In typical knee-jerk reaction, some have come out to blame "the gun", and/or our "gun culture". As Bob Costas said during a NFL Halftime show, repeating and agreeing with a sports writer, said that had the player not had the gun, they would both still be alive. Really? There is NO WAY for them to support that!
Fox Sports writer, Jason Whitlock, stated (and Costas agreed) that “if he didn’t possess/own a gun, he and Kassandra Perkins would both be alive today,”. That statement is extremely presumptuous. For it presumes that the player would not have found another way to express his rage. To blanketly say such a things, is shear foolishness.
Secondly, I find it disheartening for such people, with audiences, to rush to judgement on such matters. We don't know yet the complete motive for the murder-suicide. In matters of rage, I can tell you that people have found all sorts of extremely brutal methods to exact some revenge. And a gun is simply a tool, but not the only tool. No doubt, a firearm is a very convenient weapon, but we need to look at the WHOLE picture, least of which is the primary importance of the 2nd Amendment rights, upheld by the Supreme Court as an individual right.
If you look at the 2011 statistical table (below), you will see that the number of murders, have DECREASED over the last five years. This, while firearms ownership is at an all-time high. Over 70 MILLION citizens lawfully own over 300 MILLION firearms. 70 MILLION citizens, compared to the overall murder rate? My math ain't great (nor my grammar?), but that firearms total murders of 8,583, looks like around .012 % of the firearms owners.
But look also at the other methods. Knives and cutting instruments alone, accounted for 1,587! The use of hands, feet, fists, etc, accounted for another 728 murders. Does anyone think for a minute that the NFL player couldn't have just beat his girlfriend to death in a moment of rage?
Of those other non-firearms related murders, are those victims less important and less dead, because a firearm wasn't used?
Check this out - While firearms are far less available in the Philippines, a man there murdered 10 people, and wounded 14 others (in 2007), while using a 21" knife! Rest assured, the victims didn't have gun to protect themselves, or the murderer wouldn't have caused so many victims.
I won't go into the whole 2nd amendment argument here, but I'll ask this ONE QUESTION:
With over 70 MILLION legal firearms owners, should we deny the rights of all, because of the abuse of the extreme few?
I know my answer. What's yours?
From the FBI's uniform crime reporting site: (go to site to see all 5 years)
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-8
|
