It is abundantly clear from remarks made by the members of Connecticut’s
U.S. Congressional delegation, both before and after President Barack Obama’s
State of the Union address, that the litmus test of effective gun legislation
is that such legislation should prevent future Sandy Hooks.
U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal said following Mr. Obama’s speech,
in the course of which the president devoted several minutes to the mass murder
at Sandy Hook Elementary School, “…we
should be joining together to enact real change. Change that will help our
law enforcement officials keep guns out
of the hands of those who wish to do harm. Change that will ensure that
laws on the books are enforced. Change that will strengthen our mental health system.
And change that will keep our children
safe from tragic acts of violence…” (emphasis mine) Mr. Blumenthal characterized that portion of the
president’s State of the Union address in which he mentioned the slaughter of
school children in Newtown as a “stirring call to action against gun violence
in America, to prevent another tragedy like
the one that befell Newtown (emphasis mine)”.
It should be noted that at this point the criminal investigation
report on Sandy Hook is still in a process stage; a definitive report likely
will be issued AFTER Connecticut’s General Assembly has produced its
legislative remedies.
Thus far, investigators have not affirmed that the Sandy
Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, was suffering from a mental disorder. When a parent
of one of the victims of the Sandy Hook slaughter asked Lieutenant Paul Vance,
one of the lead investigators, to share with the parents of the victims Mr.
Lanza’s medical records, she was told that such data must await a final report
on “a pending criminal investigation.” The notion that Mr. Lanza was suffering
from a mental disorder presently is little more than inference drawn from the horrific
nature of the crime; no hard data thus far has been publically presented to
show that Mr. Lanza was mentally incapacitated. Neither does the public record
indicate that Mr. Lanza had taken psychotropic drugs; a few commentators have
pointed to causal links between some psychotropic medications and mass murders.
Mr. Blumenthal is not the only member of Connecticut’s all Democratic U.S. Congressional Delegation
to link prophylactic gun control legislation with the Sandy Hook mass murders.
Newly elected U.S. Senator Chris Murphy said, “For those of
us in Connecticut, we are still living with the horror of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, but
the healing process is helped knowing we have a president who is going to do
everything in his power to make sure no
community ever has to go through this again. There are no excuses anymore
(emphasis mine).''
Newly elected U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty was moved “by
President Obama's call for real and meaningful change to save lives in the wake of the Newtown tragedy (emphasis
mine)."
And longtime U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro thought it
important to point out that “Victims of gun violence all had names. We should remember to honor them by putting
an end to this (emphasis mine)."
The question arises: Are members of Connecticut’s U.S.
Congressional Delegation overpromising?
Consider: As yet there is no data publically confirmed by
criminal investigators or members of Governor Dannel Malloy’s investigatory
committee that the Sandy Hook shooter was suffering from a mental defect
instrumental in provoking his crime. None of the data released so far suggests
that Mr. Lanza had been taking psychotropic drugs, which some claim to have
triggered other mass murders in the United States and elsewhere.
No public data suggests that Mr. Lanza had lawful access to
the weapons he brought with him to Sandy Hook Elementary School, an arsenal that
included two semi-automatic pistols and a shotgun apparently left in the trunk
of his mother’s car, in addition to the semi-automatic long rifle Mr. Lanza used
to mow down 20 students and six faculty members of Sandy Hook Elementary School.
The mass murderer’s weapon of choice was a very lethal semi-automatic
Bushmaster rifle, but any of the weapons he carried with him, most especially
the shotgun, might have been as lethal.
Connecticut’s gun laws are comprehensive but not quite as austere
as those in Chicago, Illinois, Mr. Obama’s old political stomping grounds,
which is pretty much the murder capital of the United States. Today in Chicago,
there is more fatal gun violence than in the heyday of prohibition gangsters such as Al Capone,
and none of the gun laws on Chicago’s books have effectively kept Chicago’s
population “safe from tragic acts of violence,” to use the phrase often in the
mouths of Connecticut politicians.
If preventing future Sandy Hooks is the intended purpose of
national and state politicians who hope to “keep children safe” from determined
mass killers such as Mr. Lanza, what efficacious laws more severe than those of
Chicago -- short of repealing the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, so
that both CRIMINALS and law abiding gun owners may be effectively disarmed – do
the members of Connecticut’s Congressional Delegation suggest might accomplish
their noble purpose?
Comments
There were essentially no gun laws in most of the nation in the first half of the 20th century, and fast shooting revolvers, lever actions rifles and semi-automatic pistols were all present. (not to mention Tommy guns!). The press was pretty lurid at promoting crimes like the Lindberg kidnapping, so fame was assured for a mass killer. The only factor that could account for the relatively recent rise is deinstutionalization of mental patients. My guess is the State knows something they will not reveal related to Adam lanzas mental state. This explains the rush to legislate.
"My guess is the State knows something they will not reveal related to Adam lanzas mental state. This explains the rush to legislate."
You may be right. It will be in the final report.