"All over America today, mothers and fathers dropped their children off at school and left with a pit in their stomach. Asking themselves: 'Will they be safe?' 'Can it happen here?' 'Will they come home?'" Those words were written - Friday, February 16th, 2018 - by former Vice President Joe Biden. But they are the thoughts that are unfortunately racing through the minds of perhaps every American. Parents are thinking about their kids, but others throughout our country are fearful for the safety of all their loved ones...and themselves. And they're wondering..."Who might be next?"
I have always believed that we cannot live as frightened puppies. But with the amount of school shootings - and shootings elsewhere - in 2018 alone...we can't help but be concerned about our own personal safety and the safety of the people we cherish.
Any American with an ounce of decency has to be heartbroken this week after a deranged 19-year old former student of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, on Wednesday, February 14th, savagely slaughtered seventeen people - fourteen students and three teachers - in a shooting rampage in this once peaceful community of Parkland, Florida. Nikolas Cruz - a sick-minded sociopath who, according to the Broward County Sheriff, has confessed to the crimes - also wounded fourteen other people...one of them - as this column is published - remains in critical condition with life-threatening injuries while six are listed in fair condition, according to a spokesperson from the Broward Health hospital system. Seven others who were injured have been released.
But none of this should have happened. With so many obvious signs that Cruz was dangerously disturbed, how did nobody stop him before he could attack a high school and shoot thirty-one people? No one who is psychotic should ever have been able to buy a firearm...let alone an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with a magazine of ammunition. But Florida doesn't require fingerprinting...or a special permit...or even a waiting period to purchase a gun. And if you're at least 18 years old, you can buy a rifle in "The Sunshine State." All a person needs to do is pass a simple background check. And at age 19...and with no criminal record - even though Cruz had a history of disciplinary problems at school and was recently expelled from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School - a few hundred dollars in his wallet was all that was necessary to purchase his murder weapon. So therefore...the gun was purchased legally - and according to the FBI - "about a year ago." Meanwhile, the attorney for the store owner, where Cruz bought the rifle, told reporters on February 16th that "The standard AR-15 weapon comes with one magazine...and that one magazine is the only magazine that was furnished with the weapon. It is for that reason that no red flags were raised."
But there should have been red flags. And there may have been if Cruz's name was placed on a federal law enforcement list that described him as dangerous and potentially threatening.
Let me remind you that in February 2017 - not too long after his inauguration - Donald Trump repealed a regulation that was signed in December 2016 by President Barack Obama, which would have made it more difficult for people with mental illness to purchase a firearm. The Obama Administration rule, however, had not fully taken effect when it was overturned. President Obama believed the initiative would have added about 75-thousand names to the database of the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. But Trump was able to nullify the rule after Congress quietly voted to repeal it. The Congressional Review Act allows lawmakers to reverse any recently enacted regulation that was passed by the President. Mr. Obama had recommended the rule be implemented in 2013 following the mass murder of twenty first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
On December 17th, 2012, I published an editorial titled, WE'VE GOT TO GET THE GUNS. My column focused on the chilling murders at Sandy Hook. In that commentary, I wrote..."We must do something in this country to get guns out of the hands of people who are unconscionably evil and/or mentally unbalanced; and who are capable of performing indescribable violence on others."
But whether it's Sandy Hook Elementary School, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, or any other school that has suffered the catastrophic carnage of a mass shooting...the emotions of our nation's citizens are ripped apart in to pools of tears and fits of anger.
In my column from 2012, I also wrote similar words to those that Vice President Biden articulated this past week. I asked..."When they kiss their child goodbye, as they go off to school in the morning, must every parent now think to himself or herself...will my child live or die today because a sinful psychopath could storm in to his or her school carrying assault weapons and enough ammunition to kill hundreds of pure and pristine children? When is enough enough? How many children need to die before our politicians can unite and agree on a law that would prevent these mass murders?"
That was nearly six years ago...and yet, nothing has been done to make gun control laws stronger and to stop individuals with mental illness from buying any firearm.
Schools need to be safe sanctuaries for our kids. We must have stricter gun laws so that no other American will perish in such horrifying and cataclysmic ways. I noted in my 2012 editorial..."If twenty dead children isn't reason enough to change our laws...then I don't know what will." But the deaths of those six and seven year old boys and girls apparently didn't mean a damn thing to the Republicans in Congress. And I wonder if the deaths of fourteen teenagers this week...will make a difference either. And why? Because the GOP is in bed with the NRA.
The National Rifle Association has written checks - one after another - for the political campaigns of certain Republicans. NBC News says the NRA made contributions totaling 21-million dollars to Donald Trump's presidential campaign. And The New York Times reported in their October 2017 article that tens of millions of dollars have been given in recent years to numerous Senate and House Republicans.
The NRA has too much influence on the Republican Party and on Donald Trump. And here's more proof. Despite so many fatalities in school shootings and other mass murders...the House of Representatives - in December 2017 - passed a bill that would allow anyone who is licensed to carry concealed firearms in their own state... to legally bring those weapons across the borders in to other states without the concern of conflicting state laws or civil suits. This issue is a top priority of the NRA, which applauded the House vote. Donald Trump also supports the measure, so if the Senate passes the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, then once the legislation is signed by Trump, it would become law. This is irresponsible and crazy. Such a law would bring guns in to cities and states that do not recognize the permits from other states, which - in many cases - do not require background checks and will sell a gun to anyone with a driver's license.
Gun control is an issue that can no longer be a liberal versus conservative matter. Republicans and the NRA - as I wrote in another commentary on September 22nd, 2013 - "must support a gun control law that will rid the streets of illegal guns and stops the horrific acts of depraved homicidal degenerates." But whether the guns are obtained unlawfully or lawfully, we must halt the twisted, warped and maniacal monsters who brutally blast their way into schools, parks, playgrounds, houses of worship, concerts, nightclubs, movie theaters, restaurants, malls, baseball fields and other sports stadiums, or any other public venue. We must totally terminate shooting sprees by these barbaric beasts who are invading the backyards of America's heartland and the concourses of cosmopolitan centers.
As I wrote in my column of January 8th, 2017..."Death by guns is a public health problem. It is an epidemic. A plague. And it must be stopped." We must somehow...some way...free our nation and cleanse our country from the arsenal of guns that poison those who, in no way, deserve to be slain.
Everytown For Gun Safety - a gun control advocacy group - says there have been eighteen school shootings in the United States since January 1st, 2018. Let me repeat that a different way. In the first forty-five days of this year, there have been an alarming eighteen school shootings. The organization also says that 291 American schools have been raided by gunmen since 2013.
Do Republicans want school shootings to be daily? If a new federal gun control law is not passed...toddlers, tweens and teenagers are bound to be the victims of more and more massacres. Therefore, what will it take for Donald Trump and Congress to pass a commonsense gun control law that includes an extended waiting period of at least ninety days and an intense universal background check? Do one-hundred people need to be shot and killed? Must we wait until five-hundred of our neighbors are executed by spraying bullets? Or will it be after dozens of dedicated teachers and one-thousand of their students are riddled with ammo from assault weapons? I ask you. What will it take?
We must tackle the mayhem of gun use before the irrational and the insane overpower us. Legislation that is even stronger than the 1994 assault weapons ban that Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed in to law...is a must for our country. The 1994 law expired in 2004 after being active for only ten years. No new gun control law can be temporary. It must be permanent. Furthermore, there is no logical purpose for anyone outside of the military or law enforcement agencies to own guns with magazines that store multiple rounds of ammunition. These magazines need to be outlawed so that civilians cannot purchase them.
The families of too many Americans - whether in Parkland, Florida...Newtown, Connecticut...or elsewhere...have had their hearts torn apart as they weep from the realization that their loved ones were murdered and are gone forever. No mother... no father...no son...no daughter...no husband...no wife...not one single person in the United States...should ever have to agonize from their kinfolk being killed by someone with a gun.
Not even when two of their own nearly died from gunshot wounds did Congress agree on gun control legislation. In January 2011, when then Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, Democrat of Arizona - was shot...or in June 2017, when Republican Congressman Steve Scalise of Louisiana received his bullet wounds...did the Republican-controlled Congress care enough about gun control.
Even after the worst mass shooting in modern American history - which left fifty-eight people dead and 851 others injured at an October 1st, 2017 country music festival on "The Strip" in Las Vegas, Nevada - Republicans still refused...because of politics...to get off their butts to help save lives in the future. Do Republicans not care that a madman with twenty-three semi-automatic rifles and handguns...fired more than eleven-hundred rounds of ammunition...from his 32nd floor suite at the Mandalay Bay hotel...which overlooked an audience of concertgoers? The killer - who died in that hotel room when he later turned a gun on himself - used bump fire stocks, which in essence turned his semi-automatic weapons in to automatic rifles...by mimicking its firing speed to between four-hundred and eight-hundred rounds per minute. According to The Economist magazine, bump fire stocks sell in the United States for about one-hundred dollars and up. We must ban bump fire stocks. Also, there must be a limit on how many guns an individual can buy. Police discovered twenty-four more firearms at the Las Vegas shooter's two Nevada homes. Therefore, a monitoring system is essential so that federal, state and municipal law enforcement authorities know who owns multiple numbers of weapons. The Las Vegas killer had a total of forty-seven guns and twelve bump fire stocks.
But now...America mourns those who were murdered at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. The devastation in Parkland, Florida is gut-wrenching. It is beyond tragic. We cannot tolerate any more bloodbaths to flood our schools.
Nikolas Cruz is not a member of ISIS. He is not a religious radical from a foreign country. He is a United States citizen. He is an American. Yet he is indeed a terrorist...a violent murderer who assassinated innocent people. Our nation does not need a multi-billion-dollar wall on the U.S./Mexico border to keep us safe. We need the perfect gun control law.
Following the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Phillip Timothy - someone who I do not know - posted on Facebook..."A chunk of lead, hurtling through the air, thrown by a little explosion, triggered by one man's finger, can destroy that entire world. So I really don't give a damn how important owning a gun is to you."
Numerous students were interviewed by various news organizations, with one calling Nikolas Cruz..."reckless." Another student labeled him "a little bit off" and claimed Cruz "threatened to bring (his) guns to school multiple times." It was apparently "joked" by some kids that Cruz would "be the one to shoot up the school." According to BuzzFeed, the FBI was reportedly advised six months ago that someone with the "user name of Nikolas Cruz" bragged in a YouTube post..."I'm going to be a professional school shooter." Why was nothing done to lock him up in a hospital and provide him the psychiatric medical care he desperately needed? That option now better be off the table. Cruz will either spend the rest of his life in prison...or worse.
The FBI says that on January 5th - less than six weeks before the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shootings - the Bureau was informed on their telephone tip line that a "person close to Cruz" was aware of his "gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting." The tip should have been immediately investigated. But the FBI says this "potential threat to life" was somehow overlooked. The Bureau says "protocols were not followed." But FBI Director Christopher Wray vows to get "to the bottom of what happened." Meanwhile, the people of Parkland, Florida are livid. Student Chris Grady told NBC News that his schoolmates and teachers "might be alive today if they (the FBI) had done their job. I'm sorry, but this is so infuriating."
My heart goes out to everyone in Parkland, especially to the families who are grieving the loss of their relatives. From average citizens to Members of Congress, Americans have expressed their thoughts and prayers...their sympathies and condolences...to the bereaved. But even the warmest words are not enough. Americans must join together to force the United States Senate and the House of Representatives to pass the toughest gun control bill imaginable...and Donald Trump must sign it in to law.
David Hogg, a student who survived the shootings, told CNN..."We are children. You guys are the adults. Work together, come over your politics, and get something done."
On February 14th, 2018, a cold-blooded killer stole the lives of fourteen precious pupils at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, along with three of their brave teachers who saved lives by giving up their own. Valentine's Day is supposed to be a day of happiness and love. But in Parkland, Florida...Valentine's Day will evermore be a day of sadness...and the memory of death. God help them.
And that's The Controversy for today.
I'm Gary B. Duglin.
"We'll talk again."
The Controversy is a
publication of GBD Productions. Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy
is Gary B. Duglin.
Now please express your personal opinions by following the instructions above. And thank you for reading The Controversy.
Now please express your personal opinions by following the instructions above. And thank you for reading The Controversy.
Copyright 2018 Gary B.
Duglin and TheControversy.net. All Rights Reserved.
The following comment was posted on Gary B. Duglin's Facebook page on Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 9:21 a.m. Since the reader's name appears on Facebook, it will be published here.
ReplyDelete"Gary: while I agree with everything you write, I am not optimistic that this latest shooting will have any effect on Congress. As I have stated previously, regarding the Republicans and our troglodyte president, they have made a “pact with the devil” refusing to condemn his behavior or actions because they feel that through him they can obtain their goals. In the same way, members of congress have decided to accept the bargain that in order to continue receiving funding from the NRA they are willing to accept “x” amount of deaths per year from gun violence in order to not upset the NRA. If Sandy Hook didn’t lead to change, no other mass killings will do so. There is a demonstration being planned nationwide for April 20 in which students plan to walk out of school to protest inaction by congress. Unfortunately students can’t vote and thus their effect on congress will be minimal. What might make a difference will be if their parents join in the millions and most importantly vote in November to oust those members in congress who accept millions in contributions from the NRA." - Michael Koski
Gary B. Duglin's comments, responding to the above reader, were originally posted on his Facebook page on Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 11:40 a.m.
DeleteMichael, thanks very much for your comments. There needs to be one, perhaps two, strong Republicans in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives who have the "balls" (men or women, so metaphorically speaking) to join with the Democrats so Congress can create legislation that will accomplish what I have written in my column. Let us remember that there are 51 Republican Senators and 49 Democratic Senators. Given my suggestion, I think it will be a lot easier for 11 Republicans to jump ship and agree with the Democrats (the magic number is 60) on a new commonsense gun control bill than the House of Representatives. The House will be more difficult, but if a couple of strong Republican Congressmen/Congresswomen will do the same then what I am stating is possible. I really don't want to wait until January, 2019. I truly believe that the Democrats will take control of both the House and the Senate after the 2018 mid-term elections in November, but I fear there will be many more school shootings and other people being killed elsewhere by guns if something is not done soon. Plus, there is still the issue of Donald Trump. Will he still be in office come January? And if he is, will he sign a bill in to law that is passed by a Congress that is controlled by the Democrats? And if Trump has resigned...or is impeached and convicted by January, then the same questions would apply to Mike Pence as President. Unless Special Counsel Bob Mueller discovers that Pence was involved in a cover-up, and then, with a Democratic Speaker of the House, a Democrat would become President after Pence resigns. An interesting concept, eh? But let me return to gun control. As I wrote in my editorial, a new gun control law must include an extended waiting period of at least ninety days and an intense universal background check. I will reiterate some of my other thoughts from my column. Assault weapons must be banned, as they had been with President Bill Clinton. Bump fire stocks must be banned. And as I wrote in my commentary, there is no logical purpose for anyone outside of the military or law enforcement agencies to own guns with magazines that store multiple rounds of ammunition. These magazines need to be outlawed so that civilians cannot purchase them. A new gun control law must be permanent. Having an expiration date of ten years makes no sense because if that happens we'll be back to square one in 2028. Plus, there must be a limit on how many guns an individual can buy. A monitoring system is essential so that federal, state and municipal law enforcement authorities know who owns multiple numbers of weapons. Anybody who owns 47 guns, as the Las Vegas killer did, is somebody who has the potential, if not the desire, to use those firearms for dangerously illegal purposes. In other words, they're going to probably use them to kill people. Every person who wants to buy a gun must be fingerprinted. Some banks won't let you cash a check today without providing a fingerprint. And after all is said and done, anyone who wants to purchase a firearm must have a special permit...a license. Just because a person doesn't have a criminal record shouldn't automatically grant him the opportunity to buy a gun. As I wrote in today's column, as well as in my editorial from December 17th, 2012, "We must do something in this country to get guns out of the hands of people who are unconscionably evil and/or mentally unbalanced; and who are capable of performing indescribable violence on others." Congressional Republicans must start caring more about the people in our country...and keeping Americans safe...than receiving millions of dollars from the NRA. GBD
First let me say I was as sickened by this animal’s actions in Florida last week. I am a parent and can’t imagine what these people have gone through. Let me be open about it, I am a gun owner and have a CCP (concealed carry permit). I believe in and am in favor of “common sense” gun control, the difference in many cases is what you or many others think is common sense is very different from what I and many others think is common sense. First we need to change our HIPAA laws to not only allow but require all medical and mental health professionals along with social workers, school counselors and administrators to report to local law enforcement and to a national data base setup for fire arm background checks any and all patients/individuals that are considered violent or dangerous. Right now Doctors and other caregivers risk their licenses and they risk being sued and in some states criminal charges for reporting someone to law enforcement who is not an “imminent” threat, at this time there is not a data base for these reports. I agree that no one who is psychotic should ever have been able to buy a firearm. Your statements about Florida not requiring fingerprints or a special permit would have made no difference in this case, his prints weren’t on file anywhere and he passed the background check, even a 90 day waiting period wouldn’t have helped. What we need first is better background checks and not the type put through by President Obama and repealed by the use of the Congressional Review Act and then signed by President Trump. The Obama rule would have put many people that are on Social Security Disability on a list preventing them from owning a gun, people that have been treated for anorexia and many other non-violent mental illnesses could be on the list. We need to stop the violent mentally ill people from getting a gun, not a 19 year old with an eating disorder. I personally don’t own an AR15 and don’t have a need for one but I know many people that have them, they hunt with them they go to the range with them and none of them are dangerous psychopaths. It is estimated that there are over 11 million legal AR15 type guns in private hands in the USA, would you look to confiscate all of them or buy them back, at an average value of $1200 that would take over $13,200,000,000. I don’t think the courts would allow confiscation without compensation. It is not the gun it is the person. When Seung Hui Cho the Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people and wounded many others, he did it with 2 hand guns a 22-caliber and a 9mm not an AR15 or any rifle. As for the “Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act” it may be a moot issue if the Supreme Court takes the case before them, many people believe that when the court ruled on marriage equality they stated in the decision that all states need to honor all licenses issued by other states, they could rule that a CCP from one state must be honored by all states, none of us know how the Court will rule. The FBI dropped the ball, local police dropped it, a social worker dropped the ball and I bet many more did the same. We need to fix the system, prevent the violently mentally ill from ever buying a gun, any gun! We shouldn’t take millions of honest peoples 2nd Amendment Constitutional rights away. We need to stop the mentally ill violent people from getting any gun and get them off the streets and out of society so they can’t hurt themselves or anyone else. Your comment about people with multiple guns is despicable “is somebody who has the potential, if not the desire, to use those firearms for dangerously illegal purposes. In other words, they're going to probably use them to kill people”, I have over a half dozen each with their own purpose, some are side arms, some as concealed and one small one for being very concealed, I have no desire to use any of them for dangerously illegal purposes. How many make you killer in your mind two, five, ten or more than twenty? Like I said it is not the gun it’s the person!
DeleteThe following response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
It took me a moment to digest your comments, but I want to first thank you for your response.
It was refreshing to receive remarks from a gun owner who did not attack me personally, as other readers have over the years. Instead you expressed your opinions and your feelings in an articulate fashion. You did not identify yourself as a Democrat or a Republican, although it is widely believed that someone with your thoughts does more than likely vote for candidates who are members of the GOP. That being said, you could be an Independent with views favoring the Democrats as well. But gun control should not be an issue of Democrats versus Republicans. All that being said, you didn't call me a hater, as others have wrongly done. Gun control is not a matter for hating...but Americans can no longer tolerate murders of innocent people...murders of innocent children.
Furthermore, as a self-described ultra-liberal progressive Democrat, I would support - in a perfect world - the trashing of every single gun on the planet. But Earth is not a perfect world...and as wonderful a country that the United States is...America is not perfect either. So therefore, I understand that guns are here to stay. I also understand that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gives Americans the right to own a gun. I further understand that the Second Amendment is not going away.
Although I disagree with the concept, I would never challenge the fact of you being able to own a gun. I do question why anyone (outside of someone in law enforcement) would want to carry a gun on his or her person, but again...based on certain laws in certain states, you do have the right also. And since I don't know you, I have to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are a law abiding citizen who wants to own a gun for the purpose of personal protection and home protection, not for anything illegal. And most gunowners would indeed fall in to your category. However, you noted that you own "over a half-dozen" guns...and you also note that each one has its own purpose. You didn't mention owning rifles of any kind...and since you state that you own sidearms, some of which are concealed and "one small one for being very concealed"...I have to assume that you don't use these guns for hunting in the wild. Therefore, it truly puzzles me that anyone would need six or more guns for personal protection. Perhaps you can explain your reasoning and why you think you might ever need that amount of firearms.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteYou bring up HIPAA laws. There have been precedents set in court whereby judges have ruled in favor of doctors and school officials who report a person to the police after they have made what are considered "true threats." I could cite certain cases, but I'm not a lawyer. And, therefore, you could Google them, just as I did. That being said, there were plenty of signs with the Parkland, Florida shooter that would have fallen under those precedents. I cannot believe that any person...be him or her a medical professional, an educator, social worker or anyone else who is perhaps bound by HIPAA laws...who has observed, heard or witnessed in any fashion...a "true threat" where one person has expressed to perform violence on another person...and therefore "imminent danger" towards that other person is possible, probable or even likely...then most of the aforementioned professionals would - in good conscience - report the threat...as a "true threat"...and, therefore, contact police. In the case of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shootings...there were many signals that Niklolas Cruz had made "true threats." But from state to state, it is a matter of interpretation of the laws. I think, however, that in this day and age, no judge worth his salt would ever rule against a professional in the medical, educational or social worker fields when "true threats" are apparent. You may think my thoughts are naive, but I want to believe that the justice system cannot be "that blind."
True, in the case of the Florida shooter, certain parts of the current Florida gun law would not have kept Cruz from purchasing an AR-15. And that is one reason why NOBODY should be able to purchase such a weapon. Furthermore, someone like Cruz who is obviously "psychotic" - and others like him - need to have their names placed in a federal database. And all persons must present a picture ID if they were ever to attempt the purchase of any firearm. If that had been the case with Cruz, once he would have presented his driver's license, his name would have been flagged and he would have been denied the purchase of a gun. I, therefore, believe that my recommendations, which I discuss in my column would save lives. Is any gun control law going to be perfect? Not a chance. But we need to move forward with better laws that can prevent not only the mentally ill, but the criminally evil from obtaining a gun...or guns.
In many cases, a 90-day waiting period would be beneficial. Perhaps not in the case of Cruz since he purchased his weapon about a year before he attacked the high school. But many acts of gun violence - especially with domestic murders and killings by disgruntled employees - are when a person has gone completely off the wall because he or she has been in a fight with a significant other or when a person has been fired from a job. We have heard for years about people who have gone out, purchased a gun and shot someone to death. A 90-day waiting period gives all that time for a person to - simply put - cool off. Personally, I never understand people like that, as I am perhaps one one of the calmest, most passive persons anyone would meet. And obviously I oppose guns and oppose violence of any kind. But again - as I noted above - we don't live in a perfect world...and there are people who use weapons instead of words to settle a dispute.
President Obama's rule would have worked. Even non-violent mental illness can evolve in to something worse...either by harming someone else...or themselves. You reference a 19-year old with an eating disorder. He or she could get so fed up with their life and feel that they are not losing the weight they want to lose and, therefore, they could purchase a gun and shoot themself to death. A stretch? Perhaps. But I'm just using your analogy.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteIn recent years...especially in recent months, weeks and days...I have observed numerous gun experts...plus many hunters...express categorically that there is no reason for any hunter to use an AR-15 or any assault weapons to shoot a deer or other such animal.
You ask..."It is estimated that there are over 11 million legal AR-15 type guns in private hands in the USA, would you look to confiscate all of them or buy them back, at an average value of $1200? That would take over 13-billion-200-million dollars." I throw this question back at you? What is a life worth? What are 17 lives worth? What are hundreds and thousands of lives worth? That's what we're looking at here. I guarantee you that the families of the 17 people who were killed in Parkland, Florida would say their loved one is certainly worth more than 13-billion-200-million dollars. Would you not feel the same way if God forbid one of those victims was your son...or your daughter...or your father...or your husband? Think about that?
As for mass murderers who don't own assault weapons, but use handguns - as you describe in the Virginia Tech shootings - this is why we need a better federal gun control law with the recommendations I discuss in my column. Since writing my editorial, an old college buddy of mine suggests another recommendation. I won't identify him by his full name since I have not asked to use it, so, therefore, I will simply call him by his first name, Marty. Marty says a new law should "require gun manufacturers to install or retrofit (at their expense) GPS tracking devices on all weapons so law enforcement will know where guns are, how they're being used and gain the ability to potentially prevent shootings through tracking. If Uber can track millions of vehicles all over the U.S., we should have the ability to track guns wherever they are." Although I believe Marty's suggestion is a valid one...I do pose the following question. With between an estimated 270-million and 310-million guns floating around in the United States...how do all those guns get fitted for such a GPS? And would there need to be a cash incentive for people to do that? As for all new guns manufactured and sold...Marty's idea could work.
You comment that "it's not the gun, it's the person." I cannot totally agree with you. It is true that bullets will kill, no matter what gun is shooting it. And yes a gun cannot be shot unless a person pulls the trigger. But this is why there has to be a limit on how many firearms a person can purchase. And nobody should be able to buy an assault weapon. Plus, magazines that are jampacked with ammunition must be outlawed. If a person wants to own - and has the right to own for personal protection - a single handgun...why not one with only six bullets? Whatever happened to the old so-called "six-shooter?" There is no logical reason for anybody to own a gun...especially not a semi-automatic rifle...or one with a bump fire stock that turns it in to an automatic rifle...that fires bullets at a speed of between 400 and 800 rounds per minute. I am not looking to take away your Second Amendment rights. But something needs to be done...or else we are, as a nation, looking at more and more gun tragedies in our future.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Mr GBD. I’ll try to answer some of your questions. First “why anyone (outside of someone in law enforcement) would want to carry a gun on his or her person” there are times and places that you may feel unsafe and it is comforting to know you can if needed (hopefully never) protect yourself and your family. There are many parts of this country that it can take 15-20 minutes and in some rural areas as much as 30 minutes to get a Sheriff’s officer or State police to your location, in less than 5 minutes with an armed intruder you and your family can be dead. You asked: “ it truly puzzles me that anyone would need six or more guns for personal protection” one I have is a 357 with a six inch barrel, total length of eleven plus inches, a little large for concealed carry, then there is a 9mm hold 15 rounds in the magazine and 1 in the chamber for a total of 16, quick to load and ready it is great for home protection, then there is the 22 caliber which is great to go to the range, very little kick and ammo cost about $30 for a box of 500 where 9mm will cost $35 for a box of 50, the .380 is what is called a pocket pistol, easily concealed but is for shorter range, a 38 snub which is great to carry when you don’t need to really hid it, the last is just for fun an old style 45 western single action six shooter. As for HIPAA and doctors licenses and others they require an “imminent threat” not a true threat, and if a psychiatrist or other care giver breaks doctor patient confidence without that imminent threat he can lose his license get sued or worse, that’s without penalties for violating HIPPA. I don’t have a problem with a waiting period, 90 days is a bit much 30 is better and there must be a provision to go to a judge and get it expedited if needed. 13-billion plus dollars is a lot of money and there is no price on an innocent human life but where will the money come from and what do you do when most don’t want to sell. Not to mention what do you do with the millions of AR15 that are illegally out there. The GPS thing would work, the court would never allow that invasion of privacy, would you want the government to know everywhere you go? As for hunting with an AR15 many people only have the one rifle and that is what they use it is very accurate and for many people it looks great. Just remember that the AR15 is not the only weapon describe as an assault weapon, the ruger 22 rifle used for years by the Boy Scouts at their camps was deemed to be one. Any rifle with a pistol grip was described as one plus many more. Better reporting and background checks are the way to go!
DeleteThe following response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
It's truly a shame that you feel so uncomfortable in our country that you need to be armed with a gun in order to feel safe. I don't know how old you are...if you are part of my generation or if you are younger...but I did not grow up in an age where I felt so scared that I wanted adults to be carrying guns. Oh sure...I grew up during the Vietnam War...and during a time of civil rights riots...but fortunately, the violence was not in my hometown or in my backyard. I witnessed a country in mourning by the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy...The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr...and Senator Robert F. Kennedy. But I didn't grow up during a time when school kids were being murdered in classrooms or people, in general, were being shot to death at concerts and at other public venues.
I do understand we live today in a different time. But adding guns...instead of subtracting them...is not the answer. I heard Donald Trump today say that he wants teachers to be armed. That is NOT the answer. A man with an assault weapon...or multiple weapons...is not going to be stopped by a teacher with a one handgun. Such a plan by Trump and other Republicans is insane. Totally absurd. More guns are not going to solve the problem we have in our country today. And thinking that a wild west shoot-out is going to be the answer is totally moronic.
I wrote a column for The Controversy, published on May 28th, 2014 - nearly four years ago - titled...ALL GUNS HAVE GOT TO GO AWAY BEFORE MORE INNOCENT PEOPLE DIE. AND POLICE NEED TO INVESTIGATE MORE CAREFULLY AND WITH MORE DETAIL WHEN SUSPECTING A PERSON WHO MAY BE A THREAT TO OTHER PEOPLE. Note that title please. We are still discussing the same issues today...exactly the same issues. And that was four years ago.
In that editorial, I wrote..."When our forefathers penned the Bill of Rights and the entire Constitution more than two centuries ago...it was a different world...a different time. People needed to protect themselves, their loved ones and their homes...and guns were perhaps a necessity. One hundred years later... cowboys of the so-called "wild west"...wore guns on their person...and lived in an era that was directly out of an episode of Gunsmoke...or Bonanza...or The Rifleman. We don't live that way today. Instead of everybody carrying a revolver, pistol, rifle, shotgun or sidearm of any kind...only "some" do. Unfortunately, many of the "some" - who own guns - are sickies. Others in that "some" group...are law abiding citizens...who for one reason or another...have the desire...and feel the need...to own...and/or to carry a gun. And although I respect the fact that most of those individuals are decent human beings...who obey the laws of our land...and who own their guns for personal protection...for the hunting of animals during seasons where such a sporting event is permitted...and for other legal purposes...it's time for me to finally say...that it would be best... for all guns in our country...to be illegal. After all...as I stated in an earlier commentary...if our forefathers had a crystal ball in 1787...so they could look in to the future...and be fully aware of what guns would do in the 20th and 21st centuries...a Second Amendment - as it is - would never have been written."
As noted in an earlier comment to you, I realize that guns are unfortunately here to stay. But I do continue to believe that if our forefathers could have looked in to that crystal ball...things would be different today.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteYou note that "There are many parts of this country that it can take 15 - 20 minutes...and in some rural areas as much as 30 minutes to get a sheriff's officer or state police to your location. In less than 5 minutes - with an armed intruder - you and your family can be dead." I understand that. But I truly don't know how many sane, innocent people could actually shoot a gun to kill another human being. I know I couldn't. I suppose you think you can. I hope you're never put in to such a precarious situation where you would be forced to take those six guns of yours - or even one of them - to actually pull the trigger and put to death another person.
As for HIPAA...determining an "imminent threat" or a "true threat" is going to be up to interpretation by a court. Therefore, I remain firm on my stance that no judge - in today's climate - is going to "throw the book" at any physician if such a doctor reports a patient to a law enforcement agency when that doctor believes his or her patient is going to use physicial abuse or assault on another individual...and that goes for using a gun...any other weapon...or bare hands. If I was a doctor...I could never live with myself if I knew I could have stopped a shooting spree...or even the death of one single person...by reporting a patient's threat...weather "true" or "imminent" to police. Nobody knows how "imminent" a threat is going to be before a person actually attacks. If your kid was sitting in a school classroom...and a madman entered with a gun...would you really want that doctor - who could have possibly stopped such a shooter - to have remained silent? I don't think so.
Obviously, the money you speak of - that 13-billion dollars - to buy back some 11-million AR-15 assault weapons...would have to be paid by the government through taxpayers money. But I go back to my earlier comment to you...ask the families of the 17 people killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida if they had been asked on February 13th, 2018 - the day before the school shootings - if they would have been willing to pay their share in order to save the lives of their children...their fathers...their husbands. I think you know the answer.
As for your question..."What do you do when most don't want to sell (their AR-15 weapons)?" The law needs to include that anyone who does not sell back those guns to the government...and is caught with one...would be heavily fined with the possibility of a jail sentence. And I'm not talking about a hundred bucks and 10 days in the slammer - to use a term from the old west. I'm saying a steep cash amount and - depending on the amount of assault weapons in the person's possession - a prison term of between one and five years behind bars. Believe me...people will give up their assault weapons.
As for the AR-15 weapons that are "illegally out there"...well...hopefully the "law" can find those people who harbor such guns. Obviously, it's going to be impossible to get all of them...but if no future sales are made...and local, state and federal law enforcement officers are on their toes...in time, our country will not be inundated with 11-million AR-15 weapons.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteThe issue of privacy is out the window. Everybody with a cell phone...people with new cars...are all being tracked in some way or another by a GPS. "Big Brother" - as George Orwell wrote in his classic novel 1984 - is indeed watching...and listening. And again...in our world today where schools and other public places are being attacked by deranged villains, I doubt any judge worth his salt would call GPS devices in guns "an invasion of privacy." Such a decision may need a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, but I believe - although it may be a 5 to 4 decision - most Justices would not call such a GPS an invasion of privacy for gun owners if firearms were manufactured with GPS devices.
Before a AR-15 was ever made, hunters going back to the days of Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone were able to shoot animals in the wild - for food - by using rifles that were not assault weapons. There is no reason whatsoever that a hunter needs an AR-15...and, as I noted in an earlier response, most expert hunters agree with that statement.
I was a Cub and Boy Scout for eight years during my childhood. And I spent a few weeks of one summer at a Boy Scout camp...not to mention all the Camporees and other large campouts I attended as a kid that included just my own troop or dozens of troops. I'm sure that if there was anyone that ever had such killing machines on site...my parents...and my friends' parents...and all the other parents of other Scouts...would have been advised...and I would have also known. So I question your comment about the Boy Scouts and guns.
Yes we need better background checks. That's a given. Intense universal background checks. But without implementing all the other suggestions, as well, that I and others have discussed over the last several years and over the last several days...America will be having this discussion on gun control...the next time 14 children and 3 teachers are murdered in a school...or murdered anywhere. Only next time...instead of God forbid it being 17 people...it might God forbid be 170 people...or God forbid 1700 people. Ponder that when you think of Americans being allowed to purchase multiple handguns...assault weapons...and bump fire stocks. Ponder that...if the next time the shooting starts...it's your child in that school. Ponder that...if the next time the bullets start flying at a concert...it's you sitting in the audience.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Either someone never leaves their home or they are a fool to say that they never feel or go anywhere or anyplace that they may feel unsafe. There are times you need to go into what you feel is a bad neighborhood or an area you don’t feel safe. Nobody said anything about being “so scared”. America has always been and will in some ways always be a nation of guns. It is part of our history and for much of our population part of our future. From a recent survey that said if you remove 5 major cities NYC, LA, Boston, Chicago and Washington DC that close to 60% of the rest of the nation have firearms in their home. We have more than 300 million guns in the US, nationwide they say about 42% of Americans legally own a gun. As for your statement “a man with an assault weapon...or multiple weapons...is not going to be stopped by a teacher with a one handgun” is very untrue, a teacher who is trained and qualified can with 1 shot a take down a gunman, that’s all it takes, is one good shot! I disagree with you on our forefathers they believed and wrote that it was an individual’s responsibility to protect and keep himself and his family safe. Yes, I could pull the trigger to protect my family, my friends, myself, my community and my country. If the choice is kill or be killed, I choose kill. You don’t get the HIPPA laws, if a doctor reports someone to the police and they bring him in, take away his rights and then find that he is not an “imminent threat”. When released the first person he sees is his lawyer who files a lawsuit against the doctor, maybe against the police, he files a complaint with the licensing board against the doctor. The doctor will get his license pulled; he will lose in court and may face criminal charges for HIPPA violations. We need to change the law! It is too bad you feel “privacy is out the window” in America, yes cars have GPS and so do cell phones but you can turn them off and the government needs a warrant to track you. The Ruger 10/22 the Boy Scouts of America 22 caliber rifle that has been used by them for over 50 years was deemed an assault weapons, because it could hold to many rounds, they still have a “Merit Badge” for shooting. My hope is that if or when such a thing happens again at a school or concert or anywhere, I pray that there is a good and honest person there that is armed and draws and fires and takes down the crazy person.
DeleteThe following response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
I don't know where you live or where you grew up, but I have walked alone...throughout New York City...Los Angeles...and many other cities throughout America...and I have never felt unsafe. And I'm not a fool. I'm sorry to read that you have felt unsafe. I suppose I've never gone in to any of those "bad neighborhoods" that you describe. But then...I wouldn't know where they are.
No...America is NOT "a nation of guns." We are a nation where some people - not even the majority of citizens - feel that it is necessary to own a gun. The Pew Research Center says only 30 percent of Americans own at least one gun. But 69 percent of Americans say they do not own any firearm at all. One percent refused to answer in the poll. With an estimated 270-million to 310-million guns in United States homes, Pew Research also says..."Among those who live in rural areas, 46 percent say they are gun owners, compared with 28 percent of those who live in the suburbs and 19% in urban areas."
Teachers are not hired to do anything but teach. They are responsible for educating children. They are responsible for the students' safety by virtue of them being in a classroom (or in classrooms) for about 7 hours a day. But a teacher is not responsible for drawing a concealed handgun and entering in to a shoot-out with a deranged gunman who has multiple assault weapons and an arsenal of ammunition. A school teacher is not hired to act like a police officer. I don't care how "trained and qualified" a teacher might end up being...to expect someone - who's job is to teach kids 1 plus 1, or that "Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 14-hundred-92" - to someday shoot another kid (or an adult) to death with a pistol...is totally absurd. And I can assure you that very few teachers are going to volunteer to be part of such a program. Donald Trump can say all day long that these teachers would be paid "bonuses"...but if the likelihood is they are going to be murdered by some psychopath who has broken in to his or her school...then no bonus money in the world is going to mean a damn thing. Your statement that "all it takes is one good shot" is so preposterous that no teacher's union in America will allow it. I happen to personally know someone who has been an educator for some 35 years. He has been a school teacher and a school principal. I spoke with him on Thursday and he wants no guns anywhere near his school. And he told me that if his school district ever required him or any of his teachers to carry a gun...he'd quit before he would ever let that happen in a school where he is the principal. Trump's idea is so far-fetched that I can guarantee you it will be tossed in the trash before it ever moves forward.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteIt is your right to disagree with me, especially when neither of us can really know what our forefathers would have done if they had a crystal ball, but I've got to believe that they would never have written a Second Amendment with guns if any of them knew of the way guns were being used in 2018. To think that you could "pull the trigger" and actually kill another human being - and you say that without any doubts - is mind-boggling.
I do understand the HIPAA laws. But I also have more faith in a doctor, a social worker, a guidance counselor...and others...to do what is right. I am not Catholic, but most people think of a Catholic priest as someone who would NEVER, EVER break the sanctity of the confessional. However, numerous priests have come forward in recent weeks, recent months and recent years to say that - to save a life...to save many lives - they would report someone to the police who said they were going to shoot up a school. If priests will do it...you damn well better be sure that a doctor will do it. And then worry later about his license to practice medicine. As I said...no judge worth his salt is going to rule against that doctor...or that priest...or anybody for that matter who has saved the lives of children and their teachers. But just to be on the safe side...yes, the law needs to be changed to make everything legal up front.
I once thought as you did that we were all safe from the government watching us or listening to us. Then I spoke with some people who have been involved in areas where the privacy issue is a thing of the past. And then I was convinced that "Big Brother" is indeed watching and listening. Every e-mail that you send...every comment that you or I or anybody writes on The Controversy...or on any social media site such as Facebook, Twitter, etc....are run through a series of computer checks, based on words used in those comments. The average person is ignored...but others are not. That's why it's difficult to comprehend how so many signs were missed with the Parkland shooter.
Telephone calls in our country are monitored. No that doesn't mean that a person is actually listening to your phone calls. But again...words are flagged. You can turn off your GPS on your cell phone, you can even turn the phone off...but police can still find you based on the pings off cell towers. If you think that the NSA or other government agencies couldn't do it...then you're living in fantasyland. I believe the vast majority of gun owners in our country - given today's climate - would not object to a GPS in guns. Perhaps you would not like it...but I think you'd be in the minority.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteAs for the Boy Scouts of America, officials say their rifles are only permitted on their certified shooting ranges and guns are not allowed anywhere else, thus I was never made aware of guns at any of the Camporees that I attended some many moons ago when I was a Scout. Also, Boy Scout officials say that all of their ranges are operated by people who have been certified by the National Rifle Association. Furthermore, each range must be supervised by an NRA certified Range Safety Officer. I'm sorry to hear about all of this, but I'll bet you that at some point in the not too distant future, those Boy Scout shooting ranges will close.
Your remark "that if or when such a thing happens again at a school or concert or anywhere" that you "pray that there is a good and honest person there that is armed and draws and fires and takes down the crazy person" doesn't make much sense to me unless the person who draws and fires against the "crazy person" is an undercover or off-duty cop who has the intense training to face such a dangerous situation. But that should only apply at a venue other than a school. Schools should not have anybody at all with guns. And getting rid of assault weapons will be a big step in putting a stop to other tragedies similar to the massacres at Newtown...Las Vegas...Parkland...and elsewhere. We need to rid America of assault weapons. We need to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill...and the unconsionably evil. Until we do...Americans will be saddened by the deaths of more and more innocent souls.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
The following comment was posted on Gary B. Duglin's Facebook page on Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 9:37 a.m. Since the reader's name appears on Facebook, it will be published here.
ReplyDelete"Gary, Guns by themselves don't kill. When was the last time you saw a gun pull its own trigger? People kill people with guns - maybe it's people we need to ban !! We have plenty of gun laws on the books.They need to be enforced." - Jim Sedlack
Gary B. Duglin's comments, responding to the above reader, were originally posted on his Facebook page on Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 11:45 a.m.
DeleteYes, Jim...someone's finger must pull the trigger. That is why we must have a better, tougher gun control law as I describe throughout my column and in my response to Michael Koski above. Otherwise, more and more people are going to die. But thanks very much for your comments. GBD
The following comment was posted on Gary B. Duglin's Facebook page on Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 10:27 a.m. Since the reader's name appears on Facebook, it will be published here.
ReplyDelete"The majority of Americans, in poll after poll, has supported tightening up some controls of types of guns sold and who can have access to them. The bottom line is that many members of Congress (and not just Republicans) are beholden to the NRA. Marco Rubio, a senator from the 'Sunshine' has received over $1,000,000 from the NRA! An ad in yesterday’s NY Times listed the NRA contributions to every member of the House and Senate. These congress people have made a calculus: 'I will accept 'x' number of deaths due to firearms in return for not challenging the NRA.' Tom Friedman’s op-ed in yesterday’s NY Times summarized that point well.
I am pleased to see so many young people organizing to have their voices heard to support the banning of semi automatic guns. But the problem is most of these young people are below the voting age and thus represent no threat to congressmen and women who are funded by the NRA. Yesterday, when many young people rallied in Tallahassee, the state legislature tabled any discussion of the banning of assault weapons. I applaud the fervor of these high school students. But until they can rally their parents, I don’t have much hope for significant change. Ironically our idiot president might actually be someone to support some changes. All he has to be told by his craven advisors is that Obama couldn’t push through gun control after Sandy Hook, and in his psychotic desire to 'outshine' his predecessor, he might be convinced to push for some legislation. We’ll have to see. Thus far his major suggestion is to arm classroom teachers. As we say in Spanish, 'Qué locura' (What craziness!) Keep up the good work, cousin!" - Michael Koski
Gary B. Duglin's comments, responding to the above reader, were originally posted on his Facebook page on Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 11:14 p.m.
DeleteThank you so much, Michael, for your kind words about my "good work." As for your comment, much of what you articulated so perfectly in your remarks above are the subject of my next column. We cannot start arming teachers with concealed handguns. Donald Trump has no clue as to what he is talking about when he says that teachers can be trained to kill a gunman who blasts his way in to a school. Such a concept is insanity. But what ticks me off to no end is the NRA spokeswoman who says that "Many in legacy media love mass shootings" because it's "ratings gold." That woman is a disgrace to the human race. Wait 'til my next editorial. My words - not violence - but my writing...is going to tear that person apart. GBD