Sunday, February 3, 2013

Haven't We Said This?

Reader Ed sends this in. I'd heard it, but this was the first direct link - and from CNN, too, so it's not like it's a "friendly" source...

Biden concedes new laws won't end gun massacres
Washington (CNN) – Vice President Joe Biden, who spearheaded the White House's effort to find ways of reducing gun violence, admitted to reporters Thursday that any measures passed by Congress would fail in totally eliminating gun deaths.
"Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down," Biden said, echoing remarks President Barack Obama made in January when he said "there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely."

This is EXACTLY what those of us that believe in the Constitution and respect the Second Amendment have been saying all along. Mass shootings are a statistical anomaly - more kids were killed by gunfire in Chicago last year, with its insanely tough gun laws, than in all school shootings period. Yet no one's suggesting that Chicago pass more gun laws - because IL already HAS everything they want: registration, background checks, an assault weapons ban in Cook County - everything they've suggested in the wake of the Newtown tragedy.

They're suggesting that millions of law abiding gun owners suffer the loss of their enumerated right because a tiny handful - less than the number of people struck by lightning - misuse the freedoms we all enjoy. The laws they suggest will not be obeyed by the criminals nor the mentally ill, nor will they do a damn thing about the millions of these types of firearms already in circulation. Semi-automatic, removable magazine rifles have been in widespread circulation for well over 50 years now - some, like the M1 carbine, for over 70 - and yet only in the past 20 years have we seen school and mass shootings increase.

Rather than look at this as a gun problem, we should be looking at it as a social problem. The people that perpetrate these sorts of mass shootings fit a definitive pattern, yet we decline to take even the most cursory of looks at the commonalities. All of the major spree shooters in recent memory - save the Aurora, CO and Newtown shooters, only because we haven't heard the medical reports yet - have been on very specific medications: Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) (hat tip to Dr. Gene Garris of America's Radio Show for pointing that out to me).

Yet no one's saying we should ban Prozac or Zoloft...

That is all.


Dave H said...

Biden's remarks beg the question, "Then why pass a useless law?" Those of us who understand why the Second Amendment exists know that a law is a dangerous thing, and should only be created when there's a clear need. That's why the founders created such an elaborate system of government, to vet every proposed law and enough people agreed it was really needed.

But I think the majority of people today don't see it that way. They think, "What's one more law? It doesn't affect me, so I don't care." They figure if some government official thinks there's a need, it must be true. They don't want to think about it themselves. That's what they elect representatives for.

But that answers the question about why pass a useless law. Representatives are elected to Do Something. So, to justify their jobs, they pass laws. Because that's really all they know how to do.

Daniel in Brookline said...

For once, I agree with Biden. Wasn't a school shooter stopped by an armed guard just the other day? And wasn't the shooter able to smuggle his gun past a metal detector first?

Eliminating all gun misuse is like eliminating every last traffic accident. It can't be done... which is why we expend effort in trying to minimize injuries when the accidents DO happen (e.g. seat belts and air bags).

Say, there's an idea - let's deal with shootings and car accidents alike. Every time a major car accident results in multiple fatalities, find out what models of cars were involved, and outlaw them. (In some cases, we can settle for just banning cosmetic features... but in other cases, we have to get specific. Why does anyone really need a V8, anyway?)

Right, Sen.Feinstein?

Roy said...

" justify their jobs, they pass laws."

That's most of it right there. Indeed, media reporters almost always call them "lawmakers" rather than what they are - representatives. Politicians always have to "do" something because they are so easily stampeded by the media.