In America, Guns Are Used More For Suicide Than Homicide

The majority in the Supreme Court might have thought they were protecting the Second Amendment last week with their controversial ruling, but the evidence across the country shows us something the NRA would rather keep hidden. Far from the myth that guns in the home protect citizens from mortal danger, the reality is that having a gun in the house increases the chance of a suicide or homicide in the home.

From RawStory:

ATLANTA - The Supreme Court's landmark ruling on gun ownership last week focused on citizens' ability to defend themselves from intruders in their homes. But research shows that surprisingly often, gun owners use the weapons on themselves.

Suicides accounted for 55 percent of the nation's nearly 31,000 firearm deaths in 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

There was nothing unique about that year — gun-related suicides have outnumbered firearm homicides and accidents for 20 of the last 25 years. In 2005, homicides accounted for 40 percent of gun deaths. Accidents accounted for 3 percent. The remaining 2 percent included legal killings, such as when police do the shooting, and cases that involve undetermined intent.

Public-health researchers have concluded that in homes where guns are present, the likelihood that someone in the home will die from suicide or homicide is much greater.

In fact, as the article states, crime was reduced after the D.C. ban was instated over 30 years ago. Unfortunately the strength of groups like the NRA have cut into gun control largely thanks to the conservative ideology that has run rampant in our country. Now that the courts have more and more "thinkers" like Antonio Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, we can expect more decisions like this in the future...regardless of the facts in each case.

Giuliani's Loaded Flip Flops

Cenk Uyugr rants about how Giuliani changes his mind about gun control so that he can run for President outside of New York City.

The NRA Goes Too Far, And Then Some

The NRA is an interesting organization. It raises tons of money to lobby for gun rights and all things related to the second amendment. The right for people to keep and bear arms is the essential part of the text for them. Organized militias are a thing of the past and are generally frowned upon, except in certain rural areas of the country. The NRA loves to come out and lobby for guns and their owners, particularly at terrible times that relate to murder. The current example would be the massacre at Virginia Tech.

Well a few days ago Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007." This bill gives the Justice Department the authority to restrict gun sales to known terrorists. The Bush Administration and particularly Alberto Gonzales greedily gobbled up the potential power and is backing the bill. The problem for the Administration is that their backers over at the NRA are appalled at losing even a little bit of their gun rights, even for the terrorists that share their love of guns.

Throughout the whole U.S. Attorney scandal, most of these people stayed silent as Gonzales' remained steadfast in his denial that he did anything wrong when he let eight attorneys be fired for political purposes. Now that he is backing S.1237, they are calling for his head. Well at least the gun nuts and the left can agree on the fact that Gonzales should be canned. Too bad for them that our reasoning is on more solid moral ground. Letting terrorists buy guns due to loopholes in the law isn't really the best thing for the security of our nation, something the NRA doesn't seem to care about.

Guns Ablazin At The White House Today

With Virginia Tech's tragedy in the news coupled with the new push by the right for easing restrictions on guns, there's an interesting twist that developed inside the White House gate today. A Secret Service officer's gun went off accidentally on the grounds and injured two fellow members. Thankfully this firearm incident was non-life threatening to both of them, one being hit in the leg and the other receiving shrapnel to the face.

I'm not advocating that the guardians of the President lay down their weapons and fight potential assassins with sticks and stones. Yet the incident shows that guns are indeed dangerous weapons, even if not meant to intentionally harm someone. Many Republicans are in favor of lighter gun laws and they think that by somehow arming everyone that wants to shoot, the horrible event down at Virginia Tech could have been avoided.

These gun nuts really are clueless when it comes to firearms. People such as those in the military, the police force and other weapons experts are well trained to deal with intense situations such as a shoot out. Regular citizens that like to go shooting down at the range on nights and weekends have no experience and no idea what to expect in such an adrenaline-packed situation. Wearing ear muffs and controlling a paper target on a string is one thing, real life is another. Memo to gun nuts, stop trying to live up to Rambo, this isn't a movie.

Politicizing Yesterday's Tragedy At Virginia Tech

I was completely shocked to hear the news about yesterday's tragic episode on the campus of Virginia Tech. That tremendous amount of life, so many of them just starting out their lives at college, is beyond words. My heart goes out their families and friends, not to mention the students that will live with a slight edge of terror at was once their safe school. Politics has no reason to pop it's ugly head up here but somehow a few Republican pundits and bloggers managed to do just that.

From Media Matters:

In the wake of a deadly shooting rampage that killed over 30 people on the campus of Virginia Tech University, host John Gibson asked on the April 16 edition of Fox News' The Big Story: "So, theoretically, in this lecture hall where all 31 were killed, there could have been someone with a carry permit carrying their gun to shoot the shooter?" Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano replied: "No," adding, "Virginia lets you carry a gun at a gas station or a bank or a stadium, but not on a college campus, where you may protect kids."

Napolitano and Gibson's comments echo those of right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin, who, citing an op-ed written by a Virginia Tech spokesperson, noted on her weblog that the university prohibits handguns. She then quoted a weblog post from "Andrew's Dad," who wrote: "Just imagine if students were armed. We no longer need to imag[in]e what will happen when they are not armed." Malkin also quoted an email from "[r]eader Kevin" who claimed: "Imagine if sensible CCW [Concealed Carry Weapon] laws allowed people to defend themselves, this tragedy could have been avoided."

To bring up handgun laws and attack those who fight to keep guns out of the hands of criminals in this matter is atrocious. They don't seem to get the fact that Virginia's lenient laws helped aid this mass murderer. Of course it is true that people kill people and the guns are merely the tool, but making it easier for nut jobs like yesterday's murderer to access them and use them is just plain crazy. Besides that, it is just insane to think that a college student would carry a concealed weapon to class even if they were allowed to. College is for learning (and partying too), not for protecting yourself against mass murderers.

No matter how you feel about guns (though this story might stir your emotions on it) it is undeniably wrong to bring politics into this terrible tale that was shown on the news yesterday.