article is about guns, gun control and gun rights, I think that our reaction/discussion shouldn’t be exclusively PRO or CON guns, but to ask ourselves deeper questions about what the root problems may be. So many lives were lost at the hands of a single person. But what factors made this possible and how did undercurrent cultural and/or social issues lead to this and other mass murders in our country?
Stigmatizing the mentally unhealthy, guns, mental health education/options and societal expectations are likely all in relation to a very large and complicated issue. And this complication is why these topics are so difficult to talk about.
Thank you Phil for that really well considered comments. I’m appalled by Rob’s comments in what should be a mature, open discussion about a really significant issue. Your use of language Rob discredits any valid arguments you bring to the table in addition to suggesting you feel threatened by any real discussion on gun control because you are unable to answer to yourself regarding your own beliefs
Not everyone here is promoting guns. I’m promoting actual protective measures for the schools. I’m speaking of the insanity of taking guns away from the law-abiding whereas no gun law will ever stop what happend in CT.
But the anti gunners refuse to focus upon protecting the children. Rather, they choose to leverage Newtown to their political advantage.
I get emotional because the slaughter was an emotional event for me. You read hostility. I’m reading insane actions that will do nothing to protect the completely open targets housing my children.
Its not about me. Its not about you (if you are an adult). Its about the children of the USA. WE have to protect our children. The author here foolishly thinks disarmament will make my children safer. He’s wrong and wasting precious time and energy that would be better spent on getting armed protection in the schools.
I’m sorry if my language upsets those who refuse to focus upon the real issue…the children. I’m certain that you have NEVER read a novel with blue language, a High-Times magazine with foul language and you certainly have fully avoided movies designated PG13 on-up.
But its a nice try at diverting the logic of armed response in the schools. I’m sure you realize our kids will forever be limited to hiding under desks, balled up, crapping their pants and hoping that their little arms will stop the high-powered, point-blank bullet…all while the guard or designated trained staffer that does not exist could have dropped the monster.
Go on back to your hand-wringing and latte.
I told the Canadian to STFU. Why? Canadians ought not petition for USA gun laws. Canadians ought never tread nor attempt to tread upon USA rights and laws. Its none of their biz.
I don’t know of ANY activists, authors, and lobbys in the USA calling for ANY sort of public policy change in Canada.
I am a gun enthusiast and NRA member. However, I am NOT opposed to reasonable gun control laws.
The 2nd Amendment does not give me the right to purchase a military assault rifle. I believe it does give me the right to own handguns and hunting rifles/shotguns. Nor does the 2nd Amendment give me the right to own a zillion weapons….I live in Maryland and we have a “one gun a month” limit for handguns. Perfectly OK with this restriction.
However, in Baltimore handguns are illegal. But violent crime involving guns is terrible. Same with Washington DC. So, that should tell you something. Strict gun law do not work.
Our underlying culture is violent in America. My 15 year old son loves the Call of Duty type games. I stopped watching “regular” TV decades ago. I detest gratuitous violence. I have not been to a movie theater in over 20 years…..
Now we have all these young males in their mother’s basements watching and playing these violent video games. My son is 15 and I took him to a “Midnight Release” of Black Ops II. There were more grownup men than kids!!!! Wtf! No wonder these guys don’t have the social skills to get laid.
To say that guns are responsible for all the violence in America is like saying pencils are the cause of bad spelling.
“To say that guns are responsible for all the violence in America is like saying pencils are the cause of bad spelling.”
Or spoons are responsable for fat people
I agree, but I dont think neither videogames nor violent cinema are strictly responsible more than guns. In Germany violent games are limited and games company for selling in Germany they have to make some changes, like replacing humans with robots ect. But school shooting happens also in Germany.
I don’t think there are one size fit all solution, but many small steps to make for changing this dramatic pattern. From a better gun law to limiting violence in media (not removing) to placing good and realistic male role models etc. Its a long way to walk but I think it can be reached.
Good thing no one is saying that!
Good thing no one claims that drunk driving is the only cause of traffic deaths in Amarica, or that prescription drugs are the only cause of addiction, or that fast food is the only cause of health oissues, or that carbon usage is the only cause of climate change – shall I continue?
Good thing that solving issues is usually never about finding one ultimate cause and banging it with a large hammer.
Buy a gun a month.
Just stop anyone getting/holding/owning ANY ammunition.
The Second’s “right to bear arms” is fine. Let 88.8% of people bear/bring/tote their arms. But, does the Second say anything about ammunition? NO! So, BAN the ammunition, and enact laws in each state and federally to allow anyone to ‘challenge’ someone bearing a gun to prove that it is not loaded. After the third day of continually ‘proving’ every few minutes that the gun is unloaded, the bearer will probably be so tired of the process that they will leave it at home, or sell it back at the local gun shop.
Banning ammunition will also invalidate the gun as a defense weapon. Set a quota on how much munition you can buy per month or raise the price for munitions. Either way the weapon holder will go to the black market for ammo.
As a kid (age 10-16) I was very active in NRA and Olympic sanctioned rifle competition. I burned-through over 1000 rnds of ammo every month. If ammo restrictions or taxes are imposed, we can kiss that sport goodbye.
Mass shooters usually carry about 300 rounds, tops. This stuff weighs. Law of physics–not welcome in such discussions, I know, but it’s true–and there’s a limit to how much people want to carry.
Wouldn’t take long to accumulate that much, even legally.
Not a solution to the mass shooting problem, but it does have the happy result of inconveniencing the non-threatening, legal owners of guns.
Which, i suspect, is the point.
Since anybody who’s looked at the issue knows what I wrote in the first graf. Thus, they can’t actually, logically, think it’s a solution to mass shootings. Must be some other reason they’re pitching it.
In England we have very strong gun control laws.
There are still a few guns in criminal hands, but not many. Most violent crime is committed without guns. THIS LOWERS THE STAKES!
If you are mugged by two unarmed men, and it gets violent, then you get broken bones and bruises. You don’t get shot, and you are very unlikely to die.
With the “defend your home” scenario. A person who is prepared to break into peoples houses is good at violence! They are probably much better at violence than you. They bring a friend, and they are prepared. You are asleep. Who do you think is going to win? Again without guns, you will go through a very scary experience. With guns you run a real risk of dying.
England is a total of about 56million, Canadad is 34 million, the USA is311 million. England is 51 thousand sq miles, USA is 3,800,00o square miles. I’d say there is a little diff between us.
Illinois, California and New York population alone is more then England
Apparently the US is pretty safe overall despite so many of our deaths being by firearms:
http://chartsbin.com/view/1454
I feel vary bad about the events in Connecticut. I am a Second Ammendment supporter, and have retired from college teaching.
1. In England, you get knifed.
2. The category “assault rifle” has no content. Some rifles are scary-looking, e.g the AK-47 and M-16. Is that what you meant? Ninety-five percent of murders are committed with pistols. Most mass killings are too. Talking in terms of “assault rifles” makes anti-assault rifle people look ridiculous.
3. If you are a gun owner, you are responsible to honor the gun you possess and what it can do much as a martial artist honors his/her skills. We need to think along these lines. I don’t know that it would be possible to “ungun” the US, gunned up as it is.
4. I actually oppose gun registries because that gives someone (or a future more dangerous someone) a list of the law-abiding people who own guns.
5. We might think in terms of a “pistols can’t travel” national law. That would mean pistols could be kept in the home (or in a locker at the gunrange) only. I’d rather see police shaking cars down for pistols as opposed to drugs or marijuana.
******1. In England, you get knifed.******
Wait! Wait….wait….. Are you telling me life can be taken with knives? There ought to be a law against that! And if murder IS illegal, why do people kill others with those horrid knives?
If we take away the knives…do you think there may be other things used by loony-tunes to kill children? If we look down the road enough, maybe we end up euthanizing the mentally ill or even the abnormal in any category?
Who said ban knives? in 2009 …. “BRUSSELS, Belgium — The suspect who went on a deadly stabbing spree at a Belgian day care center is also thought to have killed an elderly woman 10 days ago and had plans on him to attack two more nurseries, a prosecutor said Monday.
Christian Du Four said police now believe the man they are holding for Friday’s day care massacre in Dendermonde may also have stabbed to death a 73-year-old woman who lived nearby on Jan. 16.”
WRT mental health. It’s not like going to the doctor to get a sprain fixed.
The last people to know they’re mentally ill are the mentally ill and we have laws–possibly too restrictive but they have historical grounds–keeping us from slapping anybody we think is weird into the mental health system.
Lanza’s mother was starting an involved legal process to have him committed. That’s the point. It’s an involved legal process where the presumption is for his continued non-commitment.
Drugs work fine–when they work–if the ill person keeps up his meds which, experience shows, is not a good bet.
Any time you find a mass shooter’s previous life shows signs of mental illness, you find…that there area a thousand folks worse running around. The Columbine shooters. Got through life just fine until they started shooting. Even had the brains, the long-range planning capability to put this together, the initiative to try a propane bomb, the ability to keep it secret from their parents and others. Unless you were spying on them, you’d have no clue.
Loughner–Tucson–was so nuts there’s some talk about his mom’s position at the sheriff’s department that kept him out of the rubber room.
Holmes–Aurora–was seeing somebody, or trying to. Didn’t do much good and what seems to be a warning letter from the shrink to the school didn’t help either. We may know more after discovery.
So ponying up more money for mental health issues isn’t the issue.
The true insanity is to ignore the link between school shootings and the anti-depressants 90% of these kids/young adults have been on at the time of the shootings. They are known to cause suicidal thoughts and violent behavior, yet there’s no discussion about them being the problem. Only the tools they chose to use to embellish their need for action.
9,000 people are murdered by firearms per year. 2.5 million are saved by them per year. But the media and anti crowd always ignore those saved.
Keep railing against Assault Rifles – the media keyword used to describe a semi-automatic rifle that’s black and looks scary to them – because they accounted for 323 of the 12,644 murders in 2011.
Let the Pharma lobbies continue to push medicating the symptoms of our children’s problems instead of solving their actual problems. Keep making drugs known to give children violent behavior and want to harm themselves and others. But no, that’s not the real problem. It has to be what they do after that.
Keep repeating that mistake over and over. That’s the definition of insanity.