Why We Need Effective Gun Control Today

Author:

Daphne Holmes contributed this guest post. She is a writer from www.ArrestRecords.com and you can reach her at daphneholmes9@gmail.com.

The gun control debate ebbs and flows through political cycles without consistent direction, or even proper attention.  Occasional atrocities reignite the controversy and put heat on legislators to make a showing on the issue, but the momentum and long-term vision are never enough to result in adequate consideration of the problems and solutions relating to gun violence in the United States.

Unfortunately as gun law reform languishes in a political no man's land, incidents of gun violence continue to unfold, capturing innocent victims in the crossfire.  School shootings, explosive violence movie theaters and, even repeated shootings at military facilities are all writing on the wall for legislators and civilians, who need to turn their attention to the issue.

Gun rights advocates put-forth arguments backed by Constitutional provisions protecting the right to bear arms, but collateral killing nonetheless continues to rise in a society that too frequently turns to firearms for deadly force.  Modern incidents of gun violence reflect a new cultural paradigm, which must be accounted for in the laws applied to safe firearms acquisition and ownership.  For the following reasons, we need effective gun control today.

Downside is Insignificant by Comparison

Drawing the line on gun control means different things to different people.  As in any other impassioned debate, there are extremes on both sides.  In reality, however, most proposed gun control measures are not particularly significant to ownership rights.  Expanding background checks, for example, does not interfere with the right to bear arms.  Rather, it fortifies the law of the land by adding a responsibility component to the rights outlined by the Constitution.

The upside of gun control measures, on the other hand, can be measured with human lives.  The United States is far ahead of other countries in terms of the number of citizens killed annually by guns, so assault weapons bans and exhaustive background checks furnish sensible first-steps toward reducing gun violence in the U.S.

Criminals are Not the Only Ones Killing with Guns

In a growing trend, unconventional scenarios lead to increasing gun deaths in the United States.  Criminals are not the only shooters these days.  In fact, children account for a rising share of individuals involved in gun related incidents both as victims and shooters.  While protecting the citizenry is a strong argument for gun control, shielding the nation's young people from gun violence is an even more pressing agenda, because children are always innocent victims.

Access leads to Gun Violence

Education and other measures provide worthwhile contributions to gun safety, but stricter controls must be put in place to reduce incidents of gun violence in the United States.  While ignorance and complacency contribute to gun tragedies, simple access to guns also plays a significant role in many gun-related disasters.  Limiting access by enacting gun buying restrictions and imposing locked storage requirements are prudent parts of comprehensive gun control.

Guns are the Most Common Killing Weapons

In many cases, improving social conditions requires us to look at dilemmas in very stark ways.  We prioritize, for example, in ways that stand to contribute the greatest possible benefits across society.  Devastating diseases, for example, receive more attention from researchers and doctors than minor ailments, simply because of the toll they tackle on society.  In much the same way, guns are the tools most frequently used to take lives, so the must be given the lion's share of attention by reformers striving to reduce body counts.

Gun Control Reflects Societal Change

Laws and customs evolve alongside civilizations, as citizens adapt their approaches to the ever-changing fabric of society.  It is prudent to roll with the changes, rather than turning a blind eye to the new requirements they present.  As human interactions have evolved, guns have taken-up an increasingly negative place in society.  As a result, gun control is a prudent course-correcting intervention, which can only serve the greater good.

Today, more than ever, social phenomena support the call for gun control.  Too many gun-related incidents involve innocent victims, and they are increasingly made up of children touched by gun violence.  Curbing easy-access and accounting for societal change provide common sense strategies for reducing tragic outcomes.

Author:

Daphne Holmes contributed this guest post. She is a writer from www.ArrestRecords.com and you can reach her at daphneholmes9@gmail.com.

Concealed Carry on Guam

via ssgmarkcr

 Here is another ripple caused by the 9th Circuit ruling that repealed "may issue" permit laws in its jurisdiction. 

"Residents could soon be able to get a concealed firearms permit if they meet certain qualifications, if the governor signs a bill that was passed into law by the Legislature yesterday.

Bill 296 would align Guam's firearms law with other jurisdictions and require the police department to issue concealed firearms permits to residents who meet certain requirements."

"The bill was one of many that senators voted to pass during the last day of session yesterday. The bill received 13 "yes" votes and two "no" votes from Speaker Judith Won Pat and Vice Speaker Benjamin Cruz."

"The bill would require the Guam Police Department to issue concealed firearms permits to applicants who have shown, among other requirements:

• they are not a convicted felon;

• they have not been imprisoned; or

• they have not been committed to programs for substance abuse.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in February and March repealed "may issue" laws in California and Hawaii, respectively."

http://www.guampdn.com/article/20140510/NEWS01/305100009?odyssey=mod%7cmostcom

    Data about crime in Guam isn't very current, though it seemed to take up a sizable portion of governor's State of The Island address.

And while you're playing with your Glocks

Nothing like a little make up hints from the World's Most Famous Austrian, Conchita Wurst, to help you look your best!

Zappa - Dumb All Over, A Little Ugly on the Side

A Gun in the Home

John Lott Denies the Racially Discriminatory Aspect of Capital Punishment

The Watch

It’s when Lott starts citing statistics that his piece begins to fall apart. First, Lott attempts to debunk the notion that the death penalty is applied in a racially discriminatory manner by noting that white people are executed at a higher rate than the rate at which white people commit murders. That’s true. It’s also a rather facile way of looking at this particular aspect of the death penalty. Prosecutors seek death only in cases where they can show aggravating circumstances — the particularly heinous crimes. If you’re looking at race and execution statistics, then, it’s important to factor in the severity of the crime. And when a black defendant and a white defendant are convicted of murders with similar aggravating circumstances, the black defendant is significantly more likely to get the death penalty. In fact, a convicted black defendant is a better predictor of a death sentence than a conviction involving multiple stab wounds, or a murder committed in conjunction with another felony.

I think the far more troubling measure of the death penalty and race is the influence of the race of the victim. In most states, defendants convicted of killing white people are quite a bit more likely to be sentenced to death than defendants convicted of killing black people. That suggests that, whether intentionally or not, the criminal justice system puts a higher value on white lives than black lives. Moreover, studies that combine the race of both defendant and victim have found that a black defendant with a nonblack victim is by far the most likely to be executed, followed by a black defendant and black victim, a nonblack defendant and nonblack victim, and, far behind, a nonblack defendant and a black victim. These are percentages, by the way, not raw numbers. So they account for the fact that some of those categories have a larger sample size than others. (The Death Penalty Information Project has a summary of all of the aforementioned research, with footnotes, here.)

More on the Jack in the Box Story

ssgmarkcr wrote:

    Laci posted this last week,

It seems some open carry idiots activists actually caused workers at a Jack in the Box in Fort Worth to lock themselves in a freezer for safety.

And since its Laci, there are times that no one comments.  I personally believe that some of these open carry events end up as an overall negative outcome, though they are quite within their rights to conduct them. 

    And many gun control advocates have made a lot of media hay with this event,

"The company's statement comes in response to a social media campaign and national petition launched just over 24 hours ago by Moms Demand Action to ask Jack in the Box to enforce its policy after last week's semi-automatic rifle carrying demonstration at a Fort Worth Jack in the Box store that terrified employees so much that they locked themselves in the freezer, according to local police."

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/moms-demand-action-applauds-jack-in-the-box-for-taking-stand-on-open-carry-rallies-inside-company-restaurants-258631481.html

    The problem is that it now appears that it never really happened.  To his credit, Joe Nocera printed a correction when an official from Jack In The Box contacted him. 

"An earlier version of this post included information from Sgt. Ray Bush of the Forth Worth Police Department, who wrote in an email last week that the employees at the Jack in the Box where Open Carry Texas staged a demonstration “locked themselves inside a freezer for protection out of fear the rifle-carrying men would rob them.” However, Brian Luscomb, vice president of corporate communications for Jack in the Box, told the New York Times this evening, “Our employees told us that they did not hide in the freezer.” We have amended the post to reflect this new information. "

http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/the-gun-report-may-9-2014/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=1

    And of course, the next challenge will be to find out why Sgt. Bush of the Fort Worth PD sent out an inaccurate email concerning this event.  I'm not going to call it an outright lie yet because this being the weekend, we haven't heard from the Sergeant in question.  For example, its possible his statement was based on something he heard from another officer, etc.

    The rumors are already flying on the blogs now.  I've even seen one suggesting that the police being called amounted to a SWATing call.  Whatever happened, the MOMs took hold and rode it for all it was worth, and by doing so may have attached themselves to an event that will affect whatever credibility they now enjoy.

    I imagine this will develop as the new week progresses, and hopefully will just turn out to be some miscommunication issue happens from time to time in modern day news's push to release breaking news first and not something more overt like NBC's editing of Zimmerman's 911 call, which has grown into a defamation suit that is now progressing through the courts.

    Might be an interesting week.