Newtown Remembered

I stand with the millions of people around the world in remembering the horrific shooting in the Newton Connecticut school one year ago today. I am saddened by the tragic loss of life, and by the struggle of those who survived. It was a terrible event, but I am also saddened by this nation's reaction to that event.

 

On this anniversary of the Sandyhook school shooting almost everyone is still making the same mistake, focusing their anger on the tool instead of the problem. When a deranged bomber kills people we blame the bomber, when a drunk driver kills people we blame the driver, but when a disturbed shooter kills people we blame the gun. Some go so far as to insist that a world with exactly zero guns in it would be a safer place, even though that’s never going to happen, and although it seems intuitive I seriously doubt that it’s true.

 

Those that support gun rights may or may not be off base about mental health being the primary cause, but everyone desperately needs to understand why kids are shooting kids. In any case, it’s almost a given that someone psychologically prepared to kill innocent people is suffering from some form of mental illness.

 

Nevertheless, I concur with the thoughts and analysis by Steven Pinkers and Chris Uggen who say, “A narrow focus on stopping mass shootings is less likely to produce beneficial changes than a broader-based effort to reduce homicide and other violence. These rare and terrible crimes are like rare and terrible diseases, and a strategy to address them is best considered within the context of more common and deadlier threats to population health.”

 

“We are compelled to pay attention to extreme events and we estimate risk with these vivid examples, but as much as we should try to prevent these horrific events from taking place we should not use them as the sole basis for making inferences that determine policy. The outliers are a tragic part of the overall story, but we must pay attention to the rest of the distribution.” Focusing on guns is not the answer; they’re just a tool, they are not the problem.

Thanksgiving

Every Thanksgiving just before we eat, each person at the table takes a turn to say what they're thankful for. This year I said I was thankful for my family and my church, and in solidarity with the rest of the nation I was thankful for my Second Amendment Rights.

As I said in my opening post, protecting our Second Amendment rights in particular and the Bill of Rights in general have become absolutely necessary if we are to remain a free and open society.

What About Tomorrow

Lessons From a Lamp Post: Why the numbers don't add up. Part 4 of 4

 

I am not a prepper, or a survivalist, or a doomsday bunker kind of guy but I am concerned about what I see happening in our country. I believe people are basically good, although not all of them and certainly not all the time. Like most citizens of our modern technological world I am wholly reliant upon a fragile web of services to meet my most basic needs. Now that Home Land Security has announced cyber war as the top most threat faced by America, have you considered what will happen if those services collapse? I am convinced that the answer is chaos. It’ll take a few days, but when people figure out that the power isn’t coming back on, and there is no water, and their store is out of food, and their car is out of gas, attitudes are going to change!

 

A simple example might be in relating to the recent natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita a few months later. Approximately 3.7 million people attempted to evacuate creating predictable results. The scene along the stalled evacuation route was like a segment from an apocalypse movie; crowds milling restlessly, gas stations and mini-marts picked clean and heaped with trash, and stranded families sleeping by the side of the road. After these hurricanes nobody had any illusions that help was on the way. So have you thought about what you will do if your power never comes back on, or your grocery store shelves are never restocked?

 

Regrettably, much of the gun violence after Katrina was racially-motivated demonstrating how bad and how quickly things can degrade into chaos. White vigilantes targeted Black people and four police men were convicted of shooting Blacks who were trying to walk to safety. Obviously guns in the hands of bad guys did not make the situation better, they made it worse. The New Orleans Police Superintendent’s suggestion to confiscate all firearms didn’t help either, even though it’s almost understandable given that he was under staffed because many of his officers had evacuated with the other victims.

 

I might be persuaded to accept the Superintendent’s plea that “no civilians be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns, or other firearms” if the police are willing and able to perform their duties. In any case this should never be extended to the right to protect one’s self in one’s home. Regardless, the Superintendent’s futile suggestion would not have worked anyway because the recalcitrant criminal will not be turning in his (or her) guns for the greater good.

 

Another example is the massive earthquake in Haiti a few years ago. An estimated 2.5 million people were displaced from their homes, and after big $$ the people are still living in temporary shelters. In fact I recently heard on NPR that it would have been more efficient if the United States had given every person $10,000.00 on which they could be living well, instead of wasting money on grand schemes that never reached the populace. Add to our threat of earthquakes, climate change, pandemic, meteor strike, terrorist attack, and now cyber war and it’s easy to see why I think we are woefully under prepared!

Think for Yourself

Gun Statistics

Lessons From a Lamp Post: Why the numbers don't add up. Part 3 of 4

 

Unlike Michael Moore's persuasive movie Columbine, data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice show a very weak correlation between gun-death and gun-laws, as does the Center for Disease Control which has kept data on gun-homicide despite resistance from firearm support groups. None of these studies have been able to establish a relationship of more guns equals more gun deaths. The real question is not about the number of firearm laws but whether the laws ultimately safeguard the citizens they are intended to protect.

 

Gun accidents are tragic and we tend to hear about them, but accidental gun death is relatively rare accounting for only 1.8% all gun deaths. “Undetermined” (0.7%) and “legal intervention/war” (1.0%) categories were even less likely. In the United States where “self-inflicted” death by gunshot is taken into account the thesis of more guns equals more gun deaths is supported more closely. Even though this correlation is astonishing it’s not surprising since such findings are intuitive. What is surprising is how high the gun-suicide rate actually is. As one of the “four major mechanisms of injury in 2009”, 59.8% of all “firearm injury deaths” were suicides and 36.7% were homicides. Suicide tops homicide by nearly two to one in gun-deaths.

 

So, as we enter further into the debate about firearm laws, we should keep in mind that whereas spectacular massacres with exotic weapons generate headlines, the larger numbers are composed of pensive individuals who give up fighting the forces they see arrayed against them and take the nearest exit. Unfortunately if firearms are outlawed the “nearest exit” will be something else, which is supported by countries with strict gun control laws that have higher suicide rates than those without gun control laws.

 

I would agree with the old adage that says we use statistics like a drunken person uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination. Despite the evidence, some of my friends remain convinced that the wide availability of firearms in this nation is a major factor in the rate of gun-related deaths, and they firmly believe that there is a need to reduce the number of guns. Unfortunately, this leads them to believe that removing firearms from law abiding citizens will reduce violence on the street. I believe that even if the number of guns could be reduced to zero which it can’t, crime isn’t going to go away. Guns don’t kill people and the problem isn’t the tool.

Fallen Heros

 

All gave some - Some gave all.

 

 

September 11, 2001

On September 11 2001, four passenger airliners were hijacked and flown into buildings in a suicide attack which resulted in almost 3,000 deaths, including the 227 civilians and 19 hijackers aboard the four planes. It also was the deadliest incident for firefighters in the history of the United States. These four coordinated terrorist attacks launched upon the United States by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda changed our world forever.

 

Many countries, including the United States, strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded law enforcement powers. Congress rushed to pass legislation to strengthen security controls and the President signed the USA PATRIOT act into law. The stated purpose of the Patriot Act was "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism". Its intent was to "deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes".

 

From the very beginning opponents of the law criticized the authorization of indefinite detentions of immigrants; the permission given law enforcement officers to search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s consent or knowledge; the expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to search telephone, e-mail, and financial records without a court order; and the expanded access of law enforcement agencies to business records, including library and financial records.

 

Several legal challenges have been brought against the act and the Federal courts have ruled a number of the provisions as unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the reauthorization bill, criticized by both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns, kept most of the act's original language intact and was signed into law on March 9 and 10, 2006.