Moses Commandment (aka; Charlton Heston) “From My Cold Dead Hands” has been the new battle cry since 2000 by the Second Amendment supporters!
The list is long, and unfortunately, it is growing along with the body count. Here are the top-10 mass shootings taken from ‘MarketWatch.’
1. Las Vegas: Oct. 1, 2017.
58 killed and more than 515 wounded.
Shooter: 64-year-old Stephen Paddock.
49 people killed and more than 58 wounded.
Shooter: 29-year-old Omar Mateen.
Motive: Terror, hate crime.
3. Blacksburg, Va.: April 16, 2007.
33 killed (including the shooter) and 17 wounded on the campus of Virginia Tech.
Shooter: 23-year-old Seung-Hui Cho.
Motive: Mental-health issues.
4. Newtown, Conn.: Dec. 14, 2012.
28 killed, including the shooter and his mother along with 20 children aged 6 and 7, and two wounded at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Shooter: 20-year-old Adam Lanza.
Motive: Mental-health issues.
5. Sutherland Springs, Texas: Nov. 5, 2017
26 killed, 20 injured in a massacre at the First Baptist Church in the small south Texas town.
Shooter: Devin Patrick Kelley
6. Killeen, Texas: Oct. 16, 1991.
24 killed (including the shooter) and 27 wounded in a massacre at a Luby’s cafeteria.
Shooter: 35-year-old George Hennard.
Motive: Hatred of women, ethnic minorities.
7. San Ysidro, Calif.: July 19, 1984.
22 killed (including the shooter) and 19 wounded.
Shooter: 41-year-old James Huberty.
Motive: Mental-health issues.
8. Austin, Texas: Aug. 1, 1966.
18 killed (including the shooter) and 31 wounded in what became known as the University of Texas tower shooting.
Shooter: 25-year-old Charles Whitman.
Motive: Mental-health issues, although a brain tumor was found after his death.
9. Edmond, Okla.: Aug. 20, 1986.
15 killed (including the shooter) and six wounded.
Shooter: 44-year-old postal worker Patrick Sherill.
Motive: Revenge after a workplace supervisory reprimand. The incident inspired the phrase “going postal.”
10. San Bernardino, Calif.: Dec. 2, 2015.
16 killed (including two shooters) and 24 wounded.
Shooters: 28-year-old Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, his wife.
Motive: Terror after shooters were radicalized online and committed to jihadism.
When one considers the above numbers, usually most people will grimace when hearing about the carnage. Add those numbers to the headlines this past Fourth of July from Time Magazine; More Than 100 People Were Shot in Chicago Over the Fourth of July Weekend and is it any wonder why America is now seriously talking about a having a meaningful gun debate?
We all know the numbers, we have all read them countless times. Chicago this year will have a body count numbering that of a small town (and in some cases more significant numbers), while Houston won’t be far behind. New York City (while their numbers seem to be falling) will still be astronomical as will be Atlanta, Baltimore, Newark, and Detroit. We can debate this until “Hell Freezes Over,” but the facts are, thousands upon thousands of Americans die each year from gun violence.
The conservative right (of which I am very much a part of) will argue that the Second Amendment is “UNTOUCHABLE” as it a ‘right guaranteed by our Founding Fathers‘ and should never be discussed. The NRA and many other organizations will invest millions into advertising and will lobby the House and Senate to protect this most sacred Amendment. The conservative right will also argue that the Second Amendment is a “RIGHT” no different than breathing air and eating and is granted by God.
For the record; I am very much conservative on 99% of the topics you would like to discuss. I am very much to the “right of the Republican platform” in most areas. However, with that said, I am also a political pragmatist and a realist on what can be done, what we can get passed and how difficult it is to change anything. I will analyze a subject to death, run numbers, count votes, follow who is doing what and how they are doing. That is my job as a reporter/blogger/American political activist. This is what I do. With that said, I can unequivocally promise you that America is finished with gun violence. They are mad, they are tired of witnessing dead children in church pews, and they want something done.
And that brings us back to the subject of the Constitution and how do we begin curbing gun violence without stripping any of our rights that the Constitution grants us as American citizens?
Pat Nicklaus from Missouri is a fierce outspoken defender of the Second Amendment. She is an activist; she is a blogger and extremely knowledgeable on the subject of guns and the legal right to own firearms. While many politicians are now siding with the idea of striking down the rights of those on the “No-Fly-List,” Pat is arguing that those put on that list have not been through the process of having been found guilty to warrant the stripping of your Second Amendment right to own guns. She has a point. This is America, and do we strip rights from those who have not been through the “due process,” been to court, been found innocent or guilty of a crime that warrants taking your rights away under the Second Amendment?
Nicklaus has some very valid points. To carry the argument one step further, what about mental incompetence? Are you aware that (amongst Democrats), the left is making it known that they feel veterans returning from the Middle East have PTSD and therefore should not be able to own firearms from mental illness? Speaker Pelosi, Senator Feinstein, and others have been arguing this for several years now.
So where does this leave us? The American psyche is beginning to change on the subject of guns. While most do not want to outlaw pistols, shotguns, and rifles used for hunting (IE; 30-30, etc.) where do we draw the line or should there be a line in the sand. The right argues that the Second Amendment was put in place to prevent the government from becoming tyrannical. The right claims that “someone wanting to kill people will use pressure cooker bombs, trucks, fertilizer and diesel fuel or a baseball bat.” Others argue that an AR-15 is not needed for hunting antelope or a deer.
In Part 2, I will attempt to offer a solution as well as pose other arguments to this national debate that is bubbling under the surface. We must come to a resolution that appeases both sides. If ever there was a topic that has the potential to create a national social catastrophe, this would be the topic. This one issue could become the means that causes a total domestic meltdown, and the outcome would not be good. Stay tuned for Part 2 in a day or so.