Social problems. They are my reason for blogging on Patch: to identify a social problem and then invite our community to get involved and be part of a solution. Sadly, the social problem facing our community – rather, our country, right now needs no introduction. The tragic events that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday morning will forever change the conversation.
When faced with adversity my method of coping is mobilization. What can I do to regain a sense of control? This week we are all left to ponder this question. How can we channel our heartache and anger into action? Is it because Newtown is so close to home that we are compelled to act? I don’t think so – the country is engaged in discussion like never before.
There are many questions, and many facets to consider. But two areas scream for attention: how our society deals with mental illness and guns.
Mental Illness:
We face a mental health crisis in this country. Budgets are cut, and with the loss of funding go vital services. There is a disparity between the way insurance companies view general healthcare and behavioral health services; this allows payers to limit services for those seeking help for a mental illness. They impose limits on how much providers can be reimbursed too, so in in this part of the country most therapists don’t accept any insurance. People who have a mental illness are stigmatized, and this deters many from accessing services. Parents who seek help for their troubled children are chastised if medication is part of the treatment.
There are no easy answers. Let’s talk, listen and learn from each other. We need to take a close look at how our society deals with people who have a disease of the brain – a chemical imbalance. It will take work, but we can change the culture, and improve the care of those experiencing a mental illness.
Leadership from the National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) Connecticut is going “on the road” to talk with residents throughout the state. This is an opportunity for community members to learn about what is happening in Connecticut to address the needs of those with mental illness, and to get involved on a grass roots level. Local NAMI chapters will host the meetings; a schedule can be found on NAMI CT’s calendar. Some dates are already scheduled (below), and more will be:
- Fairfield NAMI: January 2, 2013, 7:30-9:00 pm. This meeting’s agenda includes a discussion of NAMI’s legislative priorities for 2013. More about the meeting is here.
- Stamford/Greenwich NAMI: January 16, 2013. More info here.
- NAMI Southeast (Norwich): February 6, 2013. More info here.
- NAMI Windsor Locks (East Windsor): February 10, 2013. More info here.
Guns:
Let’s consider the facts. The Swiss-based Small Arms Survey found that in 2007 the United States had the highest gun ownership rate in the world: 88 guns per 100 people, or 270 million altogether.[i] When countries experiencing high murder rates by drug cartels (Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil) were excluded, the survey reported that the US has the highest rate of homicide by guns. Firearms killed 31,347 people in 2009 – that is 17.7% of all injury deaths that year.[ii]
Gun control helps. The states with high gun ownership and weak gun laws experienced the most gun deaths.[iii] No matter how “gun enthusiasts” may spin it, the numbers speak for themselves: tougher gun laws save lives.
What justification is there for civilians to own military style weapons and high capacity magazines? What rational person would deny the importance of background checks and gun registration? When Congress resumes session in January, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) intends to introduce a bill to renew the ban on assault weapons. These are common sense measures.
The gun lobby is powerful. Suggestions to arm teachers and implement high-tech security features in our schools and public areas are based on the premise that the current state of gun ownership and (lack of) regulation is acceptable. No longer can our society acquiesce to gun violence perpetrated against the innocent. This is our call to be part of the solution. The nation is ready – now is the time for action.
Contact government officials:
Let your elected leaders know what you think. Connecticut Against Gun Violence, www.CAGV.org, is leading the charge on gun control in the state. They are working with Connecticut legislators and on January 9th a Bill will be introduced to enhance gun safety. Click on the “Legislative Action Center” on the right side of their home page, under Take Action. Once you enter your home address this link will connect you to your local, state and federal representatives in government. Since Senator-elect Chris Murphy hasn’t taken office yet, he is not included. He can be reached here, at his Congressional office. After he takes his senatorial seat that link will close and he will be listed on the CAGV’s Legislative Action Center too.
Other organizations that are actively pursuing gun control:
- The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, www.bradycampaign.org
- Mayors Against Illegal Guns, www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org
- Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, www.csgv.org
- Violence Policy Center, www.vpc.org
Several on-line petitions are circulating:
- Immediately address the issue of gun control through the introduction of legislation in Congress. We the People: sign the petition
- Gun Control. Now. Sign On (an arm of Move On): sign the petition
- Increase the availability of mental health services now! Change.org: sign the petition
- Zichronam Lirracha: For their memory shall be a blessing. Jewish Council for Public Affairs: sign the petition
[i] The Guardian, Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country. US edition. Accessed 12/18/12, http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list.
[ii] National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 60, No. 3, December 29, 2011. Accessed 12/18/12, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf.
[iii] Violence Policy Center. States with Higher Gun Ownership and Weak Gun Laws Lead Nation in Gun Deaths, Washington, DC: Violence Policy Center, October 24, 2011. Accessed 12/18/12, http://www.vpc.org/press/1110gundeath.htm.
Does Cuomo's new law require weapons be secured by the registered owner?
Huh?
I know many Chinese and I don't think they "take people to the back of the courthouse after sentencing and shoot them." I also know many Chinese that do no lie to the rest of the world and do not put on shiny happy faces. I hope you were merely trying to point out that there have been instances in China that upon sentencing, criminals are punished without delay. You may not have intended your comments to be racist. In reality, your remarks are racist.
There is no justification for a national standard for hardware restrictions, excluding artillery, machine guns, rockets, grenades, etc. The highest murder rates occur in high-density cities and victims are approximately 7 times more likely to be black and murdered by blacks. What may be desired by city law enforcement may be completely unnecessary for rural and suburban populations. CT has no business telling Montana what hardware it needs. If you make a stupid mistake in MT and find yourself charged by an angry grizzly, you might need an assault rifle and a 30-round magazine clip. It would be a shame to kill a grizzly unnecessarily, but even the stupid sometimes need help. State legislatures should empower their municipalities to pass the laws they need. The problem is the human using the gun. Pass laws which let law-abiding citizens of every race and every location adopt appropriate laws that protect themselves and their kids. A cookie-cutter, one-fits-all national law won’t work except for one remedy. The best chance for sensible compromise is probably universal gun sale background checks. The time of the unregulated gun show is past.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/ http://gunfacts.info/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
http://www.gunfacts.info/
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html
I am sure that the second amendment itself would be confusing to them-- unless of course those aliens came here to eat us in which case having guns would be a good idea.
I still do. I'm not a gun owner, never have been and hope never to be but if I feel it is necessary to protect my family, I want the choice to exercise that basic right to self defense. If the government continues to restrict that choice, I will consider actually becoming a first time owner. The vast majority of gun violence happens between those who are already criminals using illegal guns. If the police do their job, fine, but when they do not or cannot, it's up to the individual and no state can take away the basic human right to self defense.
While it is true that most firearms murders are committed by black murderers, most of their victims are also black. Too often, the victims are little black kids or other law-abiding black citizens and mostly in high-density cities. We should allow people in these circumstances to ask for laws as strict as they want without violating the 2nd amendment. The same strict laws may not be necessary or desired in other communities. Those other communities should be able to get the laws they want. We could eliminate a lot of contentious debate if we went local with our laws. The communities should decide about the freedom vs. security tradeoffs, not some Nanny in Chief in Washington or in state capitals, except for ownership restrictions on mental condition and serious criminal history. If you want the FBI’s breakdown of murderers and victims by race and gender, check out this link: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6 It’s encouraging to see the beginning of more reasoned thought on this subject. Let’s enact laws that actually work and where they are needed and protect all races.
My understanding of anthropology is limited but I don't know that Chinese is a race but the subject is getting blurred.
noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others. 2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. My comments do not embody any of these points. To anyone with an ounce of common sense, it's obvious I meant the government - per my earlier comments to your accusation above. But either way, your opinion of me means *nothing* so if it makes you feel better/superior/sanctimonious, etc. then accuse away. Couldn't care less.
The majority of gun-related legislation that has been introduced is an affront to our constitutional rights as law-abiding citizens. This unfortunate theme is epitomized in Senate Bill 122, introduced by Senator Edward Meyer (D-12). SB 122 seeks to prohibit the purchase, sale, donation, transportation, possession and use of any firearm except one designed to fire a ^^single round^^!! If enacted, SB 122 will only render law-abiding citizens and their families as defenseless victims. Firearms designed to fire more than a single round are overwhelmingly the most commonly owned firearms for self-defense and home protection, recreational and competitive target shooting, marksmanship training, and/or hunting. This arbitrary and unconstitutional legislation will only victimize law-abiding citizens in Connecticut, and leave them vulnerable to the criminal who will never comply with a gun control law to only possess a firearm that only fires a single round. Please contact your state legislators (ct.gov--click on "legislature") and encourage them to stand up for freedom and protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms this legislative session. SB 122 is just one of dozens of misguided anti-gun bills that have been introduced that will penalize only law-abiding citizens in Connecticut. Note that Sen. Meyer has also introduced a bill to legalize "Assisted Suicide"!! Typical heartless liberal insanity--both of these!
You buy the video games and want to blame the video store? Why don't you sue McDonald's because you are overweight?
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/2013SB-00122-R00-SB.htm