Guns Don’t Kill People. People Kill People.
March 26, 2018
How true, yet how trite.
People kill people, whether with their hands, a blunt object, a knife or a gun.
That said, a person armed with a .22 caliber bolt action rifle and a 10 round magazine is much less likely to engage in a mass shooting than, say, a person armed with an AR-15 rifle with a 30 round magazine.
The difference in circumference between the .22 cal and the .223 cal is negligible. The design differences are substantial.
The .22 is a rimfire cartridge, and its design goes back over 100 years. The .22 Long Rifle cartridge is the most commonly used ammunition in the world today.
The .223 is a centerfire cartridge, designed in the early 1960’s specifically for military purposes as ammunition for the M-16 rifle (the military version of the AR-15).
To the uninformed, there is not much difference between the .22 bolt action rifle commonly used for target shooting and hunting, and the .223 semi-automatic rifle which was designed for military use.
To the Rambo Wanna-Be who is planning his domestic massacre, the differences are extraordinary.
After all, how many civilians can you take out with a .22 LR equipped with a 10 round magazine, even if you are shooting copper-plated hollow point bullets? [We don’t have an answer to this question because there is no record of a shooting rampage involving .22 rifles.]
We know that the AR-15 rifle (and variants) have been the weapon of choice in the majority of firearm massacres in the U.S. over the past decade.
There have been more than 30 school shootings in the U.S. since the December 2012 execution of 20 elementary school students and 6 adults at Sandy Hook in Newtown, CT.
If we were to outlaw the production, sale or possession of AR-15 style weapons in the U.S. tomorrow, would we immediately change this paradigm? Immediately: No.
Over the longer term (say, 3, 5, 7 years)? Almost certainly.
The AR-15 (and similar weapons) have no place in a civil society, except perhaps for military and limited law enforcement use.
Please don’t stand by and wait for someone to go hunting with an AR-15 at the school which your children or grandchildren attend. Step up and demand common sense gun regulations. Now.
The NRA is a Not-for-Profit Organization
March 21, 2018
Several recent studies by independent researchers confirm that nonprofits are significant positive contributors to the American economy.
When we observe aggregate national statistics relative to not-for-profit organizations we find that NFPs contribute significantly to regional economies – estimated overall at 12.5% –through wages paid, retail and wholesale purchases, and professional service contracts.
Measured by total employment and jobs created, NFP organizations punch well above their weight class, primarily due to the trade-off employees in the NFP sector make between the expected job-security in the NFP sector vs. the higher risks inherent in private-sector employment. Several sources estimate that jobs in the NFP sector pay about 75% of comparable jobs in the for-profit sector.
Public service, whether (1) in government as an elected official, or as a civil service employee, or (2) in the not-for-profit sector, is heavily supported and subsidized by the American people. As such, we have a right to expect that the people who are employed within the public service sector are working for the greater good of society, and that they have made a conscious decision to accept a reasonable and customary package of salary and benefits in exchange for the low-risk profile of working in the public sector.
According to a study by Charity Navigator, America’s go-to charity evaluator, the median CEO compensation among not-for-profit organizations in 2015 was $123,462.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) is a not-for-profit corporation primarily supported by membership fees of public-minded citizens and clubs. Its primary stated purpose is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, especially the political, civil and inalienable rights of the American people to keep and bear arms as a common law and Constitutional right of the individual citizen.
Wayne LaPierre, EVP and CEO of the National Rifle Association is one of 10 highly compensated executives of the not-for-profit NRA who receives in excess of $400,000 in annual compensation.
LaPierre’s total reported compensation in 2016 was $1,422,339.
It really is not clear if or how Wayne LaPierre or the NRA is working for the greater good of society.
In the April 2018 issue of The American Rifleman, Mr. LaPierre had this to say,
“American freedom faces no greater threat than from our academic institutions, where the most basic fundamental principles upon which our nation was founded are aggressively attacked by extreme socialists posing as honest professors.”
LaPierre goes on to explain,
“The socialist takeover of our college campuses is part of a massive wave of socialism that, if left unchecked, threatens all of our firearms freedom and all of the American liberty that we cherish and have fought hard to defend.”
LaPierre’s goal seems to be protecting the impressionable minds of our young people from the legions of ‘liberal college professors’ whom he believes have infiltrated colleges and universities across the U.S. to promote their ‘lust for a nation of socialism’.
His call to action seems to be woven into this concluding remark,
“… and then they’ll come for us… for our freedom and for our guns. That is the tsunami of socialism that threatens every law-abiding gun owner and freedom-loving American in this country.”
If it is true that the core NRA membership (as has been reported from various sources) is white, male, rural and relatively less educated, then this approach may be on target to energize that base. Yet, it doesn’t seem to correlate with the broader wants and needs of our 21st century society.
Before I go further, I should explain my background. I grew up on University Avenue in Buffalo, NY, just down the street from the University of Buffalo, so I was exposed to college professors from a young age. In fact, my mother was one of them.
When I was a young lad, I learned that ‘liberal’ was a method of gathering, analyzing and digesting information from a variety of sources, and then using that information to help guide the individual to an informed and independent conclusion.
I also learned at a young age that people who self-identify as liberal tend to value liberty and equality; and they generally support ideas and concepts such as: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, gender equality and international cooperation.
Today, as a mature adult, I value the critical thinking skills which were introduced to me by a rather broad array of teachers and adult role models, from elementary school through graduate school.
I am an NRA member and a gun owner. I don’t want to take away anyone’s legal firearm, nor do I want to impede the rights of my fellow Americans to own and responsibly use those firearms which are generally acceptable in a civil society.
That said: I also believe that we can proudly bear our arms and have responsible and common sense firearm laws. The safety of our children and citizens doesn’t need to be at odds with gun ownership.
A legitimate and responsible debate over 21st Century common sense gun regulations will never take place if we demonize and vilify one group against another, one political position against the other.
When we have individuals and organizations which are supported and subsidized by American taxpayers conjuring up and promoting controversial and potentially incendiary commentary — aren’t we creating a deck stacked against a common sense discussion?
How is it that we – all of us taxpayers in the U.S. – are required to subsidize and support Wayne LaPierre in his partisan and razor-focused quest to support the gun industry, when some of us would prefer a more mainstream, middle-of-the-road approach?
A fair and equitable approach to ensuring that each of us – as Americans – continue to enjoy those unalienable rights with which we have been endowed, among these Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness should never be linked to the brand, caliber or style of the Arms which are the right of the people to keep and bear.
The NRA began in 1871 as a public benefit organization — just after the Civil War — by organizing classes designed to teach gun safety and marksmanship to those individuals who wished to follow their 2nd amendment right to gun ownership.
Over the ensuing 147 years, the NRA mission has evolved such that its public service component – gun safety – is no longer a priority when measured in fiscal terms. Fact: with 2016 total reported expenses of $413 Million, the NRA reported spending (1) $77 Million on Legislative programs; and (2) $48 Million on firearm training.
The NRA states in its financial statements, “Firearms safety is the cornerstone of everything the NRA does for its members.”
I hope to leave my readers with several questions to ponder:
- If ‘firearms safety is the cornerstone’ why does the NRA spend more on legislative programs than on firearm training?
- For 2016, the NRA disclosed a total annual payroll of $68.3 Million, with $7.8 Million paid to just 10 executives. This is an organization which is tax-exempt. Does that seem reasonable to you?
- If ‘firearms safety is the cornerstone’ why does the NRA continue to fight common-sense gun legislation aimed to create a safer environment for both gun owners and bystanders?
Common Sense Legislation?
March 12, 2018
This Old Walrus just doesn’t get it. We don’t rely on the Mattachine Society to write legislation on sodomy with young boys. We don’t (usually) weigh in with the Russian Mafia to write our laws on money laundering. So, why is it that the NRA has become the singular expert – the ‘Go-to People’ – for all issues concerning firearms?
Over the past decade, or so, we’ve had enough mass murders in the U.S. to spot some common ingredients: (a) Perpetrator is an under-25 white male; (b) He is angry, isolated and/or socially challenged (often described in retrospect as ‘mentally disturbed’); and (c) The weapon of choice is an AR-15 (or equal), accompanied by high-capacity magazines.
Young men mature physically much faster than they mature mentally and emotionally. A typical 18 to 20 Y.O. male physically looks like an adult, but just hasn’t attained the emotional and mental maturity that post-25 year old adults generally possess.
There is a ton of research which supports the notion that changes in cognitive abilities occurring in males between ages 18 and 25 are essentially a continued process of brain development that start during puberty. At age 18, a young man is roughly halfway through the entire stage of development. The prefrontal cortex doesn’t have nearly the functional capacity at age 18 as it does at age 25.
It is unfortunate that Congress passed legislation in 1996 which effectively precludes the CDC from conducting research on the causes of gun violence (the Dickey Amendment).
There is some colloquial evidence that people who act out their Rambo fantasies are angry, isolated and/or socially challenged, and there may be a preventable linkage between male brain development and assault weapons, but until qualitative research is conducted, we really won’t know.
Meanwhile, there seem to be a couple of simple interventions which we could enact tomorrow that would put this issue on ‘pause’ until some qualitative research can be conducted:
- Ban the manufacture, sale or possession of semi-automatic military-style assault weapons in the U.S.;
- Ban the manufacture, sale or possession of magazines that can contain more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and outlaw devices like bump stocks that make weapons more deadly;
- Institute universal background checks and close loopholes that let too many people slip through the cracks and purchase firearms despite being a threat to themselves or others;
- No weapons for suspected terrorists, domestic abusers, or individuals convicted of hate crimes;
- Impose a three-day waiting period for the purchase of all firearms, and raise the minimum age for buying those weapons to 21;
- Institute a Gun Violence Restraining Order that allows law enforcement to confiscate weapons from individuals who are deemed dangerous to themselves or others.
These are common-sense solutions to help reduce gun violence in all communities across the U.S. – including accidents, suicides, domestic violence, mass shootings, and acts of terrorism. Most of these reforms are supported by a majority of Americans – not just Democrats or Republicans, but ALL Americans.
And, once we have obtained high-quality qualitative research on the causes of gun violence, our elected officials will be in a much better position to adapt and/or modify these interim interventions to reflect data-driven conclusions on the causes of gun violence in the U.S.
What are we waiting for?
walrus51 