A Reporting Suggestion For Wisconsin Media
How about a version of this New York Times feature?
The Gun Report: March 9, 2013
 |
And my answer to the Times' question of the day - - how many people did you know who were killed by a gun - - is two (changed from the original "one").
9 comments:
mine is also one.
Self-inflicted.
To ZRM: Had to correct to two.
I've had more friends injured by snow blower accidents than by firearms. (yes, I know that doesn't speak well to their intelligence level, but before you get to smart about it, one was a Democrat and the other un-political)
Should we consider an organization to ban snow blowers, or at least make people take a 3 hour safety class before they buy one?
Mine is seven, all high school classmates who were killed while in combat "defending US global interests" around the world.
None of the seven would have believed what this country has come to.
A Congress bought and paid for by the NRA to bring battlefield assault weapons to our city streets to be available to used to kill kids in school.
An insult to all those who died in combat "fighting them over there so we won't have to fight them here".
Here is a thought why not give the gun companies two options.
Sell whatever guns you want to the military but those weapons cannot also be sold to civilians.
Here is how. The government by law will not buy any weapon that is sold to civilians.
Civilians maintain their right to own and bear arms.
The gun companies continue to make and sell guns to the government and civilians but by choices made by the gun companies not the same guns to both.
The military will not buy guns sold to civilians.
This does not infringe on 2nd amendment rights of civilians.
The government tells the companies "make a free market choice who is your best customer" ?
Put me down for two. One shot by police while unarmed. One murdered by his drunken father.
the question, of course, was not INJURIES, but FATALITIES.
I know that moving the goalposts is a tradition with some people but could you get back to us when there's a snowblower death?
People get injured all sorts of ways. What distinguishes firearms is the overwhelming severity of the injuries. unlike other equipment such as snowblowers, saws, or heck, LADDERS; guns are designed to kill. Those other things are designed to do something else entirely.
or at least make people take a 3 hour safety class before they buy one?
It's not a bad idea. Why not? we make people take safety courses before learning how to drive.
I teach the general shop safety portion of the FIRST Robotics team I mentor. Not only do we do it every year, to keep good safety practices uppermost in every team member's work, but I have noted that my own use of tools around the house has gotten more aware of safe practices.
You sure that Being snotty about safety around tools and industrial equipment is the way you want to go?
One fatality for me. Adult male, not in the service, not a hunting accident.
But IMO playing a numbers game in this manner is exactly that - a game. Idiot newspaper sidebar surveys, a pox on 'em all! I've gotten emailed in the past "there's a poll over at XYZ, we need to pump up the numbers for our side, dump cookies and vote again if you can" etc etc. Gimme a break.
But seriously, if anything has been proven in the time since the Newtown shootings it's that this is exactly the time NOT to change the gun laws, rather than the "perfect time". Good laws that most people can feel comfortable with do not get written in haste, during times of unhinged emotion-driven squawking chaos and media orgies. Addressing gun issues in a rational manner will not happen after a Newtown any more than you can expect reasonable National Security Policies to be written in the immediate aftermath of planes flying into towers in south Manhattan. Wild-eyed bandwagon-riders piling on Gun legislation will not produce good laws anymore than the wild-eyed opportunists who crapped out the PATRIOT Act. Legislate during fear, repent at leisure. There is so much in the PATRIOT Act for which there is no evidence that it actually will prevent future attacks. Just as the current behavior amongst those who claim they are "solving violence in America" will never prevent the next Newtown, it will still happen.
In fact, this social chaos we've been having over guns has exploded the fear on both "sides", and intensified the gridlock on the issue to the point that everyone is pretty much caught in cement. No movement possible. And since people are obviously stock-piling now as a result of all the shrieking, if gun laws ever do tighten up there will clearly be an enormous black-market in guns for which people are now having ample time to prepare. God, it's a damn mess. The situation is now worse, not better. Going balls-to-the-wall with this immediately during Newtown was sheer political greed. Problem solving will not come from this social trend we're in right now. Newspapers can quite the gimmicky stuff anytime now, we'll all be better off.
a-toxin, that might be a logical argument if any other gun legislation had been passed at all in any of the intervening periods.
At this point, the mass shootings are coming at a rate that there isn't any more time between them when the parties are feeling less emotional about it.
As has been said, if not now, when? And how many more dead people are acceptable before we start to make some changes?
Post a Comment