Why the same old gun-control answers aren’t comforting
As the father of two small boys, I’m as haunted by last week’s massacre in Newtown, Conn., as anyone who didn’t know personally the victims or their killer.
I have the same fears as all parents anticipating the long, potentially treacherous path ahead of their children in this broken world of ours. My fears are only multiplied by my doubts there are many real options for thwarting future slayings in other unsuspecting towns.
The two primary questions we ask after mass killings are: Why do some people act so heinously? And how can we keep others from doing so?
The first question invariably draws answers like: madness, isolation, social awkwardness or marginalization, familial dysfunction, a craving for fame (or infamy), the prevalence of violence in our popular culture, and evil pure and simple.
The second question typically brings suggestions for treating these mental illnesses and social failures. That, and gun control.
Guns typically don’t make the list of answers to “why,” only to “how.” They are but one means for mass killings — albeit the most common one — not a motivation. Yet, guns become our central focus in times like these.
I understand the impulse. How do we begin to treat the mad, and especially people, such as the Newtown killer, with only mild disorders? As important as it is for us to attempt to rebuild the American family, can we wait the years or perhaps generations such an endeavor might consume, when another mass killing could happen today? How, within the bounds of constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression, does one dial back the violence found in our movies, TV shows, video games and even music?
Whatever a killer’s motivation, guns seem to be his means of choice. Better to address that, right?
As keenly interested as I am in preventing the next mass public shooting, I see little reason to find comfort in gun control.
Consider the high school rampage in Columbine, Colo. The year was 1999, amid a decade-long ban on “assault weapons,” those firearms defined by nothing more than the minds of legislators who drafted the ban on them. (Indeed, the main characteristic common to the weapons banned then seems to be the likelihood one might have seen a similar weapon in a shoot-em-up, kill-em-up movie — an implicit nod to the overriding impact of our entertainment culture.)
One of the Columbine killers was armed with a pump-action shotgun (not exactly a semiautomatic weapon) he fired 25 times. He also fired 96 rounds from a 9-mm carbine while using 10-round magazines — the limit of choice for those who say 30-round magazines are the problem.
When New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg introduced his ban on sugary soft drinks larger than 16 oz., most observers recognized the folly of limiting the size of one drink when a person could simply buy two or more of them. Does no one else find it similarly illogical to think a person bent on mass murder won’t just carry multiple weapons with smaller mags, or that lives will be saved in the few seconds it would take an experienced gun handler to change magazines?
I raise these objections not to defend specific weapons or magazines with any number of bullets. Neither I nor anyone I know owns an “assault weapon” (as far as I know), and I have no particular affinity for bullets that come in sets of 20 or 30 or 40 rather than 10. While I generally support gun-ownership rights, I’m open to practical suggestions that can reasonably square with the Second Amendment.
Nor do I think the situation is hopeless, or as good as it gets. I do think we can make our communities safer. But I think the most effective solutions will be less comfortable — such as asking when it’s OK to invade the privacy of those who are dangerously mentally ill — and more expensive — such as ensuring there are armed guards or designated weapons-carrying citizens even at schools and other “gun-free zones” — than merely banning particular weapons and ammunition.
The lives of innocents deserve the fullness of our thought and attention, not old ideas that have been sitting on the shelf, waiting for a crisis.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
457 comments Add your comment
Uncle Jed
December 20th, 2012
1:05 pm
What should be banned when some lunatic poisons food or water resulting in mass fatalities?
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
December 20th, 2012
1:06 pm
HillbillyD@12:58 Well said, wish we could put you on the Crazy Uncle Joe committee, to give them someone with some sound logic and historical perspective.
Funny, that massive amounts of people were killed in the middle ages using long bows, cross bows, swords, and battle axes. When people desire that others should die they are very adapt at crafting a scheme to achieve their ends.
Hillbilly D
December 20th, 2012
1:08 pm
The argument against arming teachers is akin to the one that was used against arming airline pilots. They were going to accidentally hit passengers and blow holes in the fuselage and planes were going to explode in the sky. Has any of that happened?
Always thought the argument about pilots was ludicrous. Aren’t they already entrusted with the lives of a whole plane load of people? If you’re worried about their being responsible enough to carry a weapon (if they choose), they have no business flying a plane in the first place.
md
December 20th, 2012
1:10 pm
“The argument against arming teachers is akin to the one that was used against arming airline pilots. ”
Yet we take 18 year olds and all their years of wisdom and train them to be soldiers and police officers and nary a word is said……….go figure.
I guess teachers are inferior human beings to those 18 years olds that choose to go into the military and police forces……….
Curious Observer
December 20th, 2012
1:20 pm
I don’t like throwing cold water on hot ideas, but I don’t see any way to prevent these random mass shootings. Even gun control will do nothing to take the hundreds of thousands of assault weapons away from their owners in this country or even the semi-automatic pistols. An armed guard in every school will be ineffective, because a guard can’t be every place a shooter might enter a building, and besides, a determined shooter would get the drop on the guard. Finally, it’s impossible to locate and render harmless every deranged person who might commit such an act.
I wish there were answers, but in the majority of cases such shooters have already consigned themselves to suicide as a final act. A person bent on destroying others as well as himself has nothing to lose.
It’s nice to imagine that there’s a rock-solid way of preventing such massacres, but reality says otherwise.
Hillbilly D
December 20th, 2012
1:31 pm
Another thing we need to look at, in my opinion, is the effect of chemicals on the overall mental health. I wonder how many of the problems we see are from exposure to chemicals and that’s both utilitarian and recreational. I have a feeling some of the mental problems we see in young people is a result of their parents recreational drug use, in years past, as well as their own usage. That’s another elephant in the room.
md
December 20th, 2012
1:35 pm
“Another thing we need to look at, in my opinion, is the effect of chemicals on the overall mental health.”
Kind of like treating Dementia with marijuana while some studies indicate that marijuana may cause Dementia………….
independent thinker
December 20th, 2012
1:36 pm
When folks accept like other countries that ownership of a gun is a privilege a like ownership and driving a car with certain reasonable regulations and qualifications, sensible gun laws will follow .
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
December 20th, 2012
1:38 pm
Yes, if we really wanted to save our children from tragedy, we would outlaw all those harmful drugs they put into their bodies. Wait, we did? Guess that solved that problem.
md
December 20th, 2012
1:38 pm
Sensible gun laws are for sensible people…..yet sensible people aren’t the ones carrying out these atrocities.
ATL Tiger
December 20th, 2012
1:40 pm
Gun control isn’t the answer. Gun control doesn’t work here and it doesn’t work in England.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223193/Culture-violence-Gun-crime-goes-89-decade.html
We need to understand and accept that EVIL exists in this world. Banning guns only makes the situation better for evil.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
1:44 pm
Anders Breivik is a mass murderer who killed dozens of people, mostly teenagers, because he didn’t like their opinions. He is also a gamer. He likes shooters and MMOs. He has spent long hours playing these games.
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, were avid players of the video game “Doom” (Anderson & Dill, 2000).
World of Warcraft was reportedly one of the video games that James Holmes frequently played.
Virginia Tech Killer Was Another Video-Game Fanatic
Adam Lanza reportedly played Call of Duty and Starcraft, among other combat games.
Just saying.
ClydeFr0g
December 20th, 2012
1:45 pm
independent thinker;
“When folks accept like other countries that ownership of a gun is a privilege a like ownership and driving a car with certain reasonable regulations and qualifications, sensible gun laws will follow .”
But it is NOT a privilege, it is a RIGHT. Ownership and operation of a car is not protected by the Constitution.
And for those that blame these things on video games…”violent” and “graphic” video games are a relatively recent phenomenon and it’s indisputable that violent crime has dropped in the US while video game quality, production, and consumption has increased;
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/viortrdtab.cfm
https://depts.washington.edu/critgame/wordpress/2010/04/fyi-video-game-statistics-by-the-entertainment-software-association/
It is wrong to attack the First Amendment as a method of defending the Second Amendment. They are both very necessary, they support each other, and neither was a mistake or an accident.
td
December 20th, 2012
1:45 pm
independent thinker
December 20th, 2012
1:36 pm
When folks accept like other countries that ownership of a gun is a privilege a like ownership and driving a car with certain reasonable regulations and qualifications, sensible gun laws will follow .
We are not other countries. We are the USA and we have a Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Gun rights are NOT going away until you can get 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of all states to change the Constitution and that my friend is not going to happen in my lifetime (and I am a young man).
Since those facts are in evidence then what can we do to reduce the risk of this happening again?
Buzzy
December 20th, 2012
1:46 pm
It’s comforting to know that this incident is a disaster for the Right.
ATL Tiger
December 20th, 2012
1:50 pm
“It’s comforting to know that this incident is a disaster for the Right.”
It’s discomforting that you find this ‘incident’ comforting at all. It’s like you’re almost glad this tradegy took place. That is disgusting.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
1:58 pm
It’s comforting to know that this incident is a opportunity for the Left.
Acer706
December 20th, 2012
2:00 pm
Cannot let a crisis go to waste.
Glenn
December 20th, 2012
2:09 pm
I’ve read a couple of times that nothing can be done about gun violence . Just some pipe dream . Thing is that we are so far ahead of every western country on gun violence with the exception of South Africa which might not be considered western . I’m googled out . That being said wow South Africa is gun violent .
Not singling anyone out but England isn’t anywhere near the top . We as a country can obviously take steps to lessen gun violence and homicides .
Ray
December 20th, 2012
2:15 pm
Where does one turn when they suspect, know in their heart, someone is not “right”, and they pose to real risk to themselves and or society? Professional intervention systems are expensive. Realistically, are we going to set up charitable organizations to do this work? Really, when Republicans plan on doing away with charitable or limiting tax deductions? God forbid that we expand government, so what do we do to help this horrible problem, for free, that does’t cost our government a dime. The sad truth is our soldiers coming home, are not all in the best mental health. They are coming home, killing themselves, their wives, children, other family, and others. We have to do something, but it is going to cost money, and it is going to involve expanding government services.
CC
December 20th, 2012
2:17 pm
I’ve been removed from Atlanta long enough that I no longer know where to acquire weapons illegally. Before I departed from the area, Stewart Avenue was the marketplace. The right connections and enough money could purchase anything that one might want, and I do mean ANYTHING! Of course, this market was used by criminals primarily because they could not obtain what they desired legally. Stewart Avenues exist in every city of America, and will continue to exist.
Law-abiding citizens purchase weapons legally. They produce the necessary documentation, fill out the forms and undergo the waiting period to buy their weapons. Weapons are purchased by law-abiding citizens for self-defense, home defense, hunting, target shooting and collections. Criminals purchase weapons to enhance their criminal activity. Stricter gun control or banning personal ownership of all weapons places law-abiding citizens at the mercy of both criminals and politicians. Criminals (still armed) will prey on the law-abiding citizens, but the great fear of politicians will be removed if banning of weapons is ever successful.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
2:19 pm
Howdy-Doody time at the RNC!
Incoming state Rep. Kyle Kacal, R-Texas: “I’ve heard of people being killed playing ping-pong — ping-pongs are more dangerous than guns,” he added. “Flat-screen TVs are injuring more kids today than anything.”
ClydeFr0g
December 20th, 2012
2:20 pm
Aesop’s Fables;
“Anders Breivik is a mass murderer who killed dozens of people, mostly teenagers, because he didn’t like their opinions. He is also a gamer. He likes shooters and MMOs. He has spent long hours playing these games.
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, were avid players of the video game “Doom” (Anderson & Dill, 2000).
World of Warcraft was reportedly one of the video games that James Holmes frequently played.
Virginia Tech Killer Was Another Video-Game Fanatic
Adam Lanza reportedly played Call of Duty and Starcraft, among other combat games.
Just saying.”
And I bet they all watched Sesame Street when they were kids too. LOTS of males play these games, and the overwhelming majority of them don’t harm a fly.
Bussy;
“It’s comforting to know that this incident is a disaster for the Right”
It’s great that those 20 kids didn’t go to waste, right? What a fantastic tragedy you can exploit to advance an anti-Constitutional agenda! Good times!
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
2:21 pm
…banning personal ownership of all weapons places law-abiding citizens at the mercy of both criminals and politicians.
And no one is proposing this.
ClydeFr0g
December 20th, 2012
2:22 pm
Finn McCool;
“…banning personal ownership of all weapons places law-abiding citizens at the mercy of both criminals and politicians.
And no one is proposing this”
YET. At least until the next time some crazy person does something evil and he doesn’t use an “assault rifle”.
And actually, there are MANY proposing exactly this.
Gun Control?...WWJD?
December 20th, 2012
2:23 pm
@Aesop’s Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
1:58 pm
It’s comforting to know that this incident is a opportunity for the Left.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comforting to know?
You get comfort from this mass killing so you can call out
the LEFT?
Sounds like you are USING THIS OPPORTUNITY to
call out the LEFT.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:23 pm
Aahhh yes, New York City, one the most liberal and fascist communities in all of the land, has fallen headlong for the Mayan Cataclysm, just as they did for al-Gore’s Y2K, and instead of prepping for their bleak futures, they scheme a way to go out as they lived their, uh, eh, let’s just exclude the adjectives, lives -
NYers who believe in Mayan apocalypse search for sex before the world ends
Such upstanding, moral people. Will the kids notice?
ATL Tiger
December 20th, 2012
2:26 pm
I think we should have forced immunizations for the flu. The flu kills approximately 36,000 Americans each year which is 3X the number of deaths related to firearms. Think about how many lives (especially children and the elderly) we could save if everyone was forced to get a flu shot.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:29 pm
And I bet they all watched Sesame Street when they were kids too. LOTS of males play these games, and the overwhelming majority of them don’t harm a fly.
Yep and lots of people own “assault rifles” and wouldn’t harm a fly, either.
My point exactly.
Thanks.
Ray
December 20th, 2012
2:29 pm
Why does anyone need one of these Bushmaster assault rifles? Seriously?
My read of Kyle’s comments is that he doesn’t know anyone who has one of these type of guns, and he doesn’t know why anyone would need an ammunition clip greater than 10, and so he’s not necessarily opposed to regulating/restricting the use of these — but we still shouldn’t do it. Why not?
Glenn
December 20th, 2012
2:30 pm
The crazy liberals that built Y2K bunkers and hid in them with canned spam and ammo . What can you tell us about NYC ?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:30 pm
Cheesy – As usual, you miscomprehend. Go look up the word “sarcasm.”
Thanks for your interest.
Have a great day.
Old Timer
December 20th, 2012
2:35 pm
The first place Obama and joe should study is Obama’s own Chicago. That should tell them what the mental and social environment these shooter come from. Mental health has been a problem since all the crazies were allowed to walk the street due to budget problems. Hollywood, computer and video games add to the folly. There will be no gun law proposed by Obama that will control this problem. It is a society problem and he does nothing to improve the society. A hell bent crazy and street hood will always be able to find a weapon, be it a gun, knife, car, rope, explosive ad infintum.This is a governmental shoot from the hip due to public concern that will diminish in a couple of months, until the next problem which may include the economy. I pray for the children and families.
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2012
2:37 pm
ClydeFr0g – 12:54
I simply respond to whatever subject Kyle essays here.
So, if it’s guns, I talk about the phallic challenged.
Reading between the lines, I suspect a good look in the mirror will tell us who is the phallic obsessed one here. (hint – it’s not me)
As for women, have you never read Freud? Have you never heard of pen*s envy?
It’s obvious to anyone with intelligence and observation skills that many gun nuts are compensating for an inadequacy. Phallic seems like the most likely to me.
Perhaps, after you finish high school, you’ll know the difference between “substantial argument” and “juvenile insults”
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:37 pm
Why does anyone need one of these Bushmaster assault rifles?
Well, for one thing, if the fascists in New York City are right and the Mayan Cataclysm holds forth it’s furies, it’ll probably come in pretty handy.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:39 pm
It’s kinda hard to kill a deer with a pen*s, although haven’t tried.
Lil' Barry Bailout -OBAMAPHONE!!!
December 20th, 2012
2:40 pm
JDW: what if the Sandy Hook killer had only had a pump action shotgun, would the toll have been 15 instead of 20? Would there be 5 fewer innocents to mourn?
——–
No.
Because there was no one there who could have done anything while the shooter slid more rounds into the magazine.
The only difference is that the gun control freaks would be calling for a ban on pump shotguns.
ATL Tiger
December 20th, 2012
2:40 pm
“Why does anyone need one of these Bushmaster assault rifles? Seriously?”
Why does anyone need a 900hp muscle car, why not drive a hybrid? Why is there 1st class seating on airplanes? Why does anyone need to have an unlimited data plan for their cell phones?
There are many choices we have the privledge to make because we live in this wonderful country. Some of the choices are wasteful, frivolous or dangerous to some. One of the choices we have is the weapon we choose. Whether it’s for sport or protection…it’s our choice…like many things in our life. You know….”assault weapons” are not Automatic weapons…they are the same mechanically as some hunting rifles with just a change in the stock design.
Ray
December 20th, 2012
2:44 pm
Aesop: So it sounds like from your answer that the only people who might need a Bushmaster assualt rifle are crazy. Sounds about right to me.
independent thinker
December 20th, 2012
2:45 pm
“”"”"”"”"”"The massacre of schoolchildren in Connecticut may yield new laws to limit the availability of military-style assault weapons. But one thing the latest tragedy will likely not produce: lawsuits against the company that manufactured the gun used in the killings.
Under a controversial law Congress passed seven years ago at the urging of the National Rifle Association, gun manufacturers are explicitly shielded from lawsuits that would seek to hold them liable for crimes committed with weapons they sold.
The 2005 law has drawn attacks from gun control advocates and constitutional scholars, who portray it as a powerful insulator for gun manufacturers. Why should gun manufacturers, they ask, enjoy a special liability protection not available to other companies that make potentially lethal products?
“Gun companies should be treated the same as any other company. There is no reason to give them special exemption from litigation,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Irvine School of Law. “It is an outrageous piece of legislation.”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/newtown-victims-lawsuits-nra-_n_2325721.html
Ray
December 20th, 2012
2:49 pm
ATL Tiger: We can’t own hand grenades, or bazookas, or Sherman tanks, or mortars, or machine guns — does that wrongly diminish our choices and diminish this wonderful country?
md
December 20th, 2012
2:51 pm
“Howdy-Doody time at the RNC!
Incoming state Rep. Kyle Kacal, R-Texas: “I’ve heard of people being killed playing ping-pong — ping-pongs are more dangerous than guns,” he added. “Flat-screen TVs are injuring more kids today than anything.””
From that bastion of conservative news:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30686493/ns/health-childrens_health/t/falling-flat-screen-tvs-growing-threat-kids/#.UNNrq3exnJY
Naquelle
December 20th, 2012
2:52 pm
In a nation of 315 million people there are the loony outliers like the kid in CT and this kind of thing will repeat over and over. Stuff happens, sad but true. We need to learn from these incidents how to make schools and other public places more secure. Just hoping that you or your family won’t be a target is not a strategy.
md
December 20th, 2012
2:53 pm
“There are many choices we have the privledge to make because we live in this wonderful country.”
You’ll find many here that don’t believe we make choices, ironically, they choose to make excuses instead.
Ray
December 20th, 2012
2:57 pm
I choose to have a nuclear missile. Why can’t I have one.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
2:58 pm
If you are licensed and pay the government goons their extortion, you can own a machine gun and probably anything else you’d like.
Just trying to help you liberal scholars out with some facts.
Banner123
December 20th, 2012
3:00 pm
To independent thinker:
To your 2:45p comment. From a product liablity standpoint, I don’t think you can hold a manufacturer liable for product mis-use. I think you can only hold them liable for defects in the product. The gun was not defective and worked properly.
Not sure how any claim would stand up in court if a civil case was brought.
Ray
December 20th, 2012
3:01 pm
Aesop: Yes, I’m worried about the government goons and would like to won a Sherman tank to defend myself from them. Why do I apply for a license for my tank?
ATL Tiger
December 20th, 2012
3:01 pm
Ray,
The question for us as a society isn’t if we need gun control. We already have severe weapon control. You cannot legally own a bazooka, a grenade, an atomic bomb. We have, and most would say we need, at least safeguards against personal ownership of some weapons. Our societal question is to determine the balance between the cost in misery that can be meted out by a weapon and the benefits of having the freedom to possess the weapon. It is the same as determining the cost of accident-potential for high speeds on a roadway vs. the benefits of being able to travel quickly.
Criminals are going to ignore the law. So passing a law that says ordinary citizens cant have, for example, full auto guns only means that criminals will have them but law abiding citizens like you and me cannot. I have nothing to fear from law abiding citizens owning fully auto machine guns and bazookas.
md
December 20th, 2012
3:03 pm
“gun manufacturers are explicitly shielded from lawsuits that would seek to hold them liable for crimes committed with weapons they sold.”
So if automobiles become the chosen killing machine of choice and deranged individuals choose to start running over people at will, do we hold Ford, GM and the others accountable for the individuals actions??