Predictably, gun industry supporters rushed to cameras and keyboards on Friday to demand we not “politicize” the horrific tragedy in Newtown. They’re wrong. (More)
In Newtown, Connecticut last week, the United States’ culture of violence flared up yet again in an especially tragic and gruesome way when Adam Lanza reportedly shot and killed 27 people, including 20 children and his mother, and killed himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School. According to a comprehensive report by Mother Jones magazine, this killing rampage is just the latest of more than 60 mass killings that have occurred throughout the nation since the early 1980s. And while high profile, mass killings account for only a small portion of total firearm homicides in the US, which numbered more than 11,500 in 2009.
Whenever a heinous murder spree like the one in Connecticut occurs, gun rights activists offer two responses. The first is to argue that killings like these could have been prevented if there were more guns in our society. For example, Larry Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, responded to the Newtown tragedy by stating that:
Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun.
This view that the solution to gun violence is more guns is a common one among gun fanatics – for example, the Republican-controlled legislature in Michigan on Thursday passed a law, which Governor Rick Snyder (R-MI) is still evaluating, that would allow concealed weapons in bars, schools, child-care centers, colleges, hospitals, and places of worship. It is also a view that is flatly wrong. While it is hypothetically possible that a teacher could have stopped the shooting in Newtown if he or she had been armed, the far more likely result if multiple people in such a situation are armed is a shootout that could lead to even more deaths and mayhem. And a wide array of scientific research bears that point out, by demonstrating that the higher the number of guns in a society, the higher the number of firearm homicides.
The second major response to mass killings offered by gun rights activists is to try to squelch any discussion of guns in the wake of the killing by claiming that we should not “politicize” the situation by talking about guns at a time when families and the nation are mourning the victims of yet another shooting. But this response is utter poppycock. To “politicize” something means to make it “political” which, in turn, means simply that the issue relates to or deals with the affairs of government, politics, or the state. The death of 27 people, including 20 children, at the hands of an individual who was able to obtain weapons better suited for military or police work is already an issue that relates to or deals with affairs of government or the state. In fact, as Ezra Klein has pointed out, gun rights activists are themselves politicizing the issue by trying to prevent a discussion of gun laws in order to preserve the status quo of little regulation of gun possession. And gun control advocates can only change that status quo if they treat this as the political issue it is. If anything, using the Newtown massacre to help get stricter gun legislation passed so that schoolchildren will be less likely to be killed by a firearm would demonstrate a compassionate understanding of the situation, not an inappropriate politicization of an already political tragedy.
To the gun rights activists who offer spurious claims of politicization to argue that now is not the time to discuss our nation’s gun laws, Winning Progressive asks when is the right time to discuss these issues?
- If the firearm killing of 27 people, including 20 children, is not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and killing of six others was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of eight people in a salon in Seal Beach, California in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of five people in an IHOP in Carson City, Nevada in 2011 was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of seven people at Oikos University in Oakland, California earlier this year was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the killing of twelve people and injuring of fifty-eight in a shooting spree in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the shooting deaths of 11,500 people nationwide in 2009 was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
- If the firearm killing of 33 people and injuring of 23 people at Virginia Tech in 2007 was not the right time to discuss gun safety laws, when is?
While gun industry supporters may not be able to answer these questions, Winning Progressive believes that the time to discuss and strengthen our nation’s gun safety laws is now. Such laws should be based on the core principal that with the right to bear arms comes responsibility to make sure that guns are used safely, that they do not fall into the wrong hands, and that ownership of the most powerful weapons that are clearly meant for little else than killing people is restricted or forbidden. Consistent with that core principal, we need common sense gun safety legislation that reinstates the assault weapon ban, fixes the gun checks system, closes the gun show loophole, bans ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds, heavily taxes ammunition, and makes it easier for police to trace guns that are used in a crime and to revoke the licenses of corrupt gun dealers.
In order to get such common sense gun safety legislation passed, we must all raise our voices in demanding government action gun control. You can help do that by:
- Contacting President Obama – 202-456-1111 – and urging him to show leadership on the issue of gun control. Please also sign this petition to the White House urging action on gun control legislation.
- Call your Representatives and urge them to support Senator Diane Feinstein’s legislation to be introduced next year to reinstate the assault weapons ban.
- Writing a letter to your local newspaper editor in support of common sense gun control laws.
- Support the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, both of which are working to establish sensible gun control laws in the U.S.