Remember the great Ebola scare of 2014? Thousands of normally sane people were terrified by the prospect of the dreaded disease penetrating American shores. They demanded that the Centers for Disease Control and any number of other governmental agencies do something – anything – to halt the spread of this unholy plague.
There were demands to stop flights originating in Africa from landing at U.S. airports. Teachers who visited countries with a handful of Ebola cases were prohibited from returning to the classroom. Caregivers returning to their home nation after stints overseas were kept in quarantine regardless of whether they displayed any symptoms.
People were acting as if their hair was on fire. Ultimately, the U.S. experienced 11 total cases. Two people died. The malady can no longer be found in this country.
Meanwhile, in 2014, 12,558 people died in the United States of America as the result of gun violence. Another 22,988 were injured. Of the total 51,655 gun violence incidents across this great nation that year, 629 involved children aged 11 years or younger.
More than 34 gun-related homicides each day.
And you could hear a pin drop about it.
This year is not yet half over and, as of this writing, 5,939 met their fate as the result of a gunshot, with 11,767 wounded.
The only reason these cold, black-and-white statistics seem pertinent now is a result of last week’s terrible tragedy in Charleston, S.C., where nine innocent folks attending bible study were gunned down in the basement of their church.
After a reasonable amount of time, say another week or so, the fate of those poor souls will be forgotten and those charged with adopting the laws to protect and preserve the lives of the people who populate this wide expanse will be neglected. Yet again. Because that’s how the United States of America rolls. And you can bet that we’ll still be hearing about Tom Brady and deflated footballs long after these good people are interred.
Before we go any farther, I have a confession to make. I must admit I have played my part in this ongoing indifference to gun violence. Frankly, I’ve grown terribly weary and frustrated over the years attempting to inject logic into discussions about guns and gun control with those who shut their eyes, stick their forefingers in their ears and chant “Second Amendment…Second amendment…lalalala…Second Amendment’’ every time the issue is raised. So now I rarely broach the subject, much to my acknowledged detriment.
It was Matthew Henry, a minister in Great Britain during the 17th century, who was the first to say, “None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see.’’ It’s that tendency, which seemingly overwhelms so many gun proponents, that has subverted efforts to actually do something about the gun violence that engulfs this nation and, despite the plaintive cries of too many families that have lost loved ones, will undoubtedly continue to do so.
Gun proponents are quick to dismiss tragedies like Charleston. One member of the board of the National Rifle Association went so far as to opine that the calamity would never have occurred if the minister, who was among those killed, had been packing heat. Others shrugged their shoulders, insisting stiffer gun control laws wouldn’t have precluded the event.
Basically they’re saying the deaths of the innocents is the cost of doing business in this country.
That rationale is so cheap and so easy that it’s insulting to the hundreds of thousands of Americans who wound up on the wrong end of some pistol or rifle or semi-automatic weapon over the years. Study after study, including work by David Hemenway and others at the School of Public Health at Harvard University, firmly establishes that where more guns exist, the risk of homicide increases. States with higher levels of household gun ownership have higher rates of firearm homicide than states with lower ownership levels.
Other countries that have experienced incidents like the one that occurred in Charleston, Australia and Canada are two examples, took quick action to address the crisis by limiting access to guns. In each instance the initiative worked. But we won’t do it here.
It was the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynahan a New York Democrat, who famously said “You’re entitled to your own opinion. You’re not entitled to your own facts.’’ So here are some crucial facts:
‣ There are almost as many guns as there are people in the U.S. – an estimated 310 million as of 2009, according to the Congressional Research Service.
‣ The annual gun homicide rate of 2.97 fatalities per 100,000 people in the United States is triple the rate experienced in most of the world’s other wealthy nations, defined as countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Switzerland is second at 0.77.
‣ Every day on average, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 55 people kill themselves with a firearm in the U.S. and 46 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun, based on data from the Centers for Disease Control.
‣ Owning a gun or having one readily available increases the potential for homicide and suicide. A study by Andrew Anglemyer and two others that appeared in the January 2014 edition of Annals of Internal Medicine found “strong evidence for increased odds of suicide among persons with access to firearms compared with those without access and moderate evidence for an attenuated increased odds of homicide victimization when persons with and without access to firearms were compared.”
‣ That same study found states with more guns experience more accidental deaths. Children aged 5 to 14 are 11 times more to be killed as the result of a gun in the U.S. in comparison to other developed countries.
‣ A gun in the home, according to a study by Dr. Arthur Kellermann that appeared in the Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care is 22 times more likely to be used to kill or injure in a domestic homicide, suicide or unintentional shooting than to be used in self-defense.
Had enough?
In the minds of Second Amendment proponents, the way to address the national problem with guns is simple – more guns, which is rather like battling a flood with more water or an avalanche with more snow.
That, apparently, is the route our good friends on Capitol Hill suggest we take. In 2013, just 19 days after a mass killing at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut left 26 dead, including 20 children, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, introduced the Citizens Protection Act of 2013, opting to address the problem by repealing the federal ban on guns in school zones, essentially permitting teachers and others to play cowboy. He introduced it yet again this year as the Safe Students Act.
“Gun-free zones prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and create vulnerable populations that are targeted by criminals,” Massie said, ignoring all the evidence regarding the easy accessibility of guns.
“I will work vigorously to defend the rights of gun owners,’’ Massie said. “The right to keep and bear arms is not principally about hunting or recreation. In fact, the Second Amendment to our Constitution is our Founding Fathers’ restatement of our natural God given right to defend life, liberty and property.’’
Nothing, of course, about the life, liberty and property of those who are dead.
Massie isn’t the only Kentucky lawmaker to ignore the carnage their policies have wrought. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, of Louisville, who usually takes great pains to avoid looking foolish, took the stage at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting in March 2014 brandishing a rifle, raising it above his head before gifting it to former Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK, who was retiring.
It was McConnell who, as the minority leader in 2013, filibustered a gun control law supported by President Obama in wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy. That bill would have simply expanded background checks. Amendments, like reinstating the federal ban on assault weapons and outlawing high capacity magazines, were similarly deflected.
Then, of course, there’s U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Bowling Green, who wants to be the next president of the United States. Paul is a member of the National Association of Gun Rights, a group so outrageous it is far to the right of the National Rifle Association. Paul instigated the filibuster of the Sandy Hook bill and placed a hold on the nomination of Dr. Vivek Murthy to serve as surgeon general because of Murthy’s view that gun violence represents a significant public health threat.
What it all adds up to is an astonishing breach of duty.
And the carnage continues.
Perhaps you’ve seen The Bridge on the River Kwai, directed by the great David Lean. In the climactic scene, Major Clipton, the medical officer serving the British POWs, ventures to the riverbank to witness the horror of bodies strewn about as the result of a last ditch skirmish.
“Madness,’’ Clipton exclaims. “Madness.’’
Washington correspondent Bill Straub served 11 years as the Frankfort Bureau chief for The Kentucky Post. He also is the former White House/political correspondent for Scripps Howard News Service. He currently resides in Silver Spring, Maryland, and writes frequently about the federal government and politics. Email him at williamgstraub@gmail.com.
Hey Bill Straub, your anti-gun bias is showing and as usual with your tribe your facts are cherry picked and your words so misleading as to lose all your credibility.
First off, to list children is emotional pandering.
2. never mind.
3-4-5 etc
Bottom line- would you take America to a no-guns country? Meaning, none for police nor military? What about all the millions of really good guys with guns in this good ol’ US of A?
Do you realize that if all guns were vaporized, that they would be quickly re-manufactured, daily, by crooks and tyrants across the globe? Gun control is just plain crazy.