There have been 150 shootings, classified as “Mass Killings” in this country so far this year. I’m not sure what the qualifications are for the title of “Mass Shootings.” Any way you want to slice it, that isn’t calming. I pulled the data below and verified it with multiple sites. The chart strips out everything less than three dead. That leaves 22 shootings that meet these gross qualifications, that come out to 107 dead, 34 injured (the lucky ones) with a total of 141 victims, again on the stripped-down data. Shockingly that is almost one dead per day this year for these types of events.
That brings me to the title; what is the number? How many have to die before we start to make actual fundamental gun law changes to stop this nonsense. We have a bit over 500 people in Washington representing this country, and very badly, in most cases, that can’t solve this problem. If they can’t agree on this one issue, “we the people” are lost as a country, and we have lost humanity. It should be common knowledge that the United States is virtually the only country that suffers this tragedy. Occasionally you do hear it happen in other countries, probably less than once per year at best.
Most recently, from Ted Cruz, we constantly hear that any of the proposed laws would not prevent these events, maybe not, but we have to try something. I’m getting a bit tired of the vigils, the flowers, the candles, and the prayers over these events. Isn’t it time to shit or get off the pot? The bottom line is we will probably never solve the problem entirely, and it would be foolish to think otherwise; it is also more foolish to do nothing.
You may think I oppose the second amendment, quite the contrary; I’m a strong supporter of the second amendment. There is a reason why the amendment is at the top of this list. These events are not a second amendment issue; it is a common-sense issue. Nobody is trying to take away your rights to own guns. Even the most active liberal in congress does not advocate that; yes, there are some very fringe people, but nobody in congress gives that any serious support. However, there is no reason we can’t find a way to limit some of these events.
Anyone who wants a gun should get a gun, but there is always a but; you should have to go through a thorough background check that includes a psych evaluation. I think these things are logical and can be done in 30-60 days. If you can’t wait for 30-60 days, maybe you should not have a gun.
In terms of the second amendment, I’m sure the founders of the constitution would disagree with the basic argument of the right to bear arms and precisely the types of weapons people have today. The main idea was historical for citizens to protect themselves from a government that can raise an army against the citizens; this became a means to prevent such actions and for the citizens to arm and assist in protecting the country when needed. This amendment balanced the power between the states and the federal government. Due to the military’s size and complexity, these armed militias and the right to bear arms to protect against tyranny are outdated since no militia or citizen could defeat the army. Laws now exist to prevent any such action. The second amendment was really between the federal government and the states to regulate weapons. It gets more complex with individuals that bring in the fourteenth amendment, which we never hear about. This is my basic interpretation and understanding and can be supported here https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-ii/interps/99
If we are the most advanced nation on the planet and are the most civilized species on the earth, it is time to find some solution. Now we are at a point when you don’t even look upon reports of a mass shooting. Maybe we need to have congress attend every funeral and explain to the family why they failed again. You have to start somewhere.
|7-Apr||Rock Hill||South Carolina||7||0||7|
|9-Jan||Chicago and Evanston||Illinois||6||2||8|
|6-Apr||New York City||New York||4||0||4|