First, let’s dismiss the ridiculous. Donald Trump, certainly not based on extensive experience as a teacher, in law enforcement, or in the military (he has no experience in any of those areas), proclaimed the solution to mass shootings in schools is to arm “adept teachers,” he estimates 20%, with “concealed guns.” The NRA and CPAC cheered this proposal, but sane voices, including Avery Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called it a “colossally stupid idea.” Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the National Education Association, responded to Trump, “Educators need to be focused on teaching our students. We need solutions that will keep guns out of the hands of those who want to use them to massacre innocent children and educators. Arming teachers does nothing to prevent that.”
In a New York Times op-ed, Anthony Swofford, a former Marine and a weapons expert who is currently an English professor at West Virginia University wrote: “I would never bring a weapon into a classroom. The presence of a firearm is always an invitation to violence. Weapons have no place in a learning environment.”
Trump’s comments are basically an effort to deflect attention away from the real issue – eliminating automatic and semi-automatic weapons held by private individuals and reducing and regulating gun ownership in general.
Second, we also need to look at the complicated. There were heroes at Marjory Stoneman High School who either died or were wounded while protecting others. They include teacher Scott Beigel, assistant football coach Aaron Feis, and students Anthony Borges and Peter Wang. They should be honored now and in the future.
Other people have been the subject of criticism, and at least some of it, may be unfair. According to reports, Broward County Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson, who was the armed school resource officer assigned to the school, and three other Broward County Sheriff’s deputies, took cover behind vehicles outside the school. Police did not enter the building until reinforcements arrived at the scene. Attacks on them by gun advocates have become another way to deflect attention away from the need for gun control.
My understanding is that police are supposed to ascertain what is happening, secure the scene, and wait for reinforcements and instructions, not rush into a fire zone guns ablaze. I wish these deputies had been more heroic. But it is also possible that if they had entered the building and returned fire, more innocent victims, including students, staff, and police, could have been injured or killed. This is one of the reasons arming teachers is a ridiculous proposal.
Third, let’s look at the numbers. Although over 50 million Americans own guns, the National Rifle Association has only 5 million members. While it has a lot of money to buy political support, it only represents a small fraction of gun owners. According to a Pew survey, almost 30% of gun owners believe the NRA has too much influence over gun laws.
Part of the NRA’s influence comes from its connection to a network of wealthy rightwing organizations. Koch-backed Freedom Partners gave the NRA Institute for Legislative Action $4.9 million. Marc Short, the former president of Freedom Partners is now the Director of Legislative Affairs in the Trump administration. According to the nonpartisan group Center for Responsive Politics, the NRA and affiliated groups spent $54 million during the 2016 election to elect Donald Trump and secure Republican control of Congress.
Fourth, the Second Amendment DOES NOT guarantee individuals the unlimited right to own and use deadly weapons.
According to the Preamble to the United States Constitution, the first priorities of the national government are to “insure domestic Tranquility,” “provide for the common defence”, “promote the general Welfare,” and “secure the Blessings of Liberty.” The question is whether unrestricted or minimally restricted gun ownership insures domestic tranquility, provides for national defense, promotes general welfare, or secures the blessing of liberty? Mass murders are definitely not tranquil, the mass murderers are the people we need to be defended from, their having guns does not promote anyone’s welfare, and allowing them to have guns certainly did not secure the blessing of liberty to those who were murdered.
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” to ensure the mandate spelled out in the preamble which includes regulating gun ownership.
Defenders of the unrestricted right to bear arms like the National Rifle Association cite the Second Amendment to the Constitution as the basis for their right to own automatic guns and high-powered rifles. The Second Amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Gun advocates think they have a strong case here, but they are missing three important things. Militias are supposed to be “well regulated.” The right of the people to keep and bear arms does not specifically permit every individual to own automatic guns and high-powered rifles. Last, the “people” refers to a collective right to bear arms in the national defense, not an individual’s right to shoot people.
In 2008 a 5-4 majority of a rightwing dominated Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that it is unconstitutional to completely ban handguns, but left room for other forms of regulation. The four dissenters were much more comfortable with even tighter regulation.
Fifth, other countries, similar to the United States, severely limit gun ownership.
Australia: In 1996, 35 people were killed and 23 wounded in a mass shooting at a tourist site in Tasmania, Australia. It is remembered as the Port Arthur massacre. In response, the Prime Minister of Australia introduced strict gun control laws. The National Firearms Programme Implementation Act restricts the private ownership of semi-automatic rifles and certain types of shotguns. It also established uniform and stricter firearms licensing. Australia then confiscated, paid for, and melted down a third of the country’s privately owned weapons. There has been no similar mass shooting in Australia since.
Great Britain: In March 1996 a gunman killed 16 children and a teacher at the Dunblane Primary School in Scotland. In response, Great Britain approved two new Firearms Acts that outlawed the private ownership of most handguns. There has been no similar mass shooting in Great Britain since.
Canada: In Canada, nobody can legally buy a gun without first taking the Canadian Firearms Safety Course. After completing the course individuals who hope to own a gun apply for a Possession and Acquistion Licence (PAL). This process includes screening for risk factors including histories of criminal behavior and mental health issues. The only legal reason for owning a firearm in Canada is as a tool to kill animals or as sporting equipment to shoot paper targets.
Israel: Gun advocates often cite Israel as an example of a country that permits widespread private gun ownership. They are wrong. Israel actually has strict gun control and gun ownership by civilians is far lower than in the United States where there is almost one firearm for every adult and child. In Israel, out of a population of about 8.5 million people, 135,000 citizens are licensed to own guns.
In Israel people eligible for gun permits must live or work in an area considered to be dangerous. If someone has completed military service, they can apply for a license when they are 21. Other people must wait until they are 27. Applicants receive background checks and a doctor must attest to their health. Gun licenses are renewable every three years, a process that includes evidence of annual practice at a shooting range. Most gun licenses are for 9 mm pistols. Only people involved in security can be licensed to possess an automatic weapon. In Israel, even bullets are limited by law. Unless someone is involved in security, they are allocated only fifty bullets a year. Because of its strict rules, Israel has not had the type of civilian mass shootings that plague the United States.
Sixth, the logical thing is for the United States to regulate gun ownership the way it regulates car ownership and driving. Before receiving a license to own a gun, an applicant should be required to pass a written exam and a “road test” and the license should be renewal, not permanent. Gun owners should be required to register their weapons, submit them for periodic inspection, and carry insurance against accidents. Gun operators who disobey these guidelines or act in unsafe ways should pay fines, have their licenses suspended, and their weapons impounded. Repeat offenders should have their weapons confiscated and face jail time.
Post-script: Donald Trump once supported broader gun control. In his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, Trump criticized Republicans who “walk the NRA line” and “refuse even limited restrictions” on firearm ownership. In the book he specifically called for a ban on assault weapons.
Follow Alan Singer on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ReecesPieces8