To the Editor:
Regarding Joe LaBracio's editorial, ("When Will It End?, March 2), I find it troubling that the editorial failed to mention several key pieces of information which may well change the conclusion a reader comes to with regard to guns and school violence.
Consider this: In the Pearl, Mississippi incident to which you refer, teacher Joel Myric heard the shots being fired, ran a quarter-mile from the school to his car, retrieved his legally owned handgun and ran back to the school. He then tracked down and detained at gunpoint the shooter until the police arrived. The delay in getting to his weapon came from his compliance with a gun law that states that guns are not allowed on school property. Because of the law, he had to park off campus. Had he been able to retrieve the weapon without the ensuing half-mile sprint, he quite possibly could have prevented more injury than he did.
In the Edinburo, PA incident (one you inexplicably left out), a man at a restaurant across from the school heard the shooting and retrieved his shotgun from his truck. He then tracked down the shooter in the school, holding him until the police arrived. As with Mr. Myric, this man effectively stopped the violence in mid-stream, with a legally owned firearm.
In these two incidents, and indeed in many thousands of cases all across this country every year, legally owned and carried firearms save law abiding citizens from the criminals and sociopaths that bring violence to our society.
You quote President Clinton in your column, stating, "The accidental gun death rate of children in America is nine times higher than that in the other 25 biggest countries combined." First, these deaths are not accidental. They are the premeditated acts of sociopathic kids who are illegally in possession of these firearms in the first place. To mix these statistics is to create an inaccurate picture of what is happening in two very different scenarios. Second, the statistic Clinton quotes is based on population alone. Considering the lack of rights evident in China, India and other countries, this is a rather ironic basis for a statistic. Liberty -- real liberty -- demands the ability to defend oneself against unfair and unwarranted aggression. Every right and liberty worth something has a cost associated with it, and gun ownership is no exception.
You also mention the registration of weapons as potentially having a positive effect on the school violence situation. Since the gun control act of 1964, every gun sold is registered to the purchaser. So what? No one checks BEFORE the shooting starts to make sure that gun ownership is established. After the fact it's moot. In almost every case, you cite that the weapons were legally owned by the parents of the shooter. In the Columbine shooting, the students got the guns ILLEGALLY from a second party who obtained them at a gun show, hence the attention to the so-called gun show loophole. What is plainly evident is that the seller and purchaser of the guns were identified at Columbine, and the person that broke the law was successfully prosecuted for her crime of illegally selling the guns. So what is the problem?
There are enough gun laws on the books now. Too many in fact, over 66,000 convoluted pages of them. In all of these cases you cite that existing laws were broken repeatedly. The enforcement community needs to be stronger and more uniform in its application of existing laws to increase their effectiveness. Let's not forget that the District of Columbia has the absolutely toughest gun control laws in the nation, as well as the highest per capita incidence of gun related crime. The opposite is true in Vermont, which has the fewest gun control laws in the U.S., and the lowest gun related crime rates in the nation.
You cannot legislate away sociopathic behavior and poor parenting. Attempting to restrict the rights of law abiding gun owners interested in collecting, self-defense or hunting is futile and unconstitutional. We cannot pick and choose the constitutional rights we are willing to defend. As a writer, you feel very strongly about the 1st amendment. Probably as strongly as I feel about my 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms in defense of my family and country
The most effective way to reduce violent crime rates in our public schools is to invest in counseling and screening to identify the potential shooters and get them help. Barring that, arming the teachers and providing in school police coverage is your next best bet.
