Manhattan Diary


Guns lose elections as well as lives -- Tens of thousands shot dead each year in the US

Posted on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 08:32 AM

RSS


Recent Posts

Archives

submit to reddit

A protest against the NRA on Capitol Hill


Go to the mall, get shot. Go to the movies, get shot. Go to the gun show, get shot. Go hunting, get shot. Go to the rifle range, get shot. Go to university, get shot. Go to school, get shot. Go to kindergarten, get shot.

It’s a wonder we go out at all here.

Some 30,000 people are shot dead in America each year. To put that in perspective, if you shot every man, woman and child in Naas, Co. Kildare you’d just start to grasp the full horror of it. The mind blanks at the bloody scale of it.

And we’re being asked by some to accept that this is not a national crisis? Don’t look at that terrifying pyre of the voiceless dead, look instead at the attack on your Second Amendment rights? Really?

The Second Amendment was written not to protect your gun. It was written to protect your freedom.
Freedom, the Founding Fathers knew, is a condition that is both tangible and intangible. It can vanish just as easily with a pen stroke or with a court ruling.

You actually don’t need to fire a single shot to maintain or to lose it. But history has taught us that if you’re pursuing your freedom with bullets, you’re almost always heading in the wrong direction.

I’d much prefer to live in a society free of rapid repeat-fire assault weapons, and I’d prefer to think the chances of being caught in their lethal crossfire were going down, not up. I mean, wouldn’t you?

It’s been amusing and repulsive, in about roughly equal measure, to see the contortions the NRA and their arms industry supporters have gone through to protect their own blatantly contradictory message, which goes like this -- guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

But people with guns have to pull the trigger before they kill people, so guns really have nothing to do with killing people. Got it? No? What’s the matter with you?

Their shorthand version is people are a**holes and they will shoot you if you don’t shoot them first, so you better holster up. It’s the Wild West.

The Irish poet Seamus Heaney once wrote about firing a gun. The violence of the action startled him, and he described it memorably: “I felt that I had committed a grave sin against life,” he wrote.

So he put the gun down and never fired another bullet. Having come from a society where he saw first hand the pain that guns inflict must have strengthened his resolve. In the North, the real carnage that guns create puts the idiotic sophistries of the NRA in their proper context.

In America, for various reasons, we’re fated to watch as the latest eye-popping outrage or scandal always becomes the news, as everything else gets pushed aside to make room for it.

This week it’s Manti Te’o’s phantom girlfriend. But I don’t care about Manti Te’o phantom girlfriend, do you?

I care that 20 children and six women were shot dead by another crazed young man with a grudge and access to assault weapons. I can understand why people would prefer to think about Manti Te’o, but the time has finally come to act to address this crisis.

President Obama did not propose a ban on guns last week. He has not taken a match to the Constitution.
The paranoiacs and kooks who are talking of an approaching “civil war” over their Second Amendment rights are deluded and self-defeating.

Let’s be clear -- 70 to 80 percent of the public supports common sense measures like universal background checks on gun sales. Predictably, women are more open to gun control measures than men. But is Washington and the GOP-controlled House getting the message?

If a gun massacre can happen in the leafy suburbs of Connecticut, one of the richest states in the union, it can happen anywhere.

If the Sandy Hook massacre cannot make us reconsider the wisdom of providing unfettered access to high powered weapons, what will? This was a line in the sand event. Even the most ardent politician knows it.

So if I was a Republican politician I’d be increasingly leery of the perceived inter-dependency of the NRA and the GOP.

As the last election cycle showed us, the NRA and all the frothing evangelical and anti-immigrant groups that form the party’s base are, in voters’ minds, increasingly defining the GOP as the party of angry, white Southern men.

That simple fact cost them the election. Flubbing on guns now will cost them the next one.

 
See more: Irish in US Politics , Irish Politics


41 comments

Previous Page 3 of 3 pages
What utter drivel.
EphraimKibbey, First, why should we fund government studies when there are literally thousands of studies out there about gun control that contradict each other. Second, the GOP and the NRA are NOT the same organization. As I stated earlier, this is a cultural issue. There are plenty of Democrats in rural areas that are against more stringent gun control. Conversely, there are many Republicans in the northeastern United States that support moderate gun control.
pndirishandprou - Well explained! The GOP/NRA has passed laws forbiding government agencies from studying the causes of, effects of and solutions to gun violence in the US. If we had a disease killing and maiming such a large number of our citizens there would be a cry across the land to study it and find a cure so what is the GOP/NRA afraid of America learning? When the 2nd Amendment was written, our young country could not even afford to pay its Revolutionary Vets in cash so they gave them grants of Indian land in Ohio. The young government wanted them to own their own squirril rifles and know how to shoot in case the British didn't take no for an answer as it turned out they didn't in 1812 just a few years later. Our country has grown a bit since then and our massive military budget now allows us to induct people into the military without the need to ask them to bring along their own tank, helicopter or nuclear sub. I am not for banning firearms but I am for common sense which neither the GOP or the NRA show much of these days.
Mass murders were committed by mentally unbalanced people. There can be no safety until such people can be protected from themselves and hence the rest of us. Where is the violence most extreme? Chicago and New York where handgun possession is already illegal. Life is not like the movies. Assailants don't die with one shot. Last week in Georgia a Mother and her children hiding in an attic were threatened by a burglar. She shot him with 5 shots from a 38 caliber pistol. Among other things she hit him in the face and liver. He still managed to flee in his car. Thankfully for here, she had a technically semi automatic weapon - a revolver that produced one bullet per squeeze of the trigger. That is, any weapon including revolvers and pump shot guns are semi-automatic. Only the military, police and criminals have automatic weapons. One trigger squeeze multiple bullets fired.
Who ever wrote this article appears to be mentally deranged and needs to get the facts correct.
Great article, Cahir!I like jamieLM's ideas, too.
More nonsense from Cahir. In 2011, there were 8,563 murders by guns in the US, the overwhelming majority of them in (sorry Cahir)highly democratic areas.
“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.” The second amendment was adopted in 1791, when it took about 5 minutes to load a firearm for a single shot. The wording of the 2nd amendment makes it clear what the intention of the framers was: citizens are allowed to bear firearms in the context of a well organized militia to defend the freedom of the young republic against a foreign aggressor. How could any rational individual interpret this language otherwise? How can any sane person possibly deduce from the wording of the 2nd amendment that constitutionally there can be no restrictions to gun ownership? The gun lobby wants us to believe that you can't compare the significantly higher gun-related homicide rates in the US with that of other developed countries, because we are supposedly so much different than everyone else. The big difference is that in other countries criminals and mentally ill persons don't have such easy access to the most lethal weapons.
@michaelidaho, well said. @Cahir O'D. Growing up in a rural area, all the farmer/ranchers (including my family) had guns and everyone knew that everyone else had guns. No one ever shot anyone. There are cultural and regional differences, in the U.S. when it comes to gun ownership, regardless of political party. Living in the East, you have don't seem to know much about life outside of NY. I'm for background checks and banning high round clips, etc., but that alone isn't going to solve the problem. If the U.S. passes 100 new gun control laws, it won't make any difference to criminals/gang members. Just like drugs, they'll still get all the guns they want. I think the emphasis should be: 1. getting a sound system in place to identify mentally unbalanced teens/adults with personality disorders and providing them treatment 2. rethinking the affects and influences that a culture of violence has on our kids 3. building empathy, sensitivity, and problem-solving skills at home and in school. If these issues aren't addressed, gun violence will continue, regardless of how many gun laws we pass.
michaelidaho is quite right, most Americans support common-sense measures, not Cuomo-like showboating. Here is a question: If guns are so evil, why do the liberals not propose disarming our police, local, state, and federal? After all, they are forever citing low gun crime stats in places like GB, and the cops there are usually unarmed. Isn't up to our peace officers to set an example? (Btw, the figures in this article are misleading since the author mixes police shootings with street crime.)
The usual subjective, irrational, partisan rancor. Most Democrats, like Republicans, in rural areas do not support gun control. Many Republicans in urban areas hold moderate gun control positions. Why? Because this is a cultural issue and there is no definitive connection between gun control and crime. Compare Switzerland and Mexico. Compare Boise, Idaho to Cork city. Boise, Idaho, has consistently lower murder rates than Cork, Ireland, even though Boise is slightly larger and just about everybody has a gun, while of course in Cork hardly anybody has guns ... except the criminals. FACT: 2011 Boise Homocide 1, Cork Homocides 3.
Previous Page 3 of 3 pages




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail