The Gun Shy Candidates: Clinton and Obama

Let's hear it for guns!

It's really getting dangerous in Los Angeles. The last two weeks we've seen so many random shootings I'm starting to lose track. I would say it's beginning to feel like Baghdad only that wouldn't be quite fair. The U.S. troop surge has really tamped down the violence in Iraq's carefree, cosmopolitan capital. Oh, except for this week's double suicide bombing, which killed more than 50 people and wounded more than 120 others. But that was a fluke, right?

But, truly, the gunfire in our sunny, palm-tree-lined streets is getting a bit much. A week ago one of my writing students, a high-school English teacher in South LA, walked into class practically shaking. That afternoon his students had just left school when a gunman started shooting at a bus stop down the street. His kids sprinted back to class. None of them got hit, but five children from a nearby middle school did. The last I heard, the 12-year-old girl who was struck in the chest was still in critical condition. I'm sure she'll pull through!

Sadly, that's not the case for Jamiel Shaw, who was shot multiple times last Sunday night by a couple of strangers three doors from home. Oh, if only the 17-year-old had been armed! I'm sure he could have got off a few rounds at his young male killers before falling to the pavement. Even though it was dark and he might have accidentally sprayed some other teen walking home.

Oh, well!

Instead the high-school football star who was headed for college died. And Jamiel's little brother Thomas was said to ask their father, "Dad, are they going to kill me, too?"

I think Thomas's dad should consider buying him a gun. I've heard that Glocks are light, fit nicely in the palm. That way the nine-year-old can protect himself if a kerfuffle breaks out during recess. That's what happened to my son. When he was nine, an eight-year-old boy in his class threatened to shoot him after my son called him "out" in handball. Thank goodness the kid was shipped off to another school!

Speaking of boys, did I mention the six-year-old who's now on life support? He was riding in his family's SUV when a hail of bullets from another car shattered the back window. One struck him in the head. The first grader is in critical condition.

Oh, and I almost forgot Lawrence King. Though, technically, the eighth grader was not from Los Angeles but Oxnard, California, a blue-collar community up the coast. Two days before Valentine's Day, and oddly, just as the traumatized students at Northern Illinois University were bracing to return after their own massacre, the 15-year-old was shot in the head during English class by a 14-year-old boy. He apparently took issue with Lawrence's "effeminate dress," as one local story put it, and has been charged with first degree murder with the special allegation of a hate crime.

I told you there were a lot of shootings.

What to do? Maybe what we need in response to all this gun carnage and mayhem and violence is more guns! That's what lawmakers in about 15 states are proposing. They want college students to be able to pack concealed weapons so they can defend themselves. No matter that law enforcement isn't crazy about the idea. Or that police and others actually skilled at gun play hit their targets a mere 20 percent of the time.

A few enterprising lawmakers, like State Senator Karen S. Johnson of Arizona, would have guns in elementary schools too. As Johnson, the sponsor of a firearms bill that recently passed the Arizona senate, told the New York Times: "I feel like our kindergartners are just sitting ducks."

That part of Johnson's bill didn't fly. But can't you just picture it? Instead of duck, duck goose, teachers could do target practice on the yard. Shoot, shoot Britney!

Despite the horrific school shootings of late and the rush to solutions, there are a few politicians whose voices have been silent on the issue.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

I wonder what their views are on gun control?

But I guess in Texas and Ohio, and Wyoming, and Pennsylvania, they don't have these kinds of problems.

Follow Mona Gable on Twitter: www.twitter.com/monalg

Comments

[vinny]

you are a simple candidate, simple slogan, simple solution kinda person...

the violence in our society is not caused by video games or guns, but by fundamental problems in our social institutions that place people in precarious and uncertain situations in life.

wilhelm below is right. we need a less isolated, and more social america. we need to discuss the deeper issues for a change, rather than pressing politicians for bandaid politics.

[SicPlurisPoenaPrestantia]

Barack has made his position clear: he's for responsible, sane gun registratoin policy without infringing on the individual's right to keep and bear arms under the Second Ammendment. If you're looking for someone to take away all the guns, he ain't the one. Indeed, he affirms this right as a personal right, and I believe that under an Obama Administration the real contributors to this tragic wave of shootings -- the ramshackle US Mental Health Care System, is likely to be re-imagined and re-vamped to help intercede with these nutcases before they go Rambo.

As far as Hillary's position, just imagine whichever position is going to be your perfect answer and imagine it coming out of her mouth in bland, ambivalent language. It won't matter anyway, because she could never get any kind of radical gun-control legislation through Congress (say, something like the completely pointless Assault Weapons Ban that did NOTHING to curb the tide of violence in this country). But she'd tell you whatever it is you want to hear in order to get your vote.

[Rightiesrule]

Obama favors a total ban on semi automatic handguns and would lke to ban handgun sales to city residents. He's ducked votes on the gun issue in his state senate but he still has an anti gun record. Ducking a vote doesn't make you pro gun it just makes you dishonest and a coward.

[rebeccaj]

Those votes and comments were from the 1990s when he represented an urban population in Chicago which suffered from horrible gun violence.

His Presidential platform does not mention any of these issues. Obama is now running a national campaign and he knows that "bans" have no place in it.

You are just reading the NRA propaganda that they keep sending out so you will keep voting for Republicans -- and the NRA leadership can keep their $200+ lobbying salaries in DC and spending $1 million+ a year helping to elect Republicans.

You are dupes.

[SamThornton]

Speaking as an extremely left wing Librul, I would be perfectly content to abide by the results of any national referendum presented directly to the people on any item in the right wing agenda. Let the majority of Americans decide on guns, marriage, abortion, war, economic justice, social justice, war, and peace.

The fact that this is unlikely to happen in any of our lifetimes speaks to the current corruption of our political process.

[Rightiesrule]

The American people decide on guns, marriage, abortion, war, etc at every election.

[1will]

The Constitution can be amended to repeal the 2nd Amendment. There is a method available if enough people want it done. The problem is instead of using an available method anti gunners and their politicians always try to do an end run around the Constitution. But hey, "It's for the children." Right?

[wilhelmR]

Revamping the School System (from a Learning Institution to a Social Interaction and more), revamping the Penal System (more than 1 million adults in jail, some get out with minor infractions but with a record: "No Way Out"), revamping the un (Justice) System where Prosecutors are promoted by the % of WON cases (JUST or UNJUST), revamping the Tax Code, prosecuting ALL cases of psychological harm, including bullying at any age or in the family home, making a very serious felony the cruelty to animals (FBI profiling considers that most Serial Killers started being cruel to animals + $200 for killing one’s dear and attached pet is an insult!), stop thinking that the model of taking care of the homeless is for the Faith-based Organizations (that is a subsidy to Party’s loyalty and never reaches the homeless), organize schools more according to modern management (Inside out and not looking top down: Principal, Social Workers, Guidance Councilors, and Police should know what’s going on with very misbehaved students. Do not placed the burden of Classroom Management on teachers: They are Educators and not “dominatri­x.”) Build more Medical Schools and stop catering to the Lobby of the American Medical Association that RESTRICTS the number of Doctors graduating each year and therefore interfering with a free market and restricting the supply side of Doctors. The national Health Insurance could contemplate the many retirees from companies like GM and include them in the Plan (this way GM could become much more competitive) and if you add all these plus Medicaid and Medicare costs it will pay the National Plan by itself.

[Rightiesrule]

Absolutely no one is advocating the arming of children despite the author's rhetoric. It seems she is blaming guns for the deaths of those LA children. Perhaps she could consider that criminals and crazies don't obey the law. They will always get a gun if they want one. As for the parents that leave a gun accessable to children. Charge them, try them and lock them up. Stop putting the blame on the 80 million gun owners that obey the law day in and day out.
By the way, Utah allows Concealed Carry on campus. You must be at least 21 years old, trained, fingerprinted and investigated. The few students that choose to carry on campus are adults and have conducted themselves properly. If they hadn't this author and Paul Helmke would have been dancing in the streets while informing us of their misdeeds. It is interesting to note that no one in Utah has turned college classrooms into killing zones as they have in colleges that are Gun Free Zones. It's hard to argue with success.

[Rightiesrule]

You don't have to wonder what Obama or Clinton's views on guns are. They are against them, would ban them if possible and will sign any anti gun law that passes their desk. The fact that you can't get an opinion on the gun issue from them is a reflection on their character and honesty (or lack thereof).

[Toonadude]

The Gonzales / Lautenberg Bill should have shown us where the Bush administration is coming from on guns. Basically, it would have had the "Deciderer" deciding whether you and I get to have guns based on his perception of your terror risk. But then I believe we have all seen where this group stands in terms of character / honesty.

[LizM]

The question is...do you want to see another Republican in the White House, or a Democrat..­.such as the choices in that regard are...?

A wise man (he actually blogs around here, from time to time) once suggested that Democrats should just let the Republicans have their guns and their word (marriage) and concentrate on other issues.

Unfortunately - or fortunately, depending on your particular POV - a majority of the electorate aren't in the same place as you when it comes to gun control. And so, you may want to hope that issue doesn't become front and center in the general...­if you know what I mean, and I'm not sure that you do.

[Rightiesrule]

Good point. The candidates should lie or hide their opinions on the gun issue from the electorate until their in office. Then instead of doing what they were elected to do they can advance their own agendas.
Is their any question as to why gun owners distrust anti gunners and your politicians?

[LizM]

Actually, I think you may have missed the point...it certainly wasn't a particularly good one! There are issues, this time around, that are far more important and even more "life and death" than gun control.

All I'm saying is that gun control should be the least of voters' concerns. Of course, the electorate have long ago decided that they don't care about what really matters here...and THAT would be a good point!...a­nd one that EVERYONE should be very worried about.

[TuffPosh]

Here's an idea: instead of grabbing guns, how about the Dems oppose illegal immigration? That would reduce the numbers of people able to commit crimes (such as gang members), it would decrease ethnic tension that leads to some shootings, and it would tighten the labor supply and cause many who might commit crimes to get jobs instead.

But, on the other hand, that would cost the Democratic Party political power. That's obviously too great a price to pay.

[Rightiesrule]

Great ideas.

[strifeknot]

Good grief, most gang members and criminals in this country are homegrown, while most illegal immigrants come here to work for a few bucks an hour under the table and mind their own business.