iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jess Coleman

GET UPDATES FROM Jess Coleman
 

We Can Save Lives, Whenever You're Ready

Posted: 07/20/2012 1:25 pm

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of waking up to news of innocent lives being taken away. I'm sick of hearing about college students, high school students, Congresswomen, and now moviegoers being shot at and killed. And I'm even more sick over the fact that no one seems to care.

President Obama released a statement this morning, stating that "we are united as one American family" in the aftermath of a Colorado shooting that killed 12 and wounded around 40 others. The President is right -- this is one of those rare opportunities for us to come together as one nation. But for all the president's nice words, come tomorrow, there will be no conversation about how to prevent this from happening again. And trust me, it will.

When 3,000 people were killed on September 11, 2001, we went to war. But every year in this country, more than 30,000 people are killed by firearms. Not only have we not gone to war, but we have failed to do anything -- anything -- that can save thousands of lives.

At the same time, the National Rifle Association works tirelessly to uphold the status quo -- standing by, ready to prey on any member of Congress who dares to bite into this incredible trend of violence. And don't bother asking what the NRA thinks about shootings like those that occurred this morning, because, in the words of their president, it's against policy to comment on a shooting. How convenient.

The United States is home to 300 million privately owned guns -- the highest amount of any country in the world. Next is Yemen -- maybe we should start learning from them.

One moment, we all shake our heads in disgust whenever innocent lives are taken, and then turn the other way and wait for the next tragedy to strike. Tightening gun laws to prevent the sale of assault weapons, or closing the gun show loophole, are simple solutions that could save tens of thousands of lives every year. But no one seems interested.

There are those that claim an unquestionable right to hold their guns, appealing to freedom and the Second Amendment. But all legal theory aside, I hardly think any of our founders would stand today and firmly invoke the right to hold concealed firearms. Ideally, we could all walk around with whatever we want attached to our belts. But so long as people continue to die, I'm sorry, but you're just asking too much.

And there will also be those who shout the same, flawed argument -- that if someone else was holding a gun, all 12 of those deaths could have been prevented this morning. But even in Colorado, where gun laws are very loose, no one came to the rescue and shot down the killer. Even so, why would you take the chance -- why not just keep the gun out of the hand of the killer in the first place?

 

Follow Jess Coleman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@jesskcoleman

FOLLOW TEEN
 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
09:16 PM on 08/14/2012
From the article: " . . . I'm sorry, but you're just asking too much."

You don't understand, Coleman--we're not "asking."
07:16 AM on 07/23/2012
Any time you legally purchase a gun--which is virtually never how criminals obtain weapons--a phone call is placed to the ATF checking your background, checking for outstanding warrants, etc. Holmes didn't order 6,000 rounds of ammo in one shot. He placed multiple orders spaced over 2 months.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
schaf1
07:47 PM on 07/22/2012
Guns are a right, but only if in this day an age there's a waiting period and a real background check is performed on the potential purchaser. Under no circumstances should someone be allowed access to an automatic weapon or 6,000 rounds of amunition. There's a middle ground and we need to find it and pressure our somewhat uselss legislators to act appropriately.
06:12 AM on 07/23/2012
The AR-15 was a semi-automatic rifle. Automatics have to predate 1986, cost $15,000+, and require direct BATFE monitoring. All competitive shooters have thousands of rounds of ammunition and reload their own. Gun control does not work. The theater was posted as a no carry zone. There were no security people provided. The back door was not alarmed. There was not a posting stating that "This no carry zone will not stop a mad man with a gun. You will be defenseless. Enter at your own risk." The theater chain may eventually be sued out of existence. More than eight million people in this country have a sense of duty to legally carry a concealed handgun. About one in twenty-seven adults now carry. If there were 200 adults in that theater, there could have been seven who carried had they been permitted. Many carry handguns having laser grips that project a dot at the point of impact that would allow hiding low behind cover and holding the gun to the side and shooting up for a head shot. There are less than 680,000 non-federal police in this country. Because of 24 X 7 coverage, only about one quarter of those are on duty at any time. That equates to one on-duty policeman for every 1800 citizens. There is no way the police can protect us from ourselves. This senseless tragedy will convince more people to be responsible for their own security.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sydkick1
07:03 AM on 07/23/2012
why should there be a limit on ammunition?

do you think one person can carry 6000 rounds on their person?

with the exception of FFL Class 3 license holders, no one in the United States has access to automatic weapons..
04:56 PM on 07/22/2012
To imply that gun owners in America don't care is as ludicrous as the number the Brady Campaign came up with about how many people in America are killed each year by guns. (That number from the Brady Campaign was proven to be bogus and fabricated by its own words.)

We care more than most non-gun owners because these heinous acts reflect on us just as blaming all Germans for what the Gestapo’s did to the Jews or the Japanese People for what the Japanese war machine did on December 7, 1941.

It's amazing how many foreign people came to America because they adore our free country but don't know that the freedom they enjoy is because we had our guns on the ready. Otherwise, we would be speaking German or Japanese and they would have no where else to go. We despise the tragedy, but we don't despise the freedom that it was stolen from.
06:20 PM on 07/22/2012
With all respect, we fought in the same wars! Australia had the Japanese on our doorstep with the bombing of Darwin in the Northern Territory. We enjoy freedom as well, hard won by our brave servicemen and women, but no one expects or tolerates those battles continuing on our streets today. For the most part, we leave the guns in the hands of the people trained and with a good reason to use them.
07:27 AM on 07/23/2012
ollieandbiss, You twisted the point I made about blaming the people of today’s world for those twisted minds in the past. Just as blaming the many honest and upstanding licensed citizens of today who are those same well trained former military, security, and police officers you tout. Do you not see the injustice in blaming honest citizens for what the thugs and murders do with those instruments? Taking guns away from those who protect our country and the innocent people of our communities won’t be free.
America is not Australia, nor is it a current Socialist nation such as the European community is becoming. None of these maintain the standard that led America to become what it is in the world today. We took a stand in WWII and when it was all said and done America came out on top..., and behind that victory was our Constitution. Not the Constitutions of Russia, Europe, Australia, Sweden, or Africa or any other country.
Furthermore, the notion that the framers of our Constitution would have not have chosen to word the Constitution the way they did if they could see us today is, once again, unfounded and ludicrous. There are just as well thought of people in our country today who fully understand what the framers meant and who firmly stand behind the constitution as it is written. They would write it today with the same intention today as they did back then.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Edmcsingin
Pedaling uphill backwards.
07:27 AM on 07/22/2012
You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first. Thinking you could have kept a gun out of that guys hands is ludicrous. This person was normal enough to go unnoticed by the few people who knew him. How is a complete stranger going to be able to tell.
The number of people in that theater and no one saw fit to illegally carry a concealed weapon is a testament to how law bidding and safe people feel in this country. The answer isn't the highly improbable task of keeping guns out of some random persons hands but, to place security in our more vulnerable gathers.
01:17 AM on 07/22/2012
Following this story from afar, from Australia. Our last shooting massacre was in 1996, 18 years ago, at Port Arthur in Tasmania. Want to read a gut wrenching account of what people in these situations live and die like? Read this account on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

Then read the part about how our Federal Government took absolutely no prisoners as it toughened gun laws nation wide, instituting an expensive buy back scheme. People said it wouldn't work, it was an over reaction, it was politicising the tragedy etc etc, but we have had no similar events since.

Of course our countries have different histories. Guns never proliferated here as they do in your country. But it is unbelievable that citizens -- mentally ill citizens at that -- can go arm themselves like paratroopers. And then someone says "oh, if only some of those people in the cinema were concealing weapons and could have taken the shooter down."

Got to tell you: from over here it all looks and sounds INSANE. Really, get your government to do something about gun control. Get the guns out of the hands of crazy people. Kids should be able to go to the movies without being shot in the head. It makes me heart sick!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
08:05 PM on 07/21/2012
My giving up my rights won't make anybody else any safer, and besides, it's not even open to discussion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
You can't take the sky from me.
06:58 PM on 07/21/2012
I know for a fact that most high school students aren't this detached from reality. I was a high school student until fairly recently.
04:34 PM on 07/21/2012
In any given year 30-40% of homicides committed in this country are done without a firearm. This tells me that homicide can be accomplished quite easily without a firearm and that with or without firearms there are violent people amongst us. I also know that criminals would not be deprived of guns if a ban were enacted. They would become more expensive, but they would be just as available as heroin or cocaine. They would probably be made available by the very same organizations.

I also know that the USDOJ says firearms are used to legally defend one’s life 1.5 million times per year in this country. To be used legally there must be an imminent threat. If even 1% of those cases resulted in the victim dying because guns were banned our murder rate would double. If we assume a more realistic expectation of 10% of them being killed and the rate would become 20 times greater.

So called “assault weapons” are used in less than 1% of all homicides, so banning them wouldn’t really change anything either.

Banning guns might prevent something like this from happening, but the math tells us that while these twelve might have lived, thousands more innocent defenseless people would be murdered in their stead.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
charleyvldm9
He thinks outside the box.
12:04 PM on 07/21/2012
Do you know that I cant purchase cyanide (a chemical poison) to do my goldsmith work,without presenting my goldsmith license, now can you dig that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:46 AM on 07/21/2012
It is truly sad that it takes a tragedy for us come together as a united nation. Unfortunately it does not really bring us together. Yes, we all feel for the tragedy that has happened, and we all wish that there was something that could be done about it, but it won't.
Dem's are going to say that if we had more gun laws it would have prevented this tragedy from happening, but it really wouldn’t
Repub's are going to say that it's not the gun's fault and laws would not prevent this from happening, and it's true.
I am for stronger gun control, but it's not really laws that are going to change the mentality of the US. Gun control will only make it tougher to get guns, but it will not stop the black market, in fact it will make it worse. We will never stop gun violence until we get rid of the military complex that we have built the backbone of this country. We give billions of dollars each year to manufactures of weapons, which in turn provide funds to the political system to ensure that guns will be available to whoever wants them. How can the country set an example for its citizens, or make sensible laws, when we are always at war. We are always at war, it is in our blood, it is in our education and until we break this cycle, events like this will continue to happen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JD Salinger
My micro-bio is invisible to the naked eye.
10:59 AM on 07/21/2012
Prohibition of guns - even just some guns - will fail as badly as all other prohibition has. These shooting tragedies are very sad. Someone dying of a heroin overdose is sad too, but prohibition hasn't stopped it from happening. If we make guns into a black market item we will increase crime and lose all control for background checks and registrations. Otherwise law-abiding citizens will be thrown in prisons for refusing to give up the guns that were once a 2nd amendment right. People who don't respect the law will still be able to get whatever gun they want, with gun cartel dealers profiting handsomely. Overall, a ban on guns is a horrible solution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackraisin
Life, Liberty, Property.
01:20 AM on 07/21/2012
"There are those that claim an unquestionable right to hold their guns, appealing to freedom and the Second Amendment. But all legal theory aside, I hardly think any of our founders would stand today and firmly invoke the right to hold concealed firearms. Ideally, we could all walk around with whatever we want attached to our belts. But so long as people continue to die, I'm sorry, but you're just asking too much."

Our founders could never envision the internet where anyone can exchange ideas freely with others on a wide-scale instantaneously. Does that mean we ban the internet? You are trying to suppress a civil right protected by the Constitution. Murderers and rapists arguably get off on 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment rights, should we toss those out because its "just asking too much?" What if torturing prisoners or even terrorists could yield information that arguably saves lives, should the 8th Amendment go too, because its just asking too much to forego? Banning groups of 3 or larger from congregating would prevent criminal gangs from meeting on a wide-scale, want to toss the 1st Amendment out?

A civil right should not be waived for everyone because some idiot commits a crime. We don't ban speech when the Westboro cult waves their terrible signs.
01:14 PM on 07/21/2012
So, the answer is to do nothing? I'm not sure what Jess Coleman (the author of the article) is suggesting, but why aren't we demanding better background checks, making gun safety classes mandatory, or making an order of over 6,000 rounds of ammunition with overnight shipping illegal? Gun owners are in love with their guns and their rights to own guns, but don't legitimate gun owners also want better regulation over the sale of guns? Do they really need to own that semi-automatic rifle RIGHT NOW?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackraisin
Life, Liberty, Property.
02:32 PM on 07/21/2012
FFL holders must perform background checks on everyone purchasing a gun. The problem is without prior restraint, we can't stop someone who hasn't gone crazy yet, from going crazy in the future because we just don't know.
04:40 PM on 07/21/2012
I’m thinking a gun safety class wouldn’t have helped in this situation. He bought the weapons over a series of months so waiting periods wouldn’t have stopped him either. He only used perhaps a couple of hundred rounds, which he could also have picked up 50 rounds at a time over a couple of months.
04:39 AM on 07/23/2012
First of all the definitions and merits of this particular "civil right" are open to interpretation.

This is what amendment says:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

There is a reason why militia appears early on in the sentence. If the intent was to simply say that all people should have a right to guns then it would have been much simpler to just state that with militia being simply one of the implied intents.

Regardless of that a historical perspective on the environment people lived in has to be taken into perspective.

Some idiot may commit a crime, but crimes are not just committed by idiots. What we can do is to take away a powerful and effective tool, from every idiot and paranoid schizophrenic, designed explicitly for killing life beings very fast and from a safe distance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sydkick1
07:13 AM on 07/23/2012
actually this particular "civil right" isn't open to determination. the Supreme Court decided that it was an individula right and had nothing to do with militia and government regulation.

McDonald v. Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that determined whether the Second Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
08:36 PM on 07/20/2012
The way to prevent this is to seriously invest ourselves in the community once again. What passes for libertarianism is more like anarchy; what passes for compassion is more like the Levite showed the Samaritan, politicians would rather fund the failure of abstinence only (complete with outright lies) than the far more successful at preventing pregnancy Planned Parenthood! We even have politicians who want to ban contraception!
If we want to end, or at least greatly reduce, violence, we need to address the need of women to prevent unwanted pregnancy, make school cool, put honor and ethical behavior back into the definition of success, stop fribbling our energy away on homophobia, and start putting both time and money into the nation, state, and city we live in.
Simple? Yes. Easy? No.
Mike Block
Mikeology (mycology)- the study of Fun Guy (fungi)
02:40 PM on 07/20/2012
Sorry, Jess. This is never going to happen. People will always have guns. Although I'm experienced with them, I don't own one and, with 2 kids, probably never will. The only exception I can see to this stance is if I move out of NYC - my dream - and find myself in the wilderness where my family might come face-to-face with a: moose, bear, mountain lion, or wolf (again, my dream - I'd love to live somewhere that wild).

Regardless of the laws on the books, the killer in CO had: a tear gas grenade, assault rifle, handgun and bulletproof vest. There's no reason for any civilian to own any of these things. The argument could be said that a handgun is needed for self-defense. Fine, what about the rest of the arsenal he was carrying. Also, I'd rather have a shotgun than a handgun any day.

I was mugged at an ATM by someone with a glock. I THOUGHT my way out of it. He got nothing and I didn't get shot. He asked me for money out of my checking account, I had 1500 in savings, no checking account. When the transaction came up as invalid, I told him I was waiting for a check to clear and had no cash as of yet. I couldn't help him. He quietly left the bank.

I'd rather have quick wits than a gun of any kind any day!

Excelsior!
04:37 PM on 07/21/2012
So you are alleging you could have thought your way out of this situation?
Mike Block
Mikeology (mycology)- the study of Fun Guy (fungi)
06:23 PM on 07/21/2012
I never thought I could have thought my way out of a mugging when the bad guy had a handgun. I just worked with what was there in the situation. At the time, I had martial arts teachers telling me I did the absolute wrong thing, but they were proud of how I handled it. 
I'm not alleging anything. Since then, however, I'm MUCH, MUCH more aware of my surroundings. Since the ATM incident, I have a family and I'm thinking of them constantly. I, definitely,would have noticed someone leave via the emergency exit and come back in armed to the teeth. What I would have done next, I can't say. I probably would have died, but I don't think as many others would have. I just don't know for sure and hope I never have to find out.