Another Perspective from Sandy Hook

Unenforced firearm laws? One of the great examples is people who are turned down for a purchase, thousands of people are turned down yearly trying to illegally buy a gun but very, very few, are arrested. Those people are filling out forms with their address and using their photo ID, should be very easy to just round them up, but law enforcement isn't willing to spend the money and time doing it. Probably a lot of them are even wanted fugitives who could be imprisoned for other charges.

frogger, thanks for your feedback. And I mean that seriously. I believe you've illustrated pretty well just how difficult this entire process is with your list of possible societal problems. I also believe our individual perceptions are more subject to the manner in which something is presented than it actually is in what is presented in far too many cases.

That your OP spoke to you and had relevance to you is obvious - otherwise I doubt you would have posted it in the first place. That this father is impassioned in his presentation is also obvious. That there are flaws and holes in the reasoning this father used in his testimony is also open to personal interpretation (one of the reasons I responded). I can also present impassioned testimony of parents who actually lost a child at Sandy Hook Elementary School before CT legislative committee members. And their testimony does not reflect the testimony of this father at all. Does that make either one of the testimonies any less relevant than the other? I doubt it. The only difference might be the level of credibility of the witness as relates to the degree of proximity held by each to the actual event. That is a decision each of us is required to make based upon our own personal biases and prejudices regarding what happened and how to help try to prevent it from happening again.

When you responded earlier to one of my posts with:

My sense is that he is angry at the exploitation by our government and lawmakers of a true American tragedy

might it also be construed this father was doing the same thing when he testified before this committee?

Laws are made to be tweaked. Existing gun regulations (and, yes, there are many) also need to be seriously looked at and modified, if appropriate, before anyone tries to reinvent the wheel, in my opinion. Along with that, there also needs to be a recognition, of sorts, that there are, in fact, other societal ills in need of being addressed, too. No doubt about that either. It was no different following Columbine, Nickel Mines, Virginia Tech, and so many others (including those that continue happening on a daily basis but that the media pays little attention to overall). It's now taking place following this tragedy. That our nation is waking up, so to speak, to this many faceted problem gives me a modicum of hope. The proof in the pudding will lie in whether or not we have the resolve to address them together, or if we continue to let our own personal biases and prejudices interfere as has happened in the past.

What form any kind of resolution may take remains the million dollar question. My hope is that the vitriolic rhetoric on both sides abates, and that we can reach some kind of consensus on addressing our societal problems. Not an easy task, as you've said, but one that can no longer be allowed to fall by the wayside after memories begin to fade.

As I listen to main stream media...I am struck by the over whelming drumbeat that GUNS are the problem. In my opinion, they are secondary to the REAL issues facing this country in which many prefer to apparantly to just simply ignore. Guns are an easier target.

I don't necessarily agree with your position there is an overwhelming drumbeat that guns are the problem. I see discussions taking place on all the issues you've identified. The problem, from my perspective, is that each of us chooses to focus our own attention on issues that are more easily debated from our own biased perspectives. You appear to approach it from a perspective of "guns are an easier target". You're right. It's a lot more glamorous to debate the issue of guns than it is to try to delve into issues revolving around mental illness, for example. I think you've made that very clear as well in one of your previous posts. As someone who's experienced both on a very personal level (first wife committed suicide with a hand gun), I think I can state with a degree of validity that neither issue is mutually exclusive of the other - both need to be part of the debate going on right now. In the end, it's up to each of us to recognize and accept that fact. It's also up to each of us to do whatever we can to contribute to the resolution of these problems, and not necessarily just offer impassioned testimony as this father did, which accomplishes little, if anything at all to the ongoing discussion. If he would have offered anything substantive by way of solving a problem, I might be more inclined to accept his testimony as having value. As it is, I didn't see anything substantive being offered other than a "rage against the machine" mentality telling the committee members they have no right to infringe on his 2nd Amendment and CT constitutional rights to bear arms. Nothing new there. Again, my two cents worth.

edited to add: I'd also like to invite you to view, and contribute to, my blog if you might be interested. I go into quite a lot of detail on these posts in particular that deal with the mental illness I've personally experienced:
http://thepeacechallenge.blogspot.com/2012/05/history-of-sorts.html
http://thepeacechallenge.blogspot.com/2012/05/actually-sleeping-with-one-eye-open.html
http://thepeacechallenge.blogspot.com/2012/05/suicide-2400-lb-gorilla-in-my-head.html and
http://thepeacechallenge.blogspot.com/2012/05/can-you-say-perseveration.html
These are the four posts I've made that I feel cut to the chase, so to speak, on my experience with mental illness. There are more posts that deal with it, but these four are probably the most relevant to our discussion here. I don't take sharing these memories lightly. They still haunt me to this day. One of the main reasons I am sharing them now is in the hope others might benefit from any insight I might be able to provide.

I am apparently not the only one to notice the drumbeat from main stream media.

Media stories favor gun control by 8 to 1, study says

http://www.examiner.com/article/media-s ... ys?cid=rss

Zhawke....I really appreciate your point of view and your articulate ability to express it. First hand experience is very valuable and my prayers to you.
We are all shaped by our experiences in this life.
My frustration is with those who merely want to point the finger at a gun rather than to roll up their sleeves and truly address the real and bigger issues that are at the heart of the rise in violence in this country.
We need to treat the infection instead of just putting a band-aid on it.
I hope that this dialog will continue on this level as I do believe that reasonable people can come to some common beliefs.
My personal belief, as i have stated before is that we have gun control measure on the books that are NOT being enforced. We need to beef up the penalties for crimes committed with a gun.
If universal background checks include my name being placed into a federal database that tells my government where to find my gun....Not in favor of it. I am a law abiding citizen that has a right to protect my home and family against anyone who would care to cause harm.
The problems we face in this country are getting worse....not better. JMO

frogger, I know the mainstream media is an issue. They always are. Regardless of whether or not they favor one thing over another (which they invariably do), it still remains there are underlying issues that must also be addressed (as you've stated). On that, we totally agree. Also, on the issues surrounding new gun regulations, I agree the ones already on the books need to be enforced more effectively. In fact, I believe all any of them need is to be tweaked to close existing loopholes, and then to be backed up with stricter enforcement. That's something I think we can all probably agree on. In that vein, I'm going to invite you, and everyone else here in The Courthouse, to join us in The Family Room where we've started a thread on school safety planning. In order to address the issues we face globally I believe we must start somewhere and build upon that. And that is what we're trying to do on our website, our facebook page, my blog, and now on every single CommunityBound site, as well. A friend of mine once told me, "if you want to slay the dragon, you must look at the animal from a perspective of death by 10,000 cuts." In order for us to tackle the issue of gun safety along with all the other issues we face, we've chosen to begin with safer schools. Hope to see everyone there.

ZHawke

Perhaps mainstream media stories support gun-control 8-1 because the American people support some form of gun-control by 83%... (Total background checks by 92%). Hmmmmm

Offering this from a so-called "liberal" publication with comments from a more "conservative" base at a gun show in Colorado Springs of all places.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/07/1539851/gun-show-background-checks/?mobile=nc

Even my sister and brother-in-law, both avid hunters and gun owners, support closing the gun show loophole. My brother-in-law is a lifetime NRA member and gun dealer. His explanation is as follows:

Most of the dealers (edit to add - at gun shows) are in favor of making the guys with the "personal" collections do NICS checks also. That's not a problem.

I guess that then begs the question of those opposed to background checks of "why"? If it's because of a concern over having the government know about your firearm, here's another thing my brother-in-law said:

Concealed carry permit holders have been checked up and down, fingerprinted, etc and are in the national database.

I regularly consult with my relatives on this issue because, quite simply, I consider both of them to be what I call "subject matter experts".

I want to be clear......I have NEVER said I was not for background checks.
My son in law and daughter on a local gun store and routinely have a booth at the Tanner Gun Show.
I am confused about background checks in regards to gun shows as they are required to run a background check for every gun they sale.

A background check and fingerprinting for a CCW are required but CCW permits are entered into the CCIC database at County Sheriff discretion.
It is my understanding that this practice is rapidly disappearing across the state.
I am neither an avid hunter, sportsman shooter or lifetime member of the NRA but I will say that I am a dedicated 2nd amendment supporter.

http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/colorado.aspx

http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592552.pdf

Sorry, frogger. I didn't mean this as being intended for you directly (just another example of how something is presented can be, and often times is, misconstrued with unintended consequences ). Again, my apologies. The way my brother-in-law explained it is from his perspective in North Dakota. Not being an avicionado of anything guns, myself, I rely on him for advice. My question was directed more to the general population of those who appear to be opposed to virtually any kind of effort to address the issue of gun violence. That's all.

Edited to add: By way of explanation, here's a little more from my brother-in-law on the issue of gun shows:

Sometimes, at a show a non-dealer will set up a table with his "personal" collection and he will not need to do NICS checks on any he sells. There were a couple guys a couple years ago who showed up at almost every show with their "personal" collection. BATF (who are a presence at the shows) warned them a couple times and finally shut them down. These guys are banned from setting up at ANY shows in perpetuity. Most of the dealers are in favor of making the guys with the "personal" collections do NICS checks also. That's not a problem.