Keep and Bear Arms

Words have meaning. The words we choose to use carry specific meaning. The words we read in newspapers or hear on radio and television news have meaning. The words flowing from a politician's mouth have meaning. They are carefully chosen to convey a specific message. If a teenager enters a school and shoots fellow students, the headlines in the newspaper read, "GUN VIOLENCE STRIKES XYZ HIGH."

Consider those words carefully. Webster's Dictionary defines "violence" as, "The quality or state of being violent; highly excited action, whether physical or moral; vehemence; impetuosity; force." Violence is an act. Can a gun act? No, it is an inanimate object. Only the individual holding the firearm can act. The same holds true of the phrase "School Violence". Schools are not capable of violence; a school is a building. Only the occupants of a school are capable of violence. Thus, we are dealing with violent people; not "gun violence" or "school violence" as the press and politicians would have us believe. Members of the press are wordsmiths. They know how to ply their trade to evoke a reaction from their readers or listeners; specifically, to convince their audience firearms are evil and schools are violent.

The members of the press do not use this logic anywhere else other than when dealing with firearms. In 1988, Larry Mahoney was driving his pickup the wrong way on Interstate 71 in Kentucky. He was drunk and drove his truck headlong into a church bus. Twenty-seven people were killed including 24 children. Thirty others were injured. Larry Mahoney killed more people in that horrible second than all of the individuals involved in violence in schools this past school year. Yet, did the press call for bans on pickups, the installation of ignition locks, or a 3 day waiting period before buying a truck? Did the press coin the phrase, "Truck Violence"? No, the responsibility for this terrible accident was placed right where it belonged, in Larry Mahoney's lap.

Unfortunately, our perception of the world is shaped by the news we read and hear. We would believe violence in schools is something new or on the increase or both based on the news reports we've been exposed to in the 1998-99 school year. Fortunately, this is far from the truth. But, finding the truth takes time and effort, and few people are willing to invest in either to discover it.

What is the truth about violent children? Are our children more violent today, or are we just being exposed to more news about violence in our schools? The National School Safety Center (NSSC) in Westlake Village, CA has studied violence in and around our schools since the school year beginning in 1992. They have published a comprehensive report on this issue on the Internet, and it is available on their web site at http://www.nssc1.org. It is well worth a read. The NSSC states that the report is not scientific as the data was obtained from newspapers and not all articles may have been found. However, the data for each year was obtained in the same manner; therefore, comparing data from year to year yields accurate comparisons. Death by violence, firearm and non-firearm related, including suicides in and around our schools were reported as follows:

School Year	Number of Violent Deaths
1992-3	54
1993-4	51
1994-5	20
1995-6	35
1996-7	25
1997-8	43
1998-9	26
1999-2000	11

Note: Of the 11 in this school year, 1 was an accidental death and 3 were suicides. Therefore, only 7 children have died violently in our schools nationwide during this school year at the hands of another. Not all these deaths we by shooting. Is this acceptable? No, but neither is a child's death in an automobile accident.

An astute reader will note the school year 1992-3 had the highest reported number of violent deaths. Was the press informing us of these incidents? Personally, I do not remember one case making the national headlines. The 1998-9 school year had the second lowest number of reported violent deaths. However, the press was on a rampage of reporting that year concerning these incidents. Therefore, the uninformed reader, relying on only the news, is led to believe we are in the midst of a national epidemic relating to violent deaths in our schools. Of course, every rational person realizes that even one violent death is one too many; however, we are not in experiencing an epidemic.

We are approximately 80% through the 1999-2000 school year. The number of deaths this year is 11. Annualizing this number for the remainder of the school year indicates a total of 14 school deaths for this school year. This is an estimated reduction of 45% year over year. Does the press tell us this? Do politicians tell us this? No! Listening to the press and politicians, we would be led to believe violent deaths in our schools are increasing!

Politicians are also wordsmiths. Consider that fact that President Clinton stated that 180,000 felons were prohibited from buying a firearm under the Brady Law in 1999 in a speech on March 15, 2000. IF that is true, why weren't 180,000 felons arrested for violating the Brady Law? Why aren't 180,000 felons in jail for violating the Brady Law? Where are these "felons"? They are on the street. If 180,000 known felons are on the street, do you feel safer knowing that fact? (And we wonder why the NRA accuses the Clinton Administration of not enforcing existing gun laws?)

What do the Chiefs of Police in America believe? According to a survey taken in 1999 by the National Association of Chiefs of Police, 93% believe honest citizens should be able to own firearms for sporting or self defense purposes (source http://www.tbhonline.com/cns/9907/990712police_chiefs.htm). Further, 97% of those Chiefs of Police who responded stated that they had not been asked to make an arrest under the Brady Law (source Sporting Classics, January-February, 2000). Where does President Clinton get those police officers standing behind him when he introduces new firearms legislation? They must be from the 3 or 7%!

Our politicians cry for more laws - trigger locks, registration of firearms, licensing of firearm owners, taxes for the manufacture or transfer of a handgun. Examine these societal fixes before you buy into them. Would a meth manufacturer in possession of a stolen handgun use a trigger lock, register it, obtain a license, or pay a tax on that firearm after stealing it? Would the six-year-old boy who lived in that house have been prevented from obtaining that firearm if all those laws were passed?

We can't just believe what we read or hear. The news story or political speech may be shockingly violent or describe truly sad events. However, you cannot just read or listen blindly and emotionally. You must be willing to think and investigate the facts as presented. Why? Your freedom is at stake.