Deadly school shooting a call for action -- lock 'em up -- Dec. 2, 2021 column

By MARSHA MERCER

A chilling headline in The New York Times read: “Michigan shooting the deadliest on U.S. school property this year.”

Let that sink in. The qualifier “this year” makes clear, a friend wrote me, that school shootings are a given, “that this is just one deadly but inevitable school shooting among many past and present.”

Sadly, she is correct. Many Americans seem to have grown accustomed to what should be unimaginable – children gunning down other children at school.

On Tuesday in Michigan, a 15-year-old boy allegedly shot and killed four of his classmates in an Oxford High School hallway after lunch. Six other students and a teacher were wounded, some critically.

The shooting was the deadliest since May 2018, according to tracking by Education Week, which reports there have been 29 on campus school shootings this year with 11 people killed and 49 injured.

Also on Nov. 30 at Humboldt High School in Tennessee, three people were shot, one fatally, at a basketball game.

In Virginia, two high school shootings occurred this year with no fatalities – in Woodbridge in August and Newport News in September.

“Schools, in general, remain among the safest places for children to be, and shootings in schools are relatively rare,” Education Week notes. Since most children were home for school during much of 2020, school shootings were much lower than in previous years.

However, unintentional shooting deaths by children rose significantly last year, according to a count by Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control advocacy group.

Authorities in Michigan said the toll there would have been higher had the school not practiced active shooter drills. In addition, a deputy assigned to the school and other deputies arrived on the scene quickly and took the suspect into custody.

In what has become a sickening routine after such tragedies, politicians sent their thoughts and prayers. Most congressional Democrats avoid even mentioning stricter gun safety measures.

Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat who represents the congressional district that includes Oxford, tweeted that the shocked students “will have to make sense of one of their peers doing this to them.”

One of their peers? What about the adult who bought the semiautomatic handgun on Black Friday that his son used four days later? It’s not yet clear how the boy -- I will not name him because sick individuals often crave publicity -- got the gun.

Slotkin said it’s time for more mental health services, and it surely is, but that is not enough.

Oakland County prosecutor Karen McDonald has the right idea. Citing evidence that the Oxford shootings were premeditated, she charged the shooter Wednesday as an adult with terrorism, four first-degree murder counts and 19 other counts.

The terrorism charge was justified not only for the victims who died but those who will carry emotional scars for life, she said.

“What about all the children who ran, screaming, hiding under desks? What about all the children at home right now who can’t eat and can’t sleep and can’t imagine a world where they could ever step foot back in that school?” she said. “Those are victims too and so are their families and so is the community. The charge of terrorism reflects that.”

She also said she may charge the shooter’s parents.

“We know that owning a gun means securing it properly and locking it and keeping the ammunition separate and not allowing access to other individuals, particularly minors. We know that and we have to hold individuals accountable who don’t do that,” she said.

I believe most gun owners are responsible and would agree with the need for common-sense precautions to keep their guns out of the wrong hands.

The old “don’t touch” rule many of us grew up with doesn’t work with all young people these days. There are many different ways to secure guns, from trigger locks to gun safes.

The NRA constantly harps that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. But fewer kids would be killing other kids at school – or themselves and their siblings inadvertently -- if their parents and other adults kept their guns safely locked up.

“We have to do better,” McDonald said. Amen.

©2021 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

30

 

Divide on gun laws sets stage for 2020 -- column of May 2, 2019

By MARSHA MERCER

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris threw down the gauntlet on gun control.

“Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together and have the courage to pass reasonable gun safety laws, and if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action,” the senator from California declared April 22 at a CNN town hall in New Hampshire.

Taking a strong stand on gun control used to be politically risky. Today, not so much.

Not after the Virginia Tech massacre of 32 students and professors in 2007, the slaughter of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, the mass murder of 17 students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School last year – and countless other shootings, including at a synagogue in California Saturday and a university in North Carolina Tuesday.

Democratic leaders agree on the need for universal background checks for gun purchases, reinstatement of the ban on sales of military-style assault weapons and red flag laws meant to keep guns out of the hands of those likely to hurt themselves or others.

In February, House Democrats passed two gun safety bills with a smattering of Republican support. If lightning should strike and the bills make it through the Republican-controlled Senate, though, President Donald Trump will veto them.

And that divide sets the stage for the 2020 campaign.

Trump told the National Rifle Association convention April 26 the constitutional right to bear arms is “under assault – but not when we’re here. Not even close.”

He urged NRA members to “get out there and vote” next year. “It seems like it’s a long ways away. It’s not,” he said. 

The NRA poured tens of millions of dollars into electing Trump, but its clout appears to be fading amidst internal strife and investigations into its tax exempt status.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, hardly a “gun grabber,” reportedly is drafting a red flag bill to help police confiscate guns temporarily from people who are likely to hurt themselves or others.

“I think most Americans believe that multiple murderers shouldn’t have gun rights. Most Americans support background checks,” he told The State newspaper in South Carolina. “The Second Amendment’s important to me, but it’s not a suicide pact.”

Polls show the major issues for 2020 are likely to be health care, the economy and immigration. Gun laws don’t make the cut, although few polls even ask the question.

But Quinnipiac University does ask, and its polls since 2014 consistently have found over 90 percent support for background checks for all gun buyers. Most recently, in January, 95 percent of Democrats, 94 percent of independents and 89 percent of Republicans said they favored background checks.

Gun rights groups say background checks are ineffective and infringe on constitutional rights. When several states passed more stringent firearm laws after the shootings in Parkland, Florida, dozens of rural counties declared themselves Second Amendment “sanctuaries,” refusing to enforce the new laws.

How did we get here? For a clear-eyed account, I suggest reading “After Virginia Tech” by award-winning journalist Thomas P. Kapsidelis, a friend and former Richmond Times-Dispatch colleague.

Kapsidelis tells victims’ stories and what happened next to survivors, families, first responders and others -- and where the political system failed them.

“One Tech parent told me that all sides could have come together to make progress. That hasn’t happened,” he writes.

It’s a sobering, unsentimental assessment, but Kapsidelis cautions against losing hope.

He quotes an editorial by Gerald Fischman, who was murdered, along with four colleagues, last summer when a gunman with a grudge burst into the newsroom at the Capital Gazette in Annapolis. After the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando where 58 were killed in July 2016, Fischman wrote: 

“Of all the words this week, hopelessness may be the most dangerous. We must believe there is a solution, a way to prevent another mass shooting.”

No one wants more mass shootings. The 2020 campaigns and election offer us the chance to show we care enough to try to stop them.

©2019 Marsha Mercer. All rights reserved.

Kicking at 2nd Amendment not the solution -- March 29, 2018 column

By MARSHA MERCER

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens rattled the National Rifle Association’s cage -- with predictable results.

Stevens, impressed by March for Our Lives demonstrations last Saturday, called for repeal of the Second Amendment, which he said is antiquated.

The amendment, as you know, states “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.”

It was adopted out of “concern that a national standing army might pose a threat to the security of the separate states,” Stevens wrote Tuesday in an op-ed in The New York Times. “Today that concern is a relic of the 18^th century.”

Told ya so, the NRA crowed.   

“I have long said the ultimate goal of the left is the complete repeal of the Second Amendment,” said NRATV host Grant Stinchfield. “This is proof, my friends.”

No, actually, it’s not.

Stevens was expressing his own provocative opinion. He doesn’t speak for “the left” any more than the NRA speaks for all gun owners, many of whom support common-sense gun safety measures.

The inspiring young protesters would be wise to thank Stevens, 97, for his support and get to work lobbying their legislators, registering to vote, backing candidates who support stricter gun laws and voting.

Repeal isn’t “simple,” as he said, or even doable. It’s a distraction, and a self-defeating one.

President Donald Trump’s response to Stevens – complete with the laying on of the caps lock key and exclamation points -- shows he thinks this is just the issue to fire up his base.    

“THE SECOND AMENDMENT WILL NEVER BE REPEALED! As much as Democrats would like to see this happen and despite the words yesterday of former Supreme Court Justice Stevens, NO WAY. We need more Republicans in 2018 and must ALWAYS hold the Supreme Court!” Trump tweeted at 4:52 a.m. Wednesday.

Yes, 4:52 a.m.

Only about one in five voters strongly or somewhat favors repeal, according to an Economist-YouGov poll in February, which found tepid support for repeal among Democrats, about 39 percent. Only 8 percent of Republicans supported repeal.

Stevens, appointed to the court by Republican President Gerald Ford, became a liberal bulwark. He retired in 2010, two years after writing a dissent in District of Columbia v. Heller, which determined there is an individual right to bear arms. Stevens still believes the court’s decision in that case was wrong.

“In 1939 the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress could prohibit the possession of a sawed-off shotgun because that weapon had no reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a `well regulated militia,’” he wrote in The Times.

The idea that gun rights were limited held until the 1980s, when the NRA and other groups mobilized, he said.

Amending the Constitution is intentionally difficult. The likely path requires a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate and ratification by three-fourths of the states.

Alternatively, two-thirds of the states could call for a constitutional convention where amendments would be proposed. That would open the door to heaven knows what – and is so daunting it’s never been tried. The amendments would then need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

If trying to repeal the Second Amendment is not the solution to ending gun violence, grassroots activism could be. 

With Trump having backed off his support for gun safety measures and Congress apparently paralyzed, gun safety advocates are smart to focus on the states. But they’ll need to persevere to make even modest progress.

After protests in Tallahassee following the Parkland shootings Feb. 14, Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, signed tighter gun laws, including raising to 21 the minimum age to buy rifles and shotguns, requiring a three-day waiting period to buy long guns and arming some staff. 

The NRA immediately filed suit to block some of the provisions.

Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo, a Democrat, signed a “red flag” executive order policy Feb. 26, allowing police to take guns from people who pose a danger to themselves or others.   

“If the federal government won’t act, states need to do more to prevent the gun violence that has become far too common,” Raimondo said.

 ©2018 Marsha Mercer.

All rights reserved.

30

Our 21st century normal -- the routine of mass shootings -- Oct. 5, 2017 column

By MARSHA MERCER

Not even the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history surprises us.

Shocked, saddened, angry – yes, all three. But if we’re honest we aren’t surprised anymore when a monster with a high-powered weapon – or weapons -- kills many people he has never met.

We’ve developed a sickening ritual around mass murder. The news comes with horrifying images and the awful audio of staccato pops and screams. Then, inspiring stories of true heroes, the brave first responders, and heart-rending bios of victims whose lives are tragically cut short.

We pray and hold moments of silence and candlelight vigils. We ponder how someone could do the unthinkable.

Politicians play their assigned roles: The president makes somber remarks, congressional Republicans demand that Democrats stop politicizing the tragedy, and Democrats call for sensible gun control. The gun lobby hunkers down.    

And we go on to the next man-made catastrophe.

We’ve had more than half a century to learn the drill. On Aug. 1, 1966, a young man dragged a footlocker with three rifles, two pistols, a sawed-off shotgun and provisions – including Spam, canned peaches, toilet paper and deodorant -- to the observation deck on the 30^th floor of the University of Texas Tower.

He took aim from his high perch and started shooting. When the 96-minute rampage was over, 14 people were dead, and at least 33 others were wounded.

A campus became a killing field. Americans were shocked, saddened, angry – and, yes, surprised. How could this happen?

The shooter was a university student named Charles Whitman, 25, a former Eagle Scout, ex-Marine, sharpshooter. He had killed his mother and wife hours earlier.  

Whitman, it turned out, had complained of severe headaches and depression and had told a psychiatrist he fantasized about killing people from the Tower.

He left a suicide note asking that his brain be examined to “see if there is any mental disorder.”

Doctors found a malignant brain tumor the size of a pecan but were never sure if it affected Whitman’s behavior. Experts still don’t agree on his motive.

Motive is again the question as we desperately try to make sense of senseless carnage, this time on the Las Vegas strip.

Stephen Paddock, 64, had no police record. A high-stakes gambler, he checked into the Mandalay Bay resort and casino with 10 suitcases. On Sunday night, he set up guns at two windows in his 32^nd floor suite. He rained bullets down on a country music festival, killing 58 people and wounding nearly 500. He killed himself as police approached.

Mary Ellen O’Toole, a forensics expert at George Mason University, believes Paddock may have studied Whitman to prepare for his rampage. It’s possible. Paddock was 13 when Whitman made worldwide news. So far, though, there’s no evidence he did so.

Paddock reportedly had 23 guns and 12 “bump stocks” at the hotel. The device makes a semiautomatic rifle act like an automatic, so instead of having to pull the trigger time after time, he could spray bullets as if he had a machine gun.

Congressional Republicans insist it’s too soon to consider gun control legislation – but it always is. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, introduced a bill Wednesday to make bump stocks and similar devices illegal.

Even before Feinstein introduced the bill, gun shops around the country reported a spike in sales of bump stocks. Banning the lethal device is eminently sensible, so it probably won’t happen.

“Nothing will change after the Las Vegas shooting” was the chilling headline in The New York Times on an op-ed by former Rep. Steve Israel, Democrat of New York.

The National Rifle Association used to support sensible measures but “now is forced to oppose them because of competing organizations,” Israel wrote.

Part of the blame goes to redistricting, which pulls Republicans farther right, making them more subject to the NRA’s score, he said, and part to Americans’ numbness to gun violence.

“You’ll watch or listen to the news and shake your head, then flip to another channel or another app,” Israel wrote. “This horrific event will recede into our collective memory.”

That’s what happened in 1966. It sadly has happened hundreds of times since and very likely will happen again. It’s the routine we have chosen. 

      

30