Taking sides on guns

NRA with ear muffsWhen it comes to innocent people being shot or taking their own lives with a gun or a child shooting someone or him/herself with a loaded unsecured gun, I thought there was only one side- common sense and safety. That was, of course, before I got involved in the gun violence prevention movement. In this movement we are all on the side of people not getting shot for really much of any reason. But we also recognize that guns are made to kill people and so, when there a lot of guns around and many of them unregulated and many of their owners also unregulated, there will be a lot of deaths and injuries.

But the silence from the gun lobby is deafening when it comes to actual people being shot and the epidemic of gun violence in our country. Is it on purpose? Is it just lack of empathy and compassion? Is it only political and in the interest of profit? Is it really true fear and paranoia that the government will come knocking on the door for their guns? Is it fear of zombies and the other? Is it just the second amendment which doesn’t say anything about guns for anyone who wants them no matter what? Is it avoidance of the truth? Is it ignorance of the laws or willful refusal to believe that gun laws can work? Is it some sort of fear of freedom being taken away when the lives lost were freedoms taken? Is it all about profits over lives? Is it about a culture change happening and fear of that change as fewer people hunt and fewer households own guns?

I don’t know that answer. I think all of the above are true actually. All I know for sure is that too many lives are taken every day by bullets and we can change that if we have the will and the political courage to do so. From the linked article above:

Is it too much to hope that America may be nearing the point of progress over the urgent — and long overdue — issue of gun violence? More than 5,000 people have been killed by guns since the start of this year. More than 10,000 have been injured. There have been more than 112 mass shootings. Just this week, amurder-suicide claimed two lives on the UCLA campus. In 2013, the U.S. saw more than 30,000 gun-related deaths. There’s cause to believe that 2016 will see a similarly horrifying tally.

Whose side are you on? Stopping some of these shootings or turning away from the carnage under our noses every day?

Thursday was #WearOrange day. By all standards, if counting many thousands of people participating in various events and posting photos of themselves on social media, it was a huge success. I was involved in organizing 2 of these events in my city. As always, we have speakers talking about why they are involved and why we need to deal with our public health epidemic. The Mayor issued a proclamation making my city orange for the day in memory and honor of gun violence victims. She held up a picture that a young boy had sent her with the words, “no more guns.” The Police Chief spoke about gun safety and the importance of storing guns safely to prevent them from being stolen and becoming crime guns. A woman spoke about the pain of losing her father when he took the gun he bought for self defense and used it to kill himself, leaving their family without a father.

And then a gun owner and hunter spoke about the need for putting our heads together and forgetting about our differences so we can save lives and prevent at least some of the gun violence. He is a strong proponent of requiring Brady background checks on all gun sales with the understanding that his own guns will NOT be taken from him nor will his rights to shoot those guns as long as he doesn’t shoot another human being.

It turns out that on the same day as our events, a Minnesota woman was found shot dead in her home, shot by the same man who had traveled to UCLA and shot a professor dead and then himself. The shooter had a hit list and he had 2 semi automatic guns, presumably bought legally. And that is the conundrum. Many people can buy guns legally and may never use those guns to shoot another human being or themselves. They may never bring it out to play with or show to someone and have it discharge. They may never drop their gun in a public place where it “accidentally” discharges. They may never leave that gun unattended, unsecured and loaded for young children or teens to find to use in a shooting.

But the fact is, far too many of these people are not safe with their guns. And we don’t know who will become unsafe or when they might become unsafe. That is the problem with our sides. My hunter friend spoke of how in other democratized countries that allow private ownership of guns, there just are not a lot of the incidents I described above. Does that mean that those folks are more careful and more safe? Maybe. But we do know that laws exist in those countries that make gun ownership a very awesome responsibility and difficult to get in the first place.

I maintain that stronger laws change the way in which people look at guns. People are less cavalier when their gun is harder to obtain and they have to go through more regulations to get a gun. They understand that they have to be safe given that they have been carefully vetted and can’t just get guns willy nilly with no background check through the internet or on the streets.

Let’s compare gun ownership to driving a car. We seem to have a common understanding that there are certain rules that everyone who wants to drive one has to follow- no exceptions. Everyone has to take drivers’ training. Everyone has to be at least 16. Everyone has to take a test. Everyone has to purchase insurance ( though some don’t). Everyone needs to wear a seat belt and follow the traffic laws. Most people actually do follow traffic rules as it turns out. Without laws and rules, our streets would be chaos.

And surely we can say that our gun culture causes chaos. Our inner city areas are chaos. Losing a loved one to a bullet causes not only grief, but chaos in one’s life. Mass shootings cause chaos. Shooting young children causes chaos. A gun suicide causes chaos in the family.

I spoke at our local event about the reason for the day, which I wrote about in my last post. Some of my readers will ask why there are so many gun deaths in Chicago like that of Hadiye Pendleton, when Chicago has strict gun laws. It’s the classic excuse given for doing nothing about stopping gun deaths because there are so many gun deaths. This illogical reasoning has been allowed to be a part of our discussion for far too long. It’s not difficult to understand when the neighboring states of Indiana and others flood the state with guns that can’t be bought in Chicago or Illinois. A brilliant article from The Trace shows us where the guns come from. From the article:

Not coincidentally, as the visualization above shows, in 2010, 2011, and 2014, the annual count of Illinois crime guns originating in Indiana topped 1,o00 guns per year. (In 2012 and 2013, there was a big dip in Illinois crime guns coming from Indiana, though the ATF isn’t sure why.) Mississippi was next in line, trafficking about a third as many guns into the state. At least four others exported more than 500 guns to Illinois during 2010–14. Five more states sent more than 400 each.

So if we follow the logical conclusion here, shouldn’t we make sure that there are uniform laws in all states to keep places like Chicago and some of our other large urban cities from providing the guns that kill innocent 15 year old girls (Hadiye Pendelton in Chicago)  and grandmothers (Birdell Beeks in Minneapolis) in their neighborhoods?

And then there’s Chuck’s gun shop in Chicago – a bad apple gun dealer. The shop has been the “target” of many protests over the past few years as the Brady Campaign and others have drawn attention to the loose practices of Chuck’s that allow crime guns to get into the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. Shouldn’t we do something about bad apple gun dealers? People are getting shot. But the gun lobby has pressured Congress to underfund the ATF which is the agency responsible for monitoring gun dealers like Chuck’s to make sure they are following the laws. Let’s enforce the laws already on the books.

There is some good news here, though. In spite of the gun industry immunity law (PLCAA) lawsuits filed against bad apple gun dealers (Badger Guns in Milwaukee) and others are winning in our courts.

Whose side are you on?

Watch here as President Obama answers a question from a man who is concerned about his gun rights, at a PBS Newshour town hall. His response is exactly mine and the millions of Americans who agree that doing something about people getting shot will not take away the rights of people to own guns. And this exchange shows the sides taken by Americans on the issue of guns and gun rights. There should be no sides when it comes to saving lives. But when it comes to guns, there are sides.

Whose side are you on?

Massachusetts is having a similar problem. Lots of the states crime guns are coming into the state from Vermont where gun laws barely exist:

Many local officials say inconsistent gun laws are fueling the trade. Most northeastern states have enacted laws that extend background check requirements for gun purchases to include firearms sold at gun shows and unlicensed dealers. But Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine do not require such checks on private sales, making it easier for people with criminal records to buy guns in those states, and move them around New England.

“We have good gun laws in Massachusetts, but our problem is most of the guns that seem to be coming in and being used in crimes are coming from other states,” Boston Police Commissioner William Evans tells The Trace. “It’s hard for us when so many come from our border states that have lax laws.”

The gun extremists like to talk about Vermont having few gun deaths in spite of loose gun laws. They are ignoring the fact that Vermont has high gun suicide and domestic shooting death rates. In addition, weak gun laws are allowing people to be able buy guns that end up in other states where it’s more difficult to buy a gun. From this article:

Again, in universal terms, the total number of homicides, domestic violence cases, and gun-related deaths is indeed small, which can make some of these rate statistics seem exaggerated. But the argument can be made that they’re also less deceptive than the happy reports of a Second Amendment oasis in the heart of New England. A truer picture lies in this final statistic: Vermont, which is virtually impossible to traverse without a car, is a state where firearms deaths outnumber traffic deaths.

So back to my original question- Whose side are you on? The side of public health and safety? Or on the side of allowing anyone to get a gun, including many who shouldn’t?- felons, domestic abusers, those adjudicated mentally ill, fugitives, terrorists, etc. Interestingly many on the side of unfettered gun rights actually don’t think criminals should have guns- or so they say. So how do they think we can stop them from getting guns if we don’t actually stop them from getting guns?

We don’t have to take sides. Gun owners and NRA members are actually on the side of common sense with me. You’d never know it though from the general rhetoric that the gun lobby spews and often gets away with because they go unchallenged. Why? Good question. Some of the arguments and statements by the gun lobby are being taken apart by more people who are doing the research the corporate gun lobby hates and has tried to stop. This is shedding bright light on the real problem in America. Too many people are getting shot.

Orange is a bold and bright color. It makes a statement. Hunters wear orange to protect themselves from being shot by other hunters while out in the woods. Last fall my grandchildren were at our cabin during deer hunting season. We could hear gunshots in the woods nearby. When they were outside, I insisted that they all wear bright orange hats which they happily did since it was also cold outside. We turned America orange to make a bold and bright statement on Thursday. Monuments all over America turned orange including the Enger Tower in my city of Duluth.  Enger tower orange

We rang the bell at Enger Park for victims of gun violence- domestic murders, suicides, a young Minneapolis girl who was just sitting in her house doing homework when a bullet flying in her neighborhood snuffed out her young life; and many others. We shouldn’t be surprised but always are at the number of people who ring the bell for relatives or people they know who have died from gunshot injuries. People who shouldn’t have been shot.

We just can’t continue on this trajectory or this level of violence. The time for action has long passed. My side of the issue can be blamed for some of this. But the bold and bright truth of the matter is that when people are getting shot and the problem is being ignored and the conversation is being stifled by those with a vested interest in selling their products, we have a big and deadly problem. No one wants to get shot. We will wear orange, have marches, turn monuments orange and continue to demand the changes in our laws and the conversation that all of the victims and their families deserve. We are Americans against being shot. #Enough now.


13 thoughts on “Taking sides on guns

  1. j. Edwards says:

    When it comes to the Chicago issue, I still don’t see guns as the problem. All of Chicago’s shootings are gang shoot outs. The whole country has a hell of a lot of guns but we only hear about a dozen people getting shot every weekend from Chicago. Its not a “gun culture” problem there; its a thug-life, let’s be-gangsta problem.

    The gun culture is at the shooting range on the weekend, not in the streets killing people. The gun culture is too busy teaching safety and defense classes to be murdering people. I think you have us confused with the “crime/gang culture”.

    1. Only a dozen? Good grief. These are real people who are not expendable.Every week day and every week-end dozens of people die from gun violence in Chicago. And yes, sir. Guns are the problem. Where do they get the guns? That is what we are trying to prevent. The gun culture is all around us where people are dying. That is the American gun culture.

  2. j. Edwards says:

    Why not prevent “gang culture” instead? You could probably classify me as a “gun person”. I enjoy shooting and I enjoy my firearms, as do many folks I know. We are not killing anyone though. I don’t think its the target shooters, hunters and gun club people killing folks in Chicago. It’s gang members.

  3. j. Edwards says:

    I think the real problem with Chicago is all these young kids who wanna kill each other have no respect for anyone cause their daddies weren’t around to scare the hell out of them and teach them to respect human life. maybe, since Chicago like trying to tell it’s people what they can and cannot do, they can make divorce illegal so the daddies are forced to stick around; maybe whup their kids butt every once in a while.

    There were guns everywhere when I was a kid. We shot targets and hunted with our buddies on the weekends like most kids watch cartoons. I’d go through a brick of ammo in two days. We never once got mad and shot somebody. We valued life. Something’s wrong with those kids in Chicago…

    1. Sure you are. Not you personally but people like you are actually shooting people. Some have been shot at gun ranges. Some at home. A concealed carry permit instructor just someone in a home when he got angry. That’s the problem with saying what you just wrote. And how do you propose to prevent the gun culture as you suggested should be done? I am not sure I like your comment about their “daddies” not being around. That is a generalization that can’t be made. Whuping kids? In what world do you live anyway?

    1. Yew. I understand that these things happen- infrequently. What I post are the incidents that happen far more frequently and often with guns stored at home for self defense. We see the world differently apparently.

  4. j. Edwards says:

    Yeah but the way you write about these negligent gun uses, you’d think these guns just up and shoot people. Saying something like “having guns in your house increases the chances of you and your family being shot” is silly to me because I’ve had them all of my life and they have never shot me. I can’t relate to that. All these people in the news that this happens to either don’t have training or are letting their untrained kids get a hold of the guns. The only way you get shot with your own guns is if someone, (your kids, yourself, ect…) shoots you with them. They don’t just magically become loaded, chambered, and pull their own triggers.

    1. And you are writing as if the incidents I post about never happen or only happen infrequently. Unfortunately they happen far too often. Saving one life is worth making some changes. Would you object to requiring training on how to use a gun before walking out the door with a gun? Would you object to stopping people who shouldn’t have guns from easily getting them with no background checks? Would you object to mandatory storing of guns safely away from young kids, burglars, suicidal teen-agers or others who can get their hands on unlocked guns far too easily? You may be safe but I happen to be acquainted with hundreds of victims from all over the country whose lives have been changed by either willful or unintentional shootings. Perhaps if you had that experience you would be more agreeable to the things I write about.

  5. j. Edwards says:

    When you state it like that, of course I would not object. Part of my professional life has been devoted to teaching others firearm handling and safe storage of guns but I do that without violating their forth amendment rights. I think most folks who disagree with you do so because they do not want the government mandating what they can and cannot buy. I keep hearing gun control advocates say things like “Nobody wants to take your guns away” but if that is the case why don’t we put that in writing? Why not create a law stating that firearms cannot be taken away from any citizen without due process of law? I would think the 4th amendment of the constitution would be enough but states like New York and California have ignored the constitution. I have a good friend in New York who had to sell or surrender many rifles that had detachable magazines because they were considered illegal under New York’s “Safe Act”. That was lawfully owned property until the State decided he no longer had a right to it.

    Correct me if I am mistaken but you do think that the right of American’s are trumped by the need to protect lives. Is that correct? If so I and a good majority of Americans would disagree. The rights of Americans are so paramount to our identity that many of us have fought and some have died to protect. Even today, I would rather die myself then be stripped of the rights that are protected, not only by my state but also by the US constitution. For me, these will never be up for debate. They are ours to keep. We have fought and killed and died for them. Why would we let them be abolished by a committee? I would rather my family and I die from a gun shot wound as free Americans then live to a ripe old age as subjects of a dominating government. I am for following the laws of the land up until those laws encroach on individual freedom. If that makes me an “extremest” so be it. I’ll be a proud one.

    1. The thing is, people have been getting background checks on gun purchasers at FFLs since the mid 90s with no gun confiscation. Where does the talk of taking guns come from? Has anyone tried to take yours? Of course not. As far as I can tell no,right is sacrosanct. With rights come responsibilities. Felons don’t have the right to buy guns. Why should we let them? There are, indeed, some people who should not have guns. No one is coming for yours. How do you think that would happen? The National Guard perhaps? Me and my colleagues? My husband? Who? This is nonsensical talk based on nothing. We are definitely on opposite sides of the political spectrum. I don’t identify with your fear of government. We will have to leave it at that.

  6. Steve says:

    I am from Australia and I am pro gun, its the same old issue, the anti gun lobby promise black and blue we just want to stop the pointless crime……..today……….then tomorrow what need of assault weapons or military weapons……..then why do you need semi automatics……..then surely you dont need a hand gun to hunt………then whats wrong with enforcing licences and gun safes surely you want to protect the children……..then before you know it you live in Australia where you have to kow tow to get a rifle to hunt, but first you have to get written permission from a private land holder to be eligible and forget large calibre and semi automatics no way. Self defense? You jest, you are a victim of the state and the state and anti gun lobby are more than happy to risk you and your family for their self righteous position. i know first hand of a mental patient who tried to attack my wife and child on the road who had no means of self defense….hey but thats all hunky dorey….the anit gun lobby are happy……..unfortunately if my experience is any lesson the reason you cannot give an inch on guns is because people and government are liars and they will never stop, there will always be a new reason to chip away at your freedoms e.g. the US takes so many moslem refugees many who do not have the right mind set to own guns and as proven are liable to often flip out but instead of fixing the refugee problem you will look at tackling the gun problem so its harder for the good guy to get a firearm. Sadly you cannot be trusted and clearly any promises you make or values you try to enshrine in your law or ammendmants only prove the point that nothing is sacred even the laws can be re-written and nothing is holy….but trust me we wont take your guns………yet

Comments are closed.