There have been horrific shootings going on in the United States for years.
There have been untold efforts to have conversations about more effective gun control.
According to Wikipedia information, gun homicides in the United States peaked at about 14,000 in 1993. Gun homicides declined to about 8000 in 2001, and in 2013 there were 11,208 gun homicides. Wikipedia says, "Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the U.S. gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher."
Many years of shootings have passed. There continues a regular onslaught on the TV news of more shootings, perhaps more frequently, and sobbing relatives and friends of victims. There are the especially painful killings of school children. There are also domestic violence and workplace shootings. There are scared police who go out to protect the citizens, who don't know what they may be encountering, and who shoot guilty and innocent persons as a result of hyper vigilance that the police may be shot at, and there are the police who themselves are killed in their efforts to protect the citizens.
Possibly a tide is turning, and more and more Americans are saying, please get rid of the guns. I don't want a gun, and this is too much to bear.
Possibly the conversations about gun control are getting more serious.
At the moment, there is no reason to think that the United States is going to reduce gun homicides without much stricter gun control than there is currently. Further, the prospects of increased gun control seem poor at the moment.
So, maybe more Americans want more conversation about gun control.
The reasons for guns would seem to be:
1. Defense of one's own person and property;
2. Resistance against tyrannical government;
3. Sporting pleasure; and
4. Psychological affinities and satisfactions that many Americans have from owning guns.
Let's put to the side for the moment reason number 2 of defense against a tyrannical government.
On reason number 1, defense of one's own person and property, if guns were outlawed, it is reasonable to believe that people would feel much safer and would think they don't need guns to protect their person and property. There would be much more effective policing for protecting citizens if every police call out was not suffused with fear of police being shot. Other advanced countries have increased safety of one's own person and property with gun restrictions.
Collectively, Americans need to decide whether their persons and property are safer in the current circumstances or whether they would be and would feel safer with strict gun control laws.
That leaves reasons 3 and 4. Reasons 3 could be accommodated under a regime of strict gun control laws. Reason 4 also might be accommodated.
The tide may be turning in favor of tight gun control. The tide may be so turning that an amendment to the Second Amendment could get adopted if that was needed to get sufficiently tight gun control.
Here's a proposal: Amend the Second Amendment so individual states could pass gun control restrictions as they chose, and no guns could be brought into the state that would violate the restrictions.
Those persons for whom gun ownership was a paramount source of happiness and well being could move to and congregate in states that had no gun restrictions.
Those for whom gun ownership was unimportant and who thought they would be safer where guns were restricted could move to states with tight gun controls.
Whether a state had tight gun controls or not could affect company decisions about where they wanted to be located. States with lax gun control laws could suffer economically because companies would not locate their facilities in those states in the belief that their employees preferred states with tighter gun controls.
Let that play out as it may, and let people make their choices about how important gun ownership was to them and which states they decided to live in.
That would seem to be a fair compromise.
Update 2/14/18
Survey of AL Law Enforcement re Police One March 2013 survey of what police officers think about gun control
It would be appreciated if offices and personnel in Alabama law enforcement would review the below March 2013 survey by Police One and answer the following three questions:
1. Are you aware of anything happening in the country that would lead you to think there is going to be a reduction of gun homicides to a much lower level than 8000 to 14,000 level of the past 20 years (say down to 3000 or below)?
2. If the Second Amendment was amended and individual States were permitted to ban guns, do you think States banning guns (or having extremely tight restrictions) could achieve much lower levels of gun homicides than they have had during the past 20 years?
3. Do you think law enforcement and safety would be much better in a State in which guns were banned (or which had extremely tight restrictions)?
PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives
Never before has such a comprehensive survey of law enforcement officers’ opinions on gun control, gun violence, and gun rights been conducted
Apr 8, 2013
In March, PoliceOne conducted the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation's attention in recent weeks: gun control.
More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals took part in the survey, which aimed to bring together the thoughts and opinions of the only professional group devoted to limiting and defeating gun violence as part of their sworn responsibility.
Totaling just shy of 30 questions, the survey allowed officers across the United States to share their perspectives on issues spanning from gun control and gun violence to gun rights.
Totaling just shy of 30 questions, the survey allowed officers across the United States to share their perspectives on issues spanning from gun control and gun violence to gun rights.
Top Line Takeaways
Breaking down the results, it's important to note that 70 percent of respondents are field-level law enforcers — those who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis — not office-bound, non-sworn administrators or perpetually-campaigning elected officials.
Breaking down the results, it's important to note that 70 percent of respondents are field-level law enforcers — those who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis — not office-bound, non-sworn administrators or perpetually-campaigning elected officials.
1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.
2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.
3.) About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.
4.) Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions. Similarly, more than 61 percent said they would refuse to enforce such laws if they themselves were Chief or Sheriff.
5.) More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent). See enlarged image
6.) The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.
7.) More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.
8.) More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.
9.) More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.
10.) When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required. About 42 percent say it should be required for all weapons, with the remainder favoring training classes for certain weapons.
11.) While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.
Bottom Line Conclusions
Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.
Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.
In fact, many officers responding to this survey seem to feel that those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent criminals.
Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.
The officers patrolling America’s streets have a deeply-vested interest — and perhaps the most relevant interest — in making sure that decisions related to controlling, monitoring, restricting, as well as supporting and/or prohibiting an armed populace are wise and effective. With this survey, their voice has been heard.
Doug Wyllie is senior contributor for PoliceOne, providing police training content on a wide range of topics and trends affecting the law enforcement community.Doug hosts the PoliceOne's Policing Matters podcast, and is the host for PoliceOne Video interviews.Doug is the 2014 Western Publishing Association “Maggie Award” winner for Best Regularly Featured Digital Edition Column, and has authored more than 1,000 articles and tactical tips. Doug is a member of International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA), an Associate Member of the California Peace Officers’ Association (CPOA), and a member of the Public Safety Writers Association (PSWA).Contact Doug at doug.wyllie@policeone.com.
Contacting Police Departments
I live in Mountain Brook. Per emails, I requested the Mountain Brook Police Department to hold a citizen seminar about what police think is needed to reduce gun violence. This request was denied. Others in Alabama should make similar requests to their police departments.
From: police dept <policedept@mtnbrook.org>
Date: Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Request for citizen seminar re reducing gun violence
To: Rob Shattuck <rdshattuck@gmail.com>
Cc: <barlowd@mtnbrook.k12.al.us>, <hooda@mtnbrook.k12.al.us>, <claytond@mtnbrook.k12.al.us>, <chamber@mtnbrookchamber.org>
At this time, the Police Department is not interested in hosting such a meeting.
Chief Cook
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Rob Shattuck <rdshattuck@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sir,
I have not received a response to the below email. I would appreciate a response.
Thank you.
Rob Shattuck
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshattuck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:55 AM
Subject: Request for citizen seminar re reducing gun violence
To: policedept@mtnbrook.orgCc: barlowd@mtnbrook.k12.al.us, hooda@mtnbrook.k12.al.us, claytond@mtnbrook.k12.al.us, chamber@mtnbrookchamber.orgDear Sir,
I am a Mountain Brook resident.
I would like to request that the Police Department hold a citizen seminar in which the Police Department discusses its views about what the Department thinks is necessary for the country to reduce its gun violence.
I am aware of a 2013 Police One survey of what police think about what will reduce gun violence, and a seminar might take that survey as a starting point.
I have incorporated the Police One survey at the following blog link of mine: http://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2018/02/lets-talk-guns.html.
Please let me know whether the Police Department will schedule a seminar as I have requested.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
Cleveland Assault Weapons Ban (added 2/18)
From: Dennis Kucinich <info@kucinich.com>
To: rdshatt <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Sat, Feb 17, 2018 12:21 pm
Subject: Fwd: This is why communities can’t ban assault weapons - let’s change that
From: Dennis Kucinich <info@kucinich.com>
To: rdshatt <rdshatt@aol.com>
Sent: Sat, Feb 17, 2018 12:21 pm
Subject: Fwd: This is why communities can’t ban assault weapons - let’s change that
|
No comments:
Post a Comment