By William A. Jacobson
Friday, December 14, 2012 at 9:23pm
I’ve been out of pocket pretty much since the first
sketchy reports this morning about a possible school shooting. A
meeting, a luncheon and then 6 hours in the car.
The car ride was enlightening because I followed the details of the
Connecticut school shooting exclusively by listening to the radio.
As in all these cases, the facts changed as the day went on. First,
it was a mass shooting with a semi-automatic assault rifle, which the
news reports noted would put back on the political table the
reinstatement of the assault weapons ban. The latest reports indicate
that an assault weapon was not fired.
Then it was a shooting with handguns, which the news reports noted
would put back on the political table hand gun control. The latest
reports indicate the assailant killed his own mother to get her legally
licensed and registered handguns, along with a long rifle which was not
fired..
Then reports trickled out that the assailant had a history of mental
illness and/or personality disorder. Those details are not confirmed as
of this writing. If true, it would fit the pattern of Jared Loughner
(who shot Gabby Gifford and killed several others) and James Holmes (who
killed 12 people at an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater), people who
were known to suffer from dangerous mental problems which were
not reported by professionals and educators out of a concern for patient
and student privacy rights and the lack of a specific demonstrable
threat.
What did not change was the politics. From the beginning of the day, the shooting has been used for political purposes.
When Obama, in his otherwise good speech, stated:
And we’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics.
I knew that the meaningful action would be all about politics.
Will we address the culture of violence generated by liberal Hollywood, evidenced in the Django movie and Jamie Foxx’s boast that he enjoyed killing white people in the movie? I doubt it.
Will we address mental health and educational privacy laws, which
instill fear of legal liability for reporting potentially violent
mentally ill people to law enforcement? I doubt it.
Will we address the sensitive civil rights issue of civil commitment laws? I doubt it.
Will we address the shooting by a frank and honest assessment of whether gun control in the form of a de facto ban on lawful possession of firearms really works, given level of violence in places like Chicago which have such a de facto ban already? I doubt it.
Banning guns not only is unconstitutional, in a free society it would
be no more effective than banning drugs, and truly would leave guns
only in the hands of criminals.
Will we address what kind of society we would have to have in order
to impose the type of gun control which exists in a place like China,
where an attack on school children by a knife-wielding assailant injured 22 students just yesterday, but did not result in any deaths? I doubt it.
What exactly is the “meaningful action” to be taken to prevent an
obviously sick person from killing his own mother and then going to a
kindergarten to shoot children?
The easy answer of more gun control would not have changed today. Today took place in a state which has gun control and in which all the rules were followed, except by the homicidal killer who would not have cared about any rules.
The seemingly easy answers will be all about the politics.
In the meantime, the other benefit of the long car ride was that I
had a lot of time to mourn the loss of the innocents today, to listen to
people in the community talk about how they rushed to school to find
their children, and to know that there but for fortune may go you or I.
No comments:
Post a Comment