"I want to be a veterinarian, and I want to go to Princeton University," a smiling 15-year-old girl told us when we were filming at KIPP: Believe, a high-performing charter school in New Orleans. Tell us more, we said. "I want to finish college because I want to have that pride in myself that, to know that I finished something, that I went somewhere and I finished it," Christine Marcelin added.
Her history teacher, Scarlett Feinberg, shared that view:
Christine always cared how other people were feeling, she put her team first always. She really cared that her friends were successful too, and she would talk to her classmates about being better. She embodied hope that we could be the change we want to see in New Orleans, and no matter how hard things were, she believed that we could all work together and make a difference. She was counting down the days to start high school because it was a step closer to college, getting her degree and beginning a career helping others.
If you read that paragraph carefully, you noted that Ms. Feinberg spoke about Christine in the past tense. She won't be going to Princeton, won't be a veterinarian and won't have a long life dedicated to rebuilding New Orleans and helping others.
Christine Marcelin was brutally murdered a few days ago.
So was another KIPP: Believe student, 15-year-old Brandon Adams. The 8th grader was fatally shot a few days before Christine was killed. Brandon was a successful student, a good athlete and a student leader, according to published reports. The two 8th graders were dating.
The school held a vigil, which you can see here.
The speculation is that Brandon got into a playground scuffle a day or two before he was murdered and that the likely killers were the young men he argued with. They went gunning for him and then, perhaps fearing that he had told his girlfriend the names of the guys he had fought with, kidnapped and executed her, then dumped her body in a deserted part of the city.
Six other New Orleans students have been shot and killed this year.
Kids murdering kids is not unique to New Orleans. We've seen mass murders on college campuses in Virginia and California, and school killings since the Columbine High School massacre in 1999 have become almost routine.
This is not happening because today's kids are different. Adolescents are no more volatile, insecure, energetic and full of doubt than any previous generation. What's different is that guns are available. We tolerate the proliferation of handguns because we won't confront the radical minority known as the National Rifle Association, the NRA. Although the NRA apparently doesn't even speak for the majority of gun owners, it has become one of the most powerful forces in American politics, powerful enough to scare politicians into silence or -- more likely -- acquiescence.
(Not all politicians are afraid. I live in a city whose mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has been forceful and courageous on this issue. He knows that the flood of guns endangers his police officers and his constituency, and he's willing to speak out. But even when other mayors join with our mayor, the Congress remains dominated by a collection of cowards.)
Because of the NRA, we are courting anarchy. A growing number of states have laws that allow proto-fascist vigilantes to strap on a gun and go searching for trouble, knowing that, even if they kill someone, they can walk because the law allows them to 'Stand Their Ground.'
The NRA's mantra, "Guns don't kill people. People kill people," is nonsense. People with access to guns kill people. The autobiography of charismatic educator Geoffrey Canada describes in vivid detail how things have changed. In fact, his brilliant title says it all: Fist Stick Knife Gun.
When I was a kid, we wrestled and maybe threw some punches when we were out of control mad. Today, we shoot someone.
But this column is not an assault on the wackos who run the NRA and people who believe that carrying a gun -- anywhere and everywhere -- makes everyone safer.
I want to know where all the leaders have gone. Where are the university presidents, once moral and ethical leaders of our nation? Remember Clark Kerr, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, James Bryant Conant, Fr. Timothy Healy, Bart Giamatti, Kingman Brewster and Robert Maynard Hutchins? The nation once looked to them for counsel, and they were willing to speak forcefully on the key moral issues of our time.
We are living in an age of economic inequality that is unprecedented, but have the presidents of Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Chicago or Princeton spoken out? They must be aware that nearly 25% of our children are growing up in poverty and being denied a fair shot at what we used to call The American Dream, and yet they are silent.
Gun violence is tearing our urban centers apart, and the blood that's most often shed seems to be that of promising young children. Why the deafening silence from our leading campuses?
I was on the campus of Notre Dame earlier this week and had the privilege of spending 30 minutes with Fr. Hesburgh, now nearly 95. 'Father Tim' happens to be one of my heroes, but this was the first time I'd had the opportunity to shake his hand. Though hampered by failing eyesight, he is as bright, strong and forceful as anyone I know, and I walked away from our meeting inspired by him -- but depressed by the resounding silence of those occupying university presidential suites today.
Why the silence? One Notre Dame sociologist suggested that presidents are too busy raising money these days. They can't risk offending the hedge fund managers they are counting on to write big checks.
If so, it's a bitter irony. As government continues to withdraw its support from higher education, higher education is becoming more dependent upon the generosity of the very wealthy... and that makes it difficult for university presidents to speak out about the dangers of income inequality (and perhaps other controversial subjects as well). By not supporting higher education, government is, it turns out, buying its silence! It's not pleasant to envision where this downward spiral leads.
Whenever you vote, think about Christine Marcelin, Brandon Adams, Trayvon Martin and the other young lives snuffed out because we haven't cared enough to insist on building a civil society.
Follow John Merrow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/john_merrow
Community Holds Vigil For Slain Students
Family: Teen shot and killed was honors student
Boy, 13, shot on way home is latest in string of young shooting victims
Wrong on both accounts. Kids are different. Specifically, they grow up in broken households that make them different. Far too many children are raised by grandparents, aunts, and cousins who are either unable or unwilling to properly raise children. Children are left to be raised by themselves, the streets, or by gangs. As a result, their future is almost guaranteed to end with prison or death.
On the other hand, guns are less available to children than they've ever been. There was a time when it wasn't uncommon for mid and highschool aged children to carry a rifle to school so they could engage in some impromptu plinking or hunting afterwards. Some schools even had on premise ranges where they taught marksmanship and gun safety. Now, children have their entire student careers ruined if they so much as point their fingers at something and say "bang".
The First step is to take advantage of high profile incidents.
The Second step is to marginalize legal gun use and historic precedent.
The Third step is to make some guns seem more dangerous than others, even if they are not.
The Fourth step is to register every sale.
The Fifth step is a robust “Shall Issue” permitting process.
The Final step is to encourage and incentivize the forfeiture of arms.
Total nonsense. Guns are harder to get now then they have ever been in America. Prior to the 1970's, guns were available through mail order and in most hardware stores. Background checks and bans on felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill from buying guns were minimal to non-existent.
Prior to 1934, it was easy to own machine guns. So why weren't there any incident at schools involving Johnny getting a hold of his dad's Tommy gun or granpa's Browning Automatic Rifle?
You can go to any gun show and stock up on assault weapons.
People that have access to cars kill people also. People with access to knives kill people also. People with access to ropes kill people also. People with access to clubs kill people also. People with hands kill people also. People with feet kill people also.
What does all those statement have in common? PEOPLE. It's PEOPLE that use or control those object that are used to kill people. Not the objects themselves.
So stop the temper tantrum and start trying to solve the root cause of the problem, not a by product or symptom of it. A band-aid won't stop the violence from happening. Takew away the guns and other forms of violence WILL INCREASE. That is not a 'maybe', or a 'not really' kind of thing. It's a REALITY and FACT kind of thing. A thing that is for sure and for cetrtain.
More than 8K people were killed by firearms in America in 2010.
Guns are destroying America. We're known the world over for our violence, and disregard for human life. See Trayvon Martin.
Wrong. Suicides should no be included in on gun deaths or violence, unless you can prove that the one committing suicide would not have used another form or tool for suicide. Something that can not be done because there are many other suicieds that do not use a gun.
And to let you know, there are an estimate of between 1.5 to 2.5 million defensive gun uese yearly in the US. That would mean a whole lot of drunken brawls resulting in deaths.
The number is 8,775 homicides. Of that number do you know how many criminal on criminal makes up that number? Estimates go as high as 75 to 80%. Criminal that should not have had a gun in the first place and did not have legal possession of the gun. Difference there. Not all of that number was an innocent victim walking by minding his own business when shot.
Yet there are other countries that are more violent on a more regular basis than the US. Mexico has a gun death rate 4X higher than ours. For murder rates, the top 5 countries in the world was Brazil at #1, India at #2, Russia at #3, China at #4, and Columbia at #5. And all 5 have stricter gun control laws than we do. Even the bastion of the gun banners utopia finger pointing for gun bans, the UK has a higher violent crime rate higher than ours. And since the gun bans they enacted, their gun death rate has doubled, their violent crime rates have risen by 300% and the UK is considered the most violent in Europe today.
See Trayvon Martin, see Sarah McKinnley.
Please tell me why your hero, Bloomberg, allows the wealthy and connected to obtain a firearms when the common man cannot? How many police officers are assigned to private security for Bloomies family and friends? Your noble hero is an elitest swine that thinks some people are more important than others.
Kinda interesting to note that NYC and Chicago(who have banned firearms) require a police officer to citizen ratio three times higher than other big cities on the west coast. Gun control in NYC seems to benefit the Police Officers Union more than anyone else.
The reason this approach does not work is because by blaming the firearm, we give implicit approval tothe violence and its actual causes. In simple terms, if your kid throws a rock through the neighbor's window, you don't run out and gather up every rock and put them under lock and key -- if you did your kid would think what he did was OK. Instead, you address the behavior and its root causes and engage in behavior modification -- a fancy term for correcting your kid.
But when it comes to violence and firearms, we have been taking the "lock up all the rocks" approach since the 1930s. When are we going to wake up and realize IT DOESN'T WORK!
What is worse is that by focusing on the object used for multiple generations now, the root causes have become more and more entrenched under each successive generation. THIS HAS TO STOP! The longer we blame the firearms, the longer this problem is going to continue. It is long past time for a paradigm shift.
I completely disagree. Firearms were more available in the past. The difference is that we have been glorifying violence. Our ethics have been changing. Our societal norms have been changing.
When we were kids, firearms were a normal household item. But we never really entertained the idea of using a firearm to address a personal problem. We knew better. We all carried knives on our belts. But we never thought about stabbing or slashing someone we had a beef with. Again, we knew better. We did not have 500 channels of TV shows showing people using violence to solve personal issues or shows making heros of such people. We did not have 300 movies a year come through the theater glorifying violence. We did not have XBox games, iPhone apps, PC games, etc. urging us to kill people. We had families which taught us right from wrong and which discplined us as needed when we messed up.
Kids of today ARE different. Their motivations are basically the same, but the kids are not.
So I'm remarking.
Guns were more readily available before the 60’s when crime violent crime rates were low. For the record, following an upsurge in the 80’s that peaked in the early 90’s violent crime rates and murder rates are finally back down to levels last seen in 1960’s. Oops!
Lie #2. “He (Bloomberg) knows that the flood of guns endangers his police officers and his constituency, and he's willing to speak out.”
NYC does indeed have strict handgun laws but the experts agree that the success NYC has seen in battling violent crime relates to Bloomberg’s “Broken Window” policies, not gun control laws. NYCPD is tough on little crimes therein reducing big crimes.
Lie #3. “People with access to guns kill people.”
Approximately 80 million gun owners in the U.S. harmed no human last year.
Want a hero who speaks to this topic? Visit the syndicated columns of Dr. Walter Williams. Be ready for some "tough love." He (partially) blames the nanny state that has replaced fathers in the name of social consciousness and mandated collective responsibilities. It seems there have been some unintended consequences of welfare and "entitlements."
You can stock up to your heart's content at any gun show.
Of the 8775 homicides committed by people who used a gun as their weapon of choice:
How many of those perpetrators were gang members?
How many had previous felony convictions?
How many were involved with drug related activity?
Survey says... about 80% of them fit into one or more of the above groups.
Instead of going after legal gun owners, lets go after parole board members who vote to allow the early release of violent criminals. If they vote to release "Tommy"and "Tommy" hurts someone after being released, the victim (or their survivors) should be able to sue the parole board members individually. Yes?
Frankly I don't care about the statistics. I care about the ethical tone of discourse in the country. The NRA and its ugly propaganda have created an environment of self-interest, machismo and entitlement that leads to more and more people "standing their ground" or believing that they are entitled to enforce their personal sense of justice - anywhere and anytime they want. Pretending this is about anything other than that is fundamentally dishonest.
Thanks for a good piece, John.
All of those were at one point considered 'reasonable'. Why should I or any other firearm owner listen to 'reasonable controls' now?
Tell me about the laws in NYC that would not require me to surrender my handguns. Show me how realistically possible it would be for me to relocate there and continue to CCW as I have for nearly 30 years.
For the record, during those three decades I've harmed zero humans while, as you say, I've existed in "an environment of self-interest, machismo and entitlement that leads to..." (me?) and "...more and more people "standing their ground" or believing that they are entitled to enforce their personal sense of justice - anywhere and anytime they want."
About those non-disarmament laws in NYC... please expound.