Michael Ejercito
2018-03-01 16:42:03 UTC
http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2018/02/scream_for_gun_control_if_you.html
Scream for gun control if you like, but it won't fix the problem: Ted
Diadiun
Updated Feb 21; Posted Feb 21
A Cleveland gun buyback in 2007 yielded 421 weapons. Ted Diadiun writes
today that 'gun control' proposals after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High
School shootings are unrealistic in trying to outlaw the millions of
AR-15-type semi-automatic weapons already in private hands in the United
States.
A Cleveland gun buyback in 2007 yielded 421 weapons. Ted Diadiun writes
today that 'gun control' proposals after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High
School shootings are unrealistic in trying to outlaw the millions of
AR-15-type semi-automatic weapons already in private hands in the United
States.(Roadell Hickman, The Plain Dealer, File, 2007)
3488
0
shares
By Ted Diadiun, cleveland.com ***@cleveland.com
It is a sign of the times that in the wake of the devastating shooting in
Parkland, Fla. last Wednesday, an essay in the New Yorker magazine
approvingly quoted a high school sophomore who had posted the following
tweet in response to President Donald Trump's expressions of sympathy:
"I don't want your condolences you f---ing piece of s---, my friends and
teachers were shot," wrote the 16-year-old girl to the president of the
United States. "Multiple of my fellow classmates are dead. Do something
instead of sending prayers. Prayers won't fix this. But Gun control will
prevent it from happening again."
Even considering the tragic circumstances that produced her comment, I found
the words stunning, a stark example of our current profane and unrestrained
era of instant communication. Not everyone saw it that way, of course: By
the time the girl took the comment down the following day, it had drawn
346,000-some likes, and been retweeted more than 144,000 times.
Whew.
Now, there's little point in chastising a grieving kid, whatever we think of
her attitude and vocabulary. She's young enough so that she likely took her
cue from those whose approach to the problem she parrots. But her tweet -
and the reaction it produced -- is a symptom of the divisive and combative
society we have created for ourselves.
ADVERTISING
ADVERTISING
And, of our futile search for simple solutions to complicated problems.
People have every right to be angry in the wake of a school shooting. Anger
is worse than useless, however, if it's directed only at targets that fit
our political prejudices.
Consider: The attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was carried out
by a 19-year-old who had long been identified by many who knew him as a
danger to himself and others. The FBI had been alerted and the school
administration had been warned.
But after the shooting, did the ire of the media and half the people in the
country focus on Nikolas Cruz, the one who actually killed those 17 people?
Was it directed toward the adult who saw him heading into the school that
day and failed to stop him? Did it settle on the FBI agents who had been
told of the multiple warning signs Cruz had exhibited and didn't follow up?
FBI failed to investigate tip on school shooter
FBI failed to investigate tip on school shooter
The FBI says it failed to investigate a specific report in January that
Nikolas Cruz could be plotting a school shooting.
No. Instead, many people instinctively and profanely pointed accusing
fingers at Congress and the president, demanding that the elected officials
do what the high school sophomore had demanded in her tweet to the
president:
Something.
OK. But what?
Gun control, she and others have said.
OK. But just how would that work, exactly?
Ban assault weapons, many have suggested.
OK. But an exhaustive Washington Post story a couple of years ago estimated
that as of 2013, we had more than 357 million privately owned guns across 37
percent (45 million) of U.S. households. Of these, about 8 million are AR-15
type semi-automatic rifles - the so-called "assault weapon" used by Cruz in
Florida.
According to FBI crime statistics, slightly more than 11,000 people were
murdered by firearms in 2016. How many do you think were killed by rifles -
including, but not limited to, semi-automatics?
The answer is 374. Most of the others were from handguns. Ask yourself:
Would an assault weapon ban have saved even those 374 lives? Or would many
of the victims have been shot by some other weapon if a rifle had not been
available?
So, then, should we ban sales of all handguns also? If we did all that
tomorrow, there would still be 300-plus million of them out there, in
addition to the 8 million "assault weapons," plus shotguns and other
assorted firearms. Banning gun sales would do nothing more than create a
massive black market for weapons of all types.
Should we instead try to collect them all? All 357 million? How would we do
that?
Certainly, Cruz acquired the weapon he used far too easily. A more rigorous
background check might have prevented his purchase given his background of
mental problems, as would a law raising the legal age for purchasing a rifle
to 21, as it is with handguns. Does anyone believe that would have kept him
from getting his hands on a firearm?
The fact is, no matter how many gun control measures our legislators enact,
there is no way they are going to control the guns we already have.
What we need to control are the people who want to pull the trigger. With
357 million triggers out there, those demented few will find one to pull if
we don't stop them. But of course, focusing our energy on that is a lot more
complicated than shouting for gun control and cursing at people who believe
it's not that simple.
So go ahead: March. Lie down. Chant. Carry signs. Donate money to anti-gun
causes. Scream at our elected officials for not fixing the problem if you
want. Vote against any legislator who has received money from the National
Rifle Association if it makes you feel better.
But don't delude yourself into thinking any of that will solve the problem.
It will not.
Ted Diadiun is a member of the editorial board of cleveland.com and The
Plain Dealer.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Scream for gun control if you like, but it won't fix the problem: Ted
Diadiun
Updated Feb 21; Posted Feb 21
A Cleveland gun buyback in 2007 yielded 421 weapons. Ted Diadiun writes
today that 'gun control' proposals after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High
School shootings are unrealistic in trying to outlaw the millions of
AR-15-type semi-automatic weapons already in private hands in the United
States.
A Cleveland gun buyback in 2007 yielded 421 weapons. Ted Diadiun writes
today that 'gun control' proposals after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High
School shootings are unrealistic in trying to outlaw the millions of
AR-15-type semi-automatic weapons already in private hands in the United
States.(Roadell Hickman, The Plain Dealer, File, 2007)
3488
0
shares
By Ted Diadiun, cleveland.com ***@cleveland.com
It is a sign of the times that in the wake of the devastating shooting in
Parkland, Fla. last Wednesday, an essay in the New Yorker magazine
approvingly quoted a high school sophomore who had posted the following
tweet in response to President Donald Trump's expressions of sympathy:
"I don't want your condolences you f---ing piece of s---, my friends and
teachers were shot," wrote the 16-year-old girl to the president of the
United States. "Multiple of my fellow classmates are dead. Do something
instead of sending prayers. Prayers won't fix this. But Gun control will
prevent it from happening again."
Even considering the tragic circumstances that produced her comment, I found
the words stunning, a stark example of our current profane and unrestrained
era of instant communication. Not everyone saw it that way, of course: By
the time the girl took the comment down the following day, it had drawn
346,000-some likes, and been retweeted more than 144,000 times.
Whew.
Now, there's little point in chastising a grieving kid, whatever we think of
her attitude and vocabulary. She's young enough so that she likely took her
cue from those whose approach to the problem she parrots. But her tweet -
and the reaction it produced -- is a symptom of the divisive and combative
society we have created for ourselves.
ADVERTISING
ADVERTISING
And, of our futile search for simple solutions to complicated problems.
People have every right to be angry in the wake of a school shooting. Anger
is worse than useless, however, if it's directed only at targets that fit
our political prejudices.
Consider: The attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was carried out
by a 19-year-old who had long been identified by many who knew him as a
danger to himself and others. The FBI had been alerted and the school
administration had been warned.
But after the shooting, did the ire of the media and half the people in the
country focus on Nikolas Cruz, the one who actually killed those 17 people?
Was it directed toward the adult who saw him heading into the school that
day and failed to stop him? Did it settle on the FBI agents who had been
told of the multiple warning signs Cruz had exhibited and didn't follow up?
FBI failed to investigate tip on school shooter
FBI failed to investigate tip on school shooter
The FBI says it failed to investigate a specific report in January that
Nikolas Cruz could be plotting a school shooting.
No. Instead, many people instinctively and profanely pointed accusing
fingers at Congress and the president, demanding that the elected officials
do what the high school sophomore had demanded in her tweet to the
president:
Something.
OK. But what?
Gun control, she and others have said.
OK. But just how would that work, exactly?
Ban assault weapons, many have suggested.
OK. But an exhaustive Washington Post story a couple of years ago estimated
that as of 2013, we had more than 357 million privately owned guns across 37
percent (45 million) of U.S. households. Of these, about 8 million are AR-15
type semi-automatic rifles - the so-called "assault weapon" used by Cruz in
Florida.
According to FBI crime statistics, slightly more than 11,000 people were
murdered by firearms in 2016. How many do you think were killed by rifles -
including, but not limited to, semi-automatics?
The answer is 374. Most of the others were from handguns. Ask yourself:
Would an assault weapon ban have saved even those 374 lives? Or would many
of the victims have been shot by some other weapon if a rifle had not been
available?
So, then, should we ban sales of all handguns also? If we did all that
tomorrow, there would still be 300-plus million of them out there, in
addition to the 8 million "assault weapons," plus shotguns and other
assorted firearms. Banning gun sales would do nothing more than create a
massive black market for weapons of all types.
Should we instead try to collect them all? All 357 million? How would we do
that?
Certainly, Cruz acquired the weapon he used far too easily. A more rigorous
background check might have prevented his purchase given his background of
mental problems, as would a law raising the legal age for purchasing a rifle
to 21, as it is with handguns. Does anyone believe that would have kept him
from getting his hands on a firearm?
The fact is, no matter how many gun control measures our legislators enact,
there is no way they are going to control the guns we already have.
What we need to control are the people who want to pull the trigger. With
357 million triggers out there, those demented few will find one to pull if
we don't stop them. But of course, focusing our energy on that is a lot more
complicated than shouting for gun control and cursing at people who believe
it's not that simple.
So go ahead: March. Lie down. Chant. Carry signs. Donate money to anti-gun
causes. Scream at our elected officials for not fixing the problem if you
want. Vote against any legislator who has received money from the National
Rifle Association if it makes you feel better.
But don't delude yourself into thinking any of that will solve the problem.
It will not.
Ted Diadiun is a member of the editorial board of cleveland.com and The
Plain Dealer.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
