ADVERTISEMENT

Opinion: How many more have to die before the GOP rethinks its opposition to gun control?

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,740
61,112
113
Opinion by
Max Boot
Columnist
March 23, 2021 at 12:55 p.m. CDT

With the increasing distribution of vaccines, we are finally starting to stumble out of the covid-19 pandemic. But mass shootings in Boulder, Colo., and Atlanta remind us that, long after covid-19 is gone, the epidemic of gun violence will still be with us because of the equivalent of the anti-maskers — irrational, extremist Republican politicians who oppose nearly all gun regulations. The Republican position is enraging: They want to make voting hard and gun ownership easy.

Although covid-19 deaths dwarfed gun deaths last year, gun violence increased. A survey of 34 large U.S. cities found a 30 percent increase in homicides last year — and more than 70 percent of homicides in the United States involve a gun. (The comparable figure for England and Wales, which have strict gun control laws, is 3 percent.) Guns are responsible for even more suicides than murders. The Gun Violence Archive reports that all gun-related deaths in 2020 totaled 43,536 — a horrific figure that would not be considered normal or acceptable in any other high-income country.
The one category of gun violence that actually declined in 2020 was mass shootings after the two worst years on record. But even that trend is now changing for the worse. Last week, a gunman armed with a 9mm handgun that he had purchased just hours before his rampage killed eight people at three spas in the Atlanta area. Then, on Monday, a gunman, who police told CNN and the Denver Post was armed with a rifle, killed 10 people at a Boulder, Colo., supermarket.
AD

ADVERTISING


No other industrialized nation has gun violence at anywhere close to these levels. Our rate of firearm homicides (based on figures from 2012) is nearly six times Canada’s, nearly 16 times Germany’s and more than 21 times Australia’s. It’s not that the United States has a higher crime rate in general; our rates of property crime are pretty similar to Western Europe’s. But we have a much higher rate of lethal violence because we have a much higher rate of gun ownership.
Americans are estimated to own nearly half of the 857 million civilian-held guns in the world. The United States has 120 civilian firearms per 100 people — i.e., more guns than people. That’s by far the highest rate of any country. (Yemen is No. 2 with 52.8 guns per 100 people.) The rate in India is 5.3, in the U.K. 4.6, in South Korea just 0.2.
This is an intolerable situation, and one that we don’t have to tolerate. Before a 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision in 2008 written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court had never found that the Second Amendment — written to protect “well regulated” state militias — conferred an individual right of gun ownership. But even the court ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller states that “the Second Amendment right is not unlimited”: “The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on … laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
AD


There is, in short, no legal prohibition — unless the even more conservative Supreme Court now chooses to impose one — on the kind of common-sense gun regulations that are backed by most Americans. A 2019 survey showed overwhelming support for preventing people with mental illnesses from buying guns, making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks, banning high-capacity magazines and banning assault weapons. There was a reduction in support for gun control in 2020, because there were fewer high-profile mass shootings, but in a Gallup poll 57 percent of Americans — and even 26 percent of gun owners — still said they favored stricter gun laws.
The problem is the Republican Party, which on this issue has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the National Rifle Association. The Onion accurately captured its ethos in a headline that it keeps running after mass shootings: “‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens.” The only Republican response is “thoughts and prayers.” Sorry, we need more than that.
The House just passed two popular pieces of gun legislation that would close existing loopholes. One bill would extend the amount of time the FBI has to conduct background checks on gun buyers. The other would require background checks for gun sales done privately or at gun shows. But almost no Republicans voted for these measures (one of the bills had eight GOP votes, the other two), and they have no chance of passage in the Senate unless Democrats curb or abolish the filibuster.
AD


The GOP has not always been so doctrinaire. The 1993 Brady Act establishing a nationwide background check for gun buyers received 54 Republican votes in the House and 16 in the Senate. But the story on guns is the same as on every other issue from voting rights to global warming to covid-19: The GOP is becoming more right-wing over time. The cost of its extremism is being paid in American lives. How many more have to die before the GOP rethinks its opposition to gun control?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morrison71
No amount. If covid taught me anything, it’s that the majority of Americans don’t GAF about others if they are even slightly inconvenienced.

This is a gross overgeneralization and completely inaccurate. The United States is and has been for some time the most generous and giving country in the world. By quite a wide margin.

I honestly wonder if some of you have ever traveled outside of the US.

America is an imperfect country with imperfect citizens. But by a supreme measure it is still a beacon of humanity and civilization.
 
Before a 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision in 2008 written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court had never found that the Second Amendment — written to protect “well regulated” state militias — conferred an individual right of gun ownership.

From the Dred Scott decision:

"For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."
 
It's an interesting question. What would it take?

Ordinarily, to get Republicans to act, they would have to be directly impacted, rather than it impacting someone else. So if lots of Republicans started getting indiscriminately shot at while going about their business in public, maybe they'd want to do something.

Unfortunately, they've been conditioned to view threats as a reason to buy more guns or expand access to guns, rather than try to control them. It's almost a paradox.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
What would you consider real action?
tenor.gif
 
I’m curious because I really truly personally dislike guns of any sort...didn’t Democratic Senators used to support the 2nd Amendment until fairly recently- and hasn’t a certain Socialist from Vermont supported 2A until recently?
Not throwing it in anyone’s face but there are a LOT of hunters out there, even in blue states like Pennsylvania. And they vote. Manchin in WV?
Just trying to keep it real.
 
It's an interesting question. What would it take?

Ordinarily, to get Republicans to act, they would have to be directly impacted, rather than it impacting someone else. So if lots of Republicans started getting indiscriminately shot at while going about their business in public, maybe they'd want to do something.

Unfortunately, they've been conditioned to view threats as a reason to buy more guns or expand access to guns, rather than try to control them. It's almost a paradox.
You mean like playing softball?
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
As long as people are having bad days, there will be mass shootings

PEW PEW ‘Murca
 
How many more? Pretty much everyone.

If killing 20 kids in an elementary school didn't move the needle, nothing is going to.
Pretty much this.

I'm a gun owner, but I consider myself pretty moderate and able to listen to different sides of the discussion. My surface level stance has always been that I won't give you grief for not owning them, you don't give me grief for owning them. That said, in the middle of that view-point is A LOT of work to be done with regards to mental health and better gun control measures. We've reached the point a moderate entity not affiliated with either party needs to address the Congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDallasRuss
Additionally, we've touched on this topic over and over and over again; we don't live in the same society we once did, but no one wants to really have that discussion. I grew up in a home with OPEN and LOADED guns everywhere in the home, including my own bedroom. These were tools not to be touched for any reason other than their intended purpose. They weren't toys. In high school I used to have parties when my parents were out of town and NO ONE ever touched them, not once.

Furthermore, I used to ride my bike all over Orlando (Pine Hills) without a care in the world. Today, my wife is nervous to let our son go one street over.

I can't imagine having any of my guns unlocked today. Why?
 
Additionally, we've touched on this topic over and over and over again; we don't live in the same society we once did, but no one wants to really have that discussion. I grew up in a home with OPEN and LOADED guns everywhere in the home, including my own bedroom. These were tools not to be touched for any reason other than their intended purpose. They weren't toys. In high school I used to have parties when my parents were out of town and NO ONE ever touched them, not once.

Furthermore, I used to ride my bike all over Orlando (Pine Hills) without a care in the world. Today, my wife is nervous to let our son go one street over.

I can't imagine having any of my guns unlocked today. Why?
Ding ding ding! Society has taken a pretty dark turn in say, the last 25 yrs? Easier to blame the guns than to get down to the actual problem.
 
Pretty much this.

I'm a gun owner, but I consider myself pretty moderate and able to listen to different sides of the discussion. My surface level stance has always been that I won't give you grief for not owning them, you don't give me grief for owning them. That said, in the middle of that view-point is A LOT of work to be done with regards to mental health and better gun control measures. We've reached the point a moderate entity not affiliated with either party needs to address the Congress.
I wish you would stop with the mental health nonsense. Mental health problems are everywhere but America has by far the biggest issues with guns. They do not go hand in hand.
 
I wish you would stop with the mental health nonsense. Mental health problems are everywhere but America has by far the biggest issues with guns. They do not go hand in hand.
They don't? Are you 100% certain? I guess these guns are like the Decepticon, just traveling through communities shooting people on their own.

OR is your stance that Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, Omar Mateen, Stephen Paddock, Seung-Hui Cho, etc. were completely sane individuals functioning normally in society.
 
I wish you would stop with the mental health nonsense. Mental health problems are everywhere but America has by far the biggest issues with guns. They do not go hand in hand.
And mental illness doesn’t beget violence. The narrative that gun violence is a mental health issue only perpetuates the stigma against those who suffer from mental illness. To be clear, it’s a hate issue—which is not a mental illness.
 
I wish you would stop with the mental health nonsense.
Also, since you're the expert, please explain why my father (age 74) has owned and been around guns since growing up Northern Wisconsin. Hunting was part of his chores. He taught me gun safety before riding a bike. In his 20s, though, he was diagnosed with Bipolar disorder. On his meds he's as normal as you and me. However, off his meds he can be completely dangerous, dangerous to the point in 2017 his home was completely surrounded by the Lake County Sheriff's department in an armed standoff with me talking him down via phone through loud-speaker from Texas. Fortunately, I was able to convince him to lay down his weapons and surrender.

Pure nonsense, though...those guns and mental health. Utter fiction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
And mental illness doesn’t beget violence. The narrative that gun violence is a mental health issue only perpetuates the stigma against those who suffer from mental illness. To be clear, it’s a hate issue—which is not a mental illness.
100% agree! ALL factors need to be studied, NOT just "getting rid of the guns". Hate and anger has exploded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slim45 and Fluffles
I’m curious because I really truly personally dislike guns of any sort...didn’t Democratic Senators used to support the 2nd Amendment until fairly recently- and hasn’t a certain Socialist from Vermont supported 2A until recently?
Not throwing it in anyone’s face but there are a LOT of hunters out there, even in blue states like Pennsylvania. And they vote. Manchin in WV?
Just trying to keep it real.

You're correct about widespread gun ownership amongst Democrats, and politicians with a similar opinion, but up until very recently you could "support the 2A" and still be in favor of some regulation, on both sides of the aisle. It's only in the last 30-40 years has there been such a fervent tacticool lobby that lives by the slippery slope theory, strict grading of politicians by the same uncompromising groups and a sizeable single-issue voter base to solidify the position in law.

I don't doubt the rampant fear that has gripped us since 9.11 has something to do with it as well. It's horrifically incredible that that terrorist attack seems to have had, at least some, of it's intended destabilizing effect on our society come to fruition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obviously Oblivious
Also, since you're the expert, please explain why my father (age 74) has owned and been around guns since growing up Northern Wisconsin. Hunting was part of his chores. He taught me gun safety before riding a bike. In his 20s, though, he was diagnosed with Bipolar disorder. On his meds he's as normal as you and me. However, off his meds he can be completely dangerous, dangerous to the point in 2017 his home was completely surrounded by the Lake County Sheriff's department in an armed standoff with me talking him down via phone through loud-speaker from Texas. Fortunately, I was able to convince him to lay down his weapons and surrender.

Pure nonsense, though...those guns and mental health. Utter fiction.

Do you reckon his home would have been surrounded in a stand off if he didn't have guns?
 
How many sick people will be allowed to take other's lives before we address mental illness? (Insert method as you feel you need)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClarindaA's
Do you reckon his home would have been surrounded in a stand off if he didn't have guns?
Nope (or maybe not as likely) and my dad should not be allowed to own them. I finally convinced him of that and flew to Florida to retrieve them. Since then, he hasn't had another manic episode, so he thinks he's fine...wants to hunt, so he's restocked his inventory. As long as he's stable, he'll be fine. Sadly, there WILL be another episode. It's a matter of when, not if. The only meds proven to keep him stable is Lithium, which he's no longer able to take. After he killed two people in a fire car crash in 1993 he was court ordered to take his meds. However, in 2014 the VA took him off because of severe kidney damage. He's had 3 episodes since then.

Also, do you think the courts have EVER followed up on his status? Nope.
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: ThorneStockton
I wish you would stop with the mental health nonsense. Mental health problems are everywhere but America has by far the biggest issues with guns. They do not go hand in hand.
They do go hand in hand. Might not be in all cases, but to say mental illness and mass shootings don't go hand in hand is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClarindaA's
I have guns in my house and I'll be damned if they haven't attacked me. Let's see.......how many guns are in America? How many of these shootings do we have? What about Switzerland? They are required to own a weapon yet, you don't see this happening there. What's the difference?
 
Nope (or maybe not as likely) and my dad should not be allowed to own them. I finally convinced him of that and flew to Florida to retrieve them. Since then, he hasn't had another manic episode, so he thinks he's fine...wants to hunt, so he's restocked his inventory. As long as he's stable, he'll be fine. Sadly, there WILL be another episode. It's a matter of when, not if. The only meds proven to keep him stable is Lithium, which he's no longer able to take. After he killed two people in a fire car crash in 1993 he was court ordered to take his meds. However, in 2014 the VA took him off because of severe kidney damage. He's had 3 episodes since then.

Also, do you think the courts have EVER followed up on his status? Nope.

That sounds like a very difficult situation, I don’t envy you at all. Good luck man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
That sounds like a very difficult situation, I don’t envy you at all. Good luck man.
Thanks. I have contingency plans with his wife to get the guns out if he's headed on a manic path. Fortunately, after 47 years, I can tell when he's headed for an episode months before any mental health professional. His wife is getting there too (understanding the signs).

Fortunately, he's never shot anyone or even fired them towards anyone, but I'll be damned if I ever want there to be a first time. Typically it's just irritating behavior like blowing through savings, traveling a lot, talking stranger's ears off, etc. It's when he gets pushed to go back to the VA hospital violence ensues.
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: ThorneStockton
This is a gross overgeneralization and completely inaccurate. The United States is and has been for some time the most generous and giving country in the world. By quite a wide margin.

I honestly wonder if some of you have ever traveled outside of the US.

America is an imperfect country with imperfect citizens. But by a supreme measure it is still a beacon of humanity and civilization.

You're right and so is the other guy (though he said everyone, I think we know he means far more than any if us ever thought before the pandemic).

Americans ARE generous and giving. Many of them. Americans are also violent. Many of them. And Americans don't care about others, including other Americans. Many of them.

I have traveled abroad. Compared to European countries, the U.S. government is involved in less giving and generosity, though it's not completely bankrupt in that regard, and much more involved in making sure the most violent Americans have access to weapons of mass violence.

In South American countries, there is almost no generosity or giving by the government, a pittance compared to the U.S. On the other hand, they don't allow people to arm themselves like the U.S. does. In fact, no country in the world allows firearms to flow so freely between businesses and consumers. Most of the weapons used by Mexican cartels are from the U.S. The secondary sources for weapons are Russia and China.

Russia and China have much worse civil rights laws and human rights laws than the U.S., but they profit from international gun sales to terrorists, insurrectionists, and organized crime organizations just as the U.S. does. Interestingly, they are like the rest of the world in that they don't allow citizens to but and sell guns as part of the legal economy. In Russia, at least, it's not that hard to get an illegal firearm. Not easy at all in China, though.

When it comes to aiding violence, the U.S. government gives the green light to gun sellers anywhere and everywhere. It's the least regulated gun country in the history of the world. The US government lags behind Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK in generosity and giving as a government and the private giving in the U.S. is not used to serve the most needy and troubled in America.

So, there are plenty of Americans with as generous a spirit as anyone in Europe, Japan, etc. However, those generous people in America have very little government representation compared to the people who crave the freedom to be violent. And that's because of the amount of money the U.S. allows in it's elections. No other country comes close to allowing so much money to determine Democratic elections. And because of that, the wealthiest organizations and individuals in the U.S. rule the U.S., nit the people. It's one dollar = one vote, not one person = one vote.

We have been gradually moving away from a government of generosity and kindness towards its citizens over the last several decades more toward the type of authoritarian rule that Russia and China have. Europe, Japan, etc., have become kinder and more generous over those decades, has become even kinder and more generous over those decades while the U.S. has turned it's backs on the poor, the marginalized, etc. Our politics have become distrustful and punitive rather than kind and rewarding. We're producing the type of ****ed up people who commit mass murder and we're making it easy for people to kill masses of people while providing very little to the families of victims in terms of helping them recover AND helping to make the U.S. a safer, kinder, more generous place.

I wish it was otherwise, but I've seen it with my own eyes around the world. Yes, thankfully, we are not Brazil or India or Mexico or Uganda. We've got it better than them in terms of kindness and generosity. But we're lagging behind the most advanced technological and economic nations when it comes to taking care of our own.
 
They do go hand in hand. Might not be in all cases, but to say mental illness and mass shootings don't go hand in hand is wrong.

They don't go hand in hand outside of the U.S. No other country in the world makes it so easy for people with an inclination to violence, emotionally disturbed or not, to attain a firearm with the capacity to kill dozens within a minute. It just doesn't happen as many times or as frequently as it happens in the U.S. anywhere else in the world. You gave to go to war zones or be in a drug cartel to get those types of weapons outside of the U.S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT