(Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons )
A month after the tragic theater shooting at Aurora, Colo. and a couple of weeks after the Sikh Temple Shooting in Wisconsin, another shooting at the Empire State Building shocked the nation.
A laid-off, disgruntled worker of Hazan Import Corp. shot his former co-worker multiple times, even after the victim had fallen. At the end of the day, two men were dead: the victim and the shooter, who was taken down by New York City’s police. Nine innocent bystanders were injured.
New York City — a place the anti-gun Brady Campaign gave a four-star rating — makes New York one of the strictest states in the nation for gun control. Of course, that doesn’t mean a thing for the shooter, Jeffrey Johnson, who didn’t even purchase the gun in New York. The weapon, a .45 caliber 1911, was purchased legally in Florida in 1999 and brought to New York illegally.
But surely that’s no excuse to encourage citizens to actively carry a weapon. That’s all we need, a bunch of uneducated civilians carrying pistols and assault rifles around like a bunch of outlaws. Leave the protection of the public to the police, New York’s Finest.
That’s right, the responding officers ended up injuring more people than the actual shooter, unloading sixteen rounds into a single target with six of those rounds missing completely. This left nine people hospitalized for gunshot wounds caused by the very people they entrusted their protection.
To clarify, those casualties should not be blamed on the NYPD, because their inaccuracy can be blamed on the ridiculous 12-pound trigger pull of their standard-issued Glock pistols. For those not in the know, the 12-pound trigger pulls mean that their index force must exert a force of at least 12 pounds to fire the weapon, resulting in less accuracy.
The problem is how shootings are rallying calls for greater gun control, but these recent shootings are happening where gun control is strict enough as it is. The fact of the matter is that these laws are creating nothing but shooting galleries for these crooks and in the case of the NYPD, leaving our last defenders much less capable.
The Aurora Shooting took place in a gun-free zone, but that didn’t prevent James Holmes from his murderous spree. This recent shooting happened in one of America’s most bustling cities, with officers responding in mere seconds. The gun was brought over illegally and in a place like New York City, it isn’t doubtful that the gun could be obtained illegally somewhere more local.
The fact is that gun control is only a leash for law-abiding citizens. Criminals act outside the moral spectrum the rest of us operate in. Laws banning or restricting the sale of firearms will only limit people who care about following the rules.
It is hard to find anyone these days who does not know someone else who carries weed, yet weed is still illegal. With the federals shipping guns back and forth across the border, what are the chances there won’t be a black market for firearms too? The criminals carry functional guns, but the rest of us will be stuck to fend for ourselves while our police deal with handicapped guns.
James Wang is a history sophomore and may be reached at [email protected].
It’s interesting that James would explain to us that a feature of a weapon was the direct cause of the casualties last weekend, not, in fact, the persons holding the weapon. Typically, one would argue that it is “not guns that kill, rather people.” Obviously, he agrees with gun control activists that the quoted statement above is not accurate. Furthermore, he also explains to us that the reason the gunman was able to use a firearm is because it was purchased in a different state, clearly supporting gun control activists argument that there is a significant need for broad federal legislation on this issue.
As a gun control activist, I always like to use the metaphor of a cancer in our society. Would we not do our best to prevent cancer if we could? Yes. Then why would we not do the same for gun violence? Gun ownership is an arbitrary right, it isn’t necessary for a productive and fulfilling life, nor do we need it to be responsible citizens.
In nations with comparable development levels and legal systems and strict restrictions on gun ownership, the rate of gun violence is a fraction of that found in the USA. The facts simply do not support Mr. Wang’s claim that gun restrictions would unfairly prejudice law abiding citizens.
Thomas Jefferson wrote that “laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind… institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.” Perhaps it is time for our nation to catch up.
Gun ownership, more accurately termed the right to keep and bear arms, is far from an “arbitrary right.” It is not a grant of privilege from the government. It is a right inherent to a free people, like the right to freedom of speech or freedom of religion.
The founding fathers who wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights had just successfully conducted a violent, armed rebellion against a tyrannical government. They intended to secure that ability for their progeny, fully aware that tyranny is a danger in any society. They did so with the second amendment.
The tyranny of unregulated weapons, that not even our most trained citizens can use properly, is what is truly a danger.
And furthermore, the British Empire could hardly be considered tyrannical. Tyranny is attending a party with your friends and being beheaded the next day because there was music and a few girls attended as well. I don’t think your description of the situation is apt.
Taxation without representation and the effort to seize
colonists’ arms at Lexington and Concord satisfied the
definition of tyranny for those who ultimately became
became Americans.
I suggest going on YouTube and look up “Australian gun ban”
Dan wake up. There are 870 million guns in circulation around the world. They are not going to go away. I am confident that there are millions of illegal unregistered guns in NYC owned by law abiding citizens. The real issue in front of us is how do we improve public safety.
The metric to measure public safety is violent crime – not gun ownership. Check your facts and you will find that violent crime is lower in places where law abiding people keep and bear arms. Fewer guns lead to less gun violence but higher violent crime.
So, do you want less gun violence and more violent crime? Really?
Dan would prefer where the only individuals with guns are the ones who write the laws; I mean, there’s no history where an unarmed citizenry wasn’t taken advantage of by their own government. Right?
So… are we supposed to have lighter triggers or police with stronger fingers? You didn’t really offer a solution here, chief. Also, comparing marijuana to illegal firearms is what we call a “red herring”.
The law abiding gun owners in NY are not now, and never were, against reasonable measures to ensure guns do not end up in the wrong hands. The new buzzword used by the advocates of stricter gun control in NYS is “reasonable”. “Reasonable” by whose definition? The so called sincerity of the “reasonable” gun control advocates is no longer accepted and with good reason. Every time “reasonable” measures were enacted, the only criminals they affected were the brand new criminals created by the new legislation. People that were solid, productive, and law abiding before and never harmed anyone. The last recent example of this was Governor Pataki and his miraculous “5 Point Plan” to cure the disease of gun violence in NYS (which included COBIS, by the way). So called Assault Weapons (by Federal definition at the time) were also banned in that legislative package. How truly effective was this and how many real violent criminals did it stop? How many more innocent victims did it create instead? Why do we need anything additional? We are the only state in the U.S. with the Sullivan Law. For there to be sincere consensus on this, the gun control advocates have to be prepared to support the repeal of most of the prior counterproductive and worthless legislation as a showing of good faith (including NYC Title 38-Go read it). Until that happens, even well meaning gun control advocates will continue to be viewed suspiciously as self-seeking liars because of prior example.
You have to ask yourself…why is a 12lb trigger pull issued? NYPD don not know how to keep their finger off the trigger until they are ready to shoot. After this incident I wonder why there is not a better process for screening which NYPD officers have the judgement and shooting skills to carry a firearm.
I was interested in the firearms training given to NYPD officers. All I could find in a brief (and I do mean brief) internet search was the following, taken from a 2008 Rand assessment of the NYPD’s firearms training and firearms discharge review process. It refers to the academy training new recruits get prior to going into the field.
“Firearms and tactics: Passing means successfully completing all components of basic firearm course and tactical components. It includes handgun qualification with a minimum of 78 percent hits on a number of stationary targets from fixed firing positions.”
I worked closely with cops for more than 25 years. The academy training they got in Washington State involved a lot of realistic shoot-don’t shoot scenarios, “run and gun” exercises, moving targets, targets that were ambiguous (and God help you if you shot a civilian target), shooting in low light, handling dangerous confrontations in populated public areas, etc. etc. On top of this, even small, rural police agencies had annual firearms qualification requirements that involved lots of scenario analysis and practice in making the instant shoot/don’t shoot decision the right way. The emphasis was always on avoiding putting a round in an innocent bystander.
It seems to me the NYPD lacks that kind of depth in their firearms training. Shooting at stationary targets from fixed firing positions won’t cut it. Top that off with a 12 pound trigger pull and you’re handicapped. My personal carry weapon has a nine pound pull on double action.
As the Chair of the Public Safety Committee of Manhattan Community Board 12, I will be holding a Public Hearing in support of a resolution for passage of NYS Senate Bill S1427 & S1863 with an emphasis on personal self-defense, education & firearm training for women.
September 12, 2012 at 6:30 PM
Isabella
515 Audubon Avenue
New York, NY 10040
[email protected]
If you live in New York State feel free to take a look at the information that I will be presenting as well as sign my on-line petition included at the link below. I hope that you will come out and support me as I support you. Fraternally.
http://cavalierknight.com/documents.html
There is one born every minute and James … I’m embarrassed for you.
Heck, the areas with the strickest gun laws have the most murders. Chicago, for instance, leads the country in murders, but it’s racists to mention that. That’s why lib networks barely report the fact.