Showing posts with label Virginia Tech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Virginia Tech. Show all posts

Friday, April 27, 2007

Gun regulation, anyone?


I recently received an interesting email from a dear friend who gre up Republican. He happens to be a collge professor and has some interesting perspectives in the light of the Virginia Tech shootings;

Ted,

Forgive me for a moment -- I do not write these emails often, but this is a part of my grieving process.

School shootings, notably the 1999 Columbine shootings, have changed K-12 education forever. How K-12 principals and superintendents think about school safety has changed at a fundamental. I imagine that the same will be true for colleges and universities following the shootings at Virginia Tech last week, but what this will look like is yet to be seen. In high schools, the most significant changes have occurred in the forms of securing the high school campus (most city schools are now "caged" -- surrounded by fences with strategically located entry points) and the development of more sophisticated crisis response plans. In higher education, I'm sure that most colleges and universities across the country will take another look at their crisis management plans, but the idea of "caging" colleges and universities is impractical.

Since Columbine, there has also been an increased discussion from some about the role of guns in U.S. society. Unfortunately, the most vocal attack came from the far left in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Any impact that this film might have had on public policy was lost when Moore used his oscar acceptance speech to attack the Bush presidency with a rant, thus placing Moore and his work into the societal margins of "leftist" thinking. The culture of guns (and of killing) in the U.S. has not changed; if anything, it continues to get worse. Let me provide one example.

A growing industry in the United States is the "canned hunt" industry. Animals are placed in private, fenced "preserves" where they are easy targets for hunters -- there is literally no escape. The animals, raised in captivity, may not be "tame," but neither are they wild. "Hunters," if they can still claim this title, then pay to kill the animals. In some cases, they are exotic animals (zebras, leopards, tigers, giraffes), but there are also hunting preserves for deer, quail, ducks, etc. The hunters may pay for time or pay per animal. In the most extreme cases, hunters do not even have to come to the preserves -- they can hunt online using remotely powered guns to target their prey.

If the mere existence of these hunting preserves is not statement enough on the culture of guns and killing in the United States, then maybe a word on who has used them and how. Those who have participated include presidents Clinton and Bush, presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Dick Cheney, along with nine friends (and GOP donors) participated in a canned hunt in which the 10 of them killed 417 ring-neck pheasants in a single day, and that was only one part of their "hunt" for the day. Indeed, Cheney himself was "credited" with killing about 70 of the birds.

While I am personally not a hunter, I would not suggest getting rid of all guns in the U.S. Further, I would politically (though maybe not personally) oppose any effort to extend gun control laws to the point that would limit honest hunting efforts. However, I would gladly vote to eliminate anything that turns the sport of hunting into a simple game of killing (even the NRA has condemned the canned hunt industry). But I would gladly go one step further and vote to eliminate the sale of any gun designed to kill humans.

At Virginia Tech, the shooter killed 32 innocent people. What's more, he shot over 170 rounds in 9 minutes -- that's about one shot every 3 seconds without accounting for time to reload or move from classroom to classroom. I'm sorry, but I cannot understand the mind of anyone who would vote to make the kinds of weapons used in this shooting available to the public. The "best" argument is that people who want these guns would simply go underground to get them. That may be true, but limiting their sale would limit the number produced; further, if it takes us 20 years to get these weapons off our streets, then let's start now -- for the sake of our grandchildren.

Lastly, note that this is not a partisan issue -- it does not break down along party lines. So, while I usually think of the current rhetoric of developing a "common sense" approach to public policy as coded language for a "dumbed down approach," I say here that I'll vote for either method, just so long as it gets guns designed to kill humans off the streets and out of our schools.

--
John L. Hoffman, Ph.D.
www.john-hoffman.com


"An education that teaches you to understand something about the world has done only half of the assignment. The other half is to teach you to do something about making the world a better place."
- Johnnetta B. Cole

John,

When I was say 8 years old my Dad took us fishing. We always rented boats and fished from the middle of small mountain lakes. That day none of us, me, my dad or my brother had any luck. I whined and moaned out of disappointment, so to placate me, Dad took us to a hatchery where you could pay to fish. Lemme tell ya, that was some easy fishin'. Not only are those hunting preserves you mentioned perverse and non-sportsmanlike, but so are automatic and semi-automatic weapons. For that matter, what about handguns? They aren't designed for hunting any game animal, their sole prey are human beings.

So often conservatives argue that they want "strict constructionist" jurists who won't over interpret the Constitution. Perhaps we need a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. The first few words are, "a well-regulated militia being necessary..." Well-regulated... wouldn't that be the state and national guard and reserves? Well-regulated...Is it possible that the founding fathers intended that we regulate gun ownership? I don't want to deny hunters or farmers a rifle or shotgun, but I do not see why a 23 year old with a history of potentially violent mental illness should be able to purchase weapons so easily without a waiting period or a background check. How many 23 year olds purchase over $500 in ammunition at one time?

I have to show an ID at the pharmacist's window to purchase one box of decongestant. I have to wait a set amount of time before I'll be permitted to buy more. If we can regulate sales of Sudafed to discourage meth production, why can't we regulate arms sales? Why is that so unreasonable? Is the NRA really that powerful of a lobby that no lawmakers in either party has the political courage to propose any kind of limits or restrictions whatsoever?

Good writing. I hope you submit it to some publications, newspapers, or journals. Would you permit me to post it on my personal blog (giving credit, not pretending I wrote it obviously)? Will you at least post it on your own website?

Omaha Central HS was closed yesterday after bomb threats.

Hope your family is all well.
_______________________________
Pirate Prayers at:
http://malloryprayer.blogspot.com

Ted's cartoons, artworks, photos, and commentary at:
http://tmal.multiply.com

"The gospel is meant to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." ~Garrison Keillor

Thursday, April 26, 2007

TV Turn off Week...or What is WRONG with us?


NBC ‘massacres’ a delicate story
Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper — Schleswig Leader, Thursday, April 26, 2007 – Page 3

I’m kind of a journalistic purist who believes that newspapers should provide information that readers can use toward sound judgements essential to the healthy functioning of a democracy. I want to train kids to be better communicators for the common well being of the community and to be more savvy consumers of the media, equipped to be discriminating. Call me a hopeless idealist, but that’s what happens when you’ve been teaching journalism for over a decade.

There are these things called the elements of news-worthiness, that you’re supposed to consider when deciding whether or not to cover something, such as timeliness, proximity, prominence, consequence, conflict, and human interest. All of these ought to be weighed against the news agency’s concept of what they see as the public’s well being.

Before releasing the contents of a package sent to them by mass murderer Seung Hui Cho, NBC failed to consider anyone’s well being. All they seemed to have cared about was ratings and “scooping” everybody else.

But that’s not the only problem with how this story has been handled.
I was appalled by the media’s coverage of the tragedy at Virginia Tech last week.
I overheard a variety of responses in the faculty lounge. Most were disgusted by how TV news has been milking it for everything it’s worth and disappointed by how emotional and melodramatic coverage has been. Perhaps more restraint and stoicism would’ve actually been more respectful.

Others were concerned that there was SO much speculation and reporting before there had been any information even collected by, let alone released by law enforcement.

A couple of people said that they can’t stand to pay attention to the news because everything is so negative. Others find it ironic that 2-3 times as many people die each day, everyday in Iraq, but that doesn’t receive near as much coverage or as much sensationalism.

I know I was surprised that on Tuesday nigh TV reporters interviewed a number of VT students who said that they didn’t think that the college could have done anything better to protect them- but the next morning’s paper featured a headline about how frustrated students were that the college didn’t do more.

This afternoon on National Public Radio, they interviewed a college official who was frustrated that pro-gun activists were using the tragedy to argue that all students should’ve been allowed to carry concealed weapons to protect themselves. Certainly there are those on the Left who have already been blaming the shooting on Virginia’s lack of regulations of firearms. Should it be a starting point for debate?

I have to tell you, I was certainly tempted to write a column about gun control. But I decided that it would be taking advantage of a heinous incident to make a political point, so I decided not to.

How about all of the samples of the killer’s poems, stories and plays that are popping up on the web? Should the media make such a heinous killer famous posthumously?

I was absolutely sickened by the things that TV news programs aired from Cho’s now infamous package to NBC. By showing his video diatribes over and over again, not only did they give him the fame and attention which he hoped for, but I believe that they compounded the pain and damage to the families of the victims and to the communities of Virginia Tech and Blacksburg, Virginia. It was like coming in behind him with more guns, shooting people once they were already down.

NBC should’ve handed the entire package over to the FBI or at least asked experts to analyze the materials and report on them without presenting the original material, over and over again ad nauseam as they did. Who would it have hurt for them to at least have held the materials for several weeks before releasing them?

Certainly this tragedy, like others before it at high schools reveal a disconnected, unsympathetic and violent society. Certainly, like the September 11 attacks or Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it reveals how painfully unprepared our institutions are to handle crises. And certainly it reveals that we need to consider regulations and procedures in both gun availability and in the field of mental health treatment. But most of all, it revealed what a salacious, sensational, insensitive and irresponsible media we have.

Ted Mallory lives in Charter Oak and teaches at Boyer Valley Schools in Dunlap. ‘Ted’s Column’ has appeared weekly in the Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper since 2002. If you’d like to see any of Ted’s editorial cartoons bigger and brighter, you can visit http://tmal.multiply.com/photos/album/2 Ted has started a new blog that focuses on Journalism and the media at http://thepresscorps.blogspot.com