Growing up in Washington, D.C., the threat of gun violence at my high school was enough of a concern that there was routine debate over whether or not to install metal detectors.
The shootings were usually related to drugs or gangs -- things you theoretically could insulate yourself from, but they were no less terrifying.
The guns turned on students in Columbine and Blacksburg and yesterday in Chardon, were aimed by shooters with no target other than to kill and create chaos. As such, there was no way -- theoretically or otherwise -- they could have insulated themselves. In countless schoolrooms across the country, the only protection against gun violence is, in the end, the law.
And yet, in the very same states that have seen the country's grisliest gun crimes -- Colorado, Virginia and Ohio -- state legislators have -- remarkably -- tried to weaken gun control, making it easier to carry concealed weapons, purchase multiple firearms or eliminate background checks.
Of course, guns don't kill. People do. But then again, when children are reliant on the state to ensure their safety, those in power must do everything to keep them out of harm's way.
Standing up to the vocal -- but certainly not all-powerful -- gun lobby would be a good place to start.
Leave a Comment:
Alex, thank you so much for this very direct and powerful statement about the need for stronger gun laws. Your words are appreciated more than you know.
Stronger Gun Laws? How much stronger does murder need to be?
The writer should know this "Growing up in Washington, D.C." where it is practically impossible for any law abiding citizen to even poses a had gun. D.C. has the toughest gun laws in the country, but is still one of the highest crime rates. On the other hand, in Vermont any person may carry a concealed weapon with NO permits, fees or registration, yet according to the FBI, Vermont enjoys the 2nd lowest crime rate in the nation.
So, i'm curious. What about the powerful Gun Control Lobby? You always see how "Horrible The Gun Lobby is!" What about the Gun Control Lobby? Are they not equally as evil?
Amen. It is time for the silent majority to assert ourselves. The gun lobby only cares about the rights of gun owners, often at the expense of children and society. We need to make some noise at the state and federal levels. Thanks for your post!
There are 350 million guns in the United States. So, you're under the false impression that "non-gun owners" are the silent majority?
I feel there is a good chance that you do not have your finger on the pulse of America.
This 17 year old kid has committed 30 or 40 felonies? Including felonies that will keep him in prison for the rest of his natural life. What gun laws could you possibly propose that would have kept this kid from stealing a firearm and committing an additional felony?
Would you try to make it really really really really illegal? The Governer in Ohio just signed a bill making it legal to carry into Bars, restaurants, shopping malls, nightclubs and sporting arenas. Had those students been at any one of those other places, they would be alive today.
The "gun free zone" is an invitation to the mentally ill, and criminally insane to "shoot without fear".
Never underestimate the willingness of the anti-gun crowd to bathe themselves in the blood of innocents to further their agenda. In most instances that blood was spilled from those who were left defenseless by the very laws the anti-gunners want to "strengthen".
In this case the shooter was, apparently, the victim of bullying that the school did nothing about. He seems to have been wholly detached from his parents, much like the Columbine shooters were. So you have a disaffected kid, whose situation is ignored by all of the authority figures in his life who should have helped him, you are shocked when he finally does act out and you blame the instrumentality rather than legitimately fact find and address the root cause.
This brief blog post reveals the mendacity of the anti-gunners in it's fullest form.
The so-called grisliest gun crimes -- Colorado, Virginia and Ohio -- all occurred in gun free zones. What laws would you have pass to prevent them? The shooters were young men, not children accidently finding the family firearm in the closet (Columbine ages 18, 17) (Virginia Tech aged 22) (Ohio age 17). In all these cases you have schools that failed to act on evident issues the shooters had. The Red Lake shooter, age 16, 8 dead, had the same issues and the same failure by the school to act.
Further encroachment on the 2nd Amendment is not the solution. The Brady anti-gun lobby rates California and New York as having some of the most restrictive firearm prohibitions in the country. These prohibitions did not stop the Salon Meritage shooting (8 dead) in California nor the Binghamton shooting (14 dead) in New York.
liberals want "gun free zones" everywhere, yet every school shooting is a "gun free zone" n many other shootings are in "gun free zones", so what exactly are these "gun free zones" stopping?
Gun free zones are the only common symptom of this increase in mass shootings. The writer should know this "Growing up in Washington, D.C." where it is practically impossible for any law abiding citizen to even poses a had gun. D.C. has the toughest gun laws in the country, but is still one of the highest crime rates. On the other hand, in Vermont any person may carry a concealed weapon with NO permits, fees or registration, yet according to the FBI, Vermont enjoys the 2nd lowest crime rate in the nation.
If you don't understand the difference between crime in Washington DC and Vermont you are either stupid or being disingenuous. It has nothing to do with guns.