TAKE 2: Bring it on — But the gun culture in America has got to change

December 17, 2012

Politics, Uncategorized

Nancy Anderson, MBJ contributing columnist

Nancy Anderson, MBJ contributing columnist

I read Nick Kristof’s column in the New York Times on Sunday. It was entitled, “Do we have the courage to stop this?” Kristof writes about common sense gun regulations in Canada and Australia that we might consider implementing. The first time the column below ran, I received some of the nastiest and scariest e-mails I have EVER received from readers. So, I screwed up my courage and asked that it be run again. …

Here it is …


I don’t like guns.

My father had an old shotgun he kept in the closet, unloaded of course. He was a country boy who never took to hunting, so I had no experience with firearms and the sport surrounding their use. Two husbands, no hunters. When I married Ken, he had a small handgun. He keeps it somewhere other than our house. I don’t know where, and I don’t really want to know. Guns just make me nervous.

I know the usual defense of guns, “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” Yeah. Yeah. But it’s harder to kill someone with a baseball bat than with a gun. A baseball bat doesn’t go off accidentally, and it’s hard to get in multiple rounds on a baseball bat in a few short seconds.

>> Reader comments from the first time this column ran …

>> Video about gun control …

Now, I’m no pacifist. If someone tried to break into my house and do harm to my family, I’d have no problem defending my turf. And I’m not interested in stepping on the happy hunting grounds of all my hunter friends. But I have serious concerns about the gun culture in this country.

When students at MSU and JSU die from gunshot wounds and when of one of my students recounts his experience of being caught in a gun battle, it’s time to do something. In my day, when young, hot-headed men got into a fight, the worst that happened was that someone got a bloody nose. Now, someone loses his life.

>> MBJ poll question … Should guns laws be changed?

Before you fire off an e-mail to me about the second amendment, know that I’ve read the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had ball and musket firearms, not semi-automatic weapons with laser sightings. Do you know how long it took to load one of those old weapons?

Go ahead. Send in your letters, your e-mails. Use everything in your arsenal to defend your “right to bear arms.” Call me a commie or a leftist or just a bleeding heart liberal. How dare I question the culture of this gun toting state? Fire away.

I’ll take a bullet for this one because I’m tired of burying young people before their time.

>> Nancy Lottridge Anderson, Ph.D., CFA, is President of New Perspectives, Inc., in Ridgeland, 601-991-3158. She is also an Assistant Professor of Finance at Mississippi College. Her e-mail address is nanderson@newper.com, and her website is www.newper.com.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “TAKE 2: Bring it on — But the gun culture in America has got to change”

  1. Patrick Donovan Says:

    “Common sense” gun regulations in Canada have done nothing to reduce crime, but they have cost the taxpayers boatloads of money. In Australia, new regulations have been accompanied by much higher crime rates while crime rates here have been declining. Mexico has some very restrictive gun laws. Check their crime rates. Have the cartels found it difficult to obtain guns due to the Mexican laws? Are they obtaining their RPG’s, hand grenades and machine guns from U.S. gun stores?

    Unless you can prove that I am connected to one of these crimes, I do not deserve punishment. My natural right to keep and bear arms is recognized by the U.S. and MS constitutions. If these documents did not recognize that right, the right would still exist. Keep your home gun-free, if you want to, but neither you nor MS nor the the U.S. gets to tell me that I must do the same.

  2. Ross Reily Says:

    I would say tell that to the parents of 20 children in Connecticut …

  3. Phillip McGregor Says:

    Bath school disaster. Bomb killed 38. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

    Dendermonde nursery attack, Belgium 3 dead, 12 mutilated with a knife

    Oklahoma City 1993. 18 kids killed among all the others.

    China. mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks 2010-11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010%E2%80%932011)

    I’m sure the Connecticut parents would have felt better if their children were bludgeoned or filleted to death instead of shot.

  4. Ross Reily Says:

    I am sure a teacher could have overtaken a skinny 20-year-old boy before he could hurt someone with a stick … I would take my chances against a stick instead of an assault rifle. … I think your attitude toward children is reprehensible and sad.

  5. Jeff Pittman Says:

    If you’re going to repeat the same old column, expect the same answers. Although Lenin famously said that a lie told often enough becomes the truth, he didn’t have red-blooded Americans to stand up and call him a liar. As I stated last time, if an inanimate object makes you nervous, you need to seek professional help for your hoplophobia.

    As with nearly all mass murders, this one also occurred in a “gun-free zone.” The killer was breaking the law as soon as he carried a firearm onto school property. He broke another law as soon as he aimed a gun at his first victim, even had he never pulled the trigger. School-zone mass shootings didn’t begin until after passage of Bill Clinton’s Gun Free Schools Act, which generally makes it illegal for parents, principals, school faculty and staff, adult students or most anyone else to be able to save kids’ lives, under threat of criminal penalty. Of course it does absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from shooting up schools; in fact making it easier by disarming the victims. The federal “assault weapon” ban law had no positive impact on crime while in effect, but the now-expired federal law continued as state law in CT. (There is actually no such machine as an “assault weapon.” It is a made-up inflammatory term which describes nothing.) So, the left would have us reinstate it as federal law everywhere else BECAUSE IT DOESN’T WORK! In fact, according to a National Academy of Science report based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, a survey that covered 80 different gun-control measures and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn’t identify a single gun-control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. Not one.

    This discussion should not be about gun control for the folks who didn’t commit the crime – it should be about how to protect ourselves and our children. If you really think that gun control does that, you are either woefully ignorant or intentionally dishonest and should exit the discussion post haste.

    Now, let’s talk about what we know DOES work.

    In states where data was available both before and after passage of right-to-carry gun laws, the average death rate from mass public shootings plummeted by 69% due to such laws, after statistically accounting for other possible causes. In states that passed such laws during the time period studied, the number of such shootings dropped by 84%, and the rate of mass public shootings approaches zero five years after right-to-carry laws are enacted. Deaths in these states, from these types of incidents, dropped an average of 90% and injuries by 82%. (from John Lott’s study)

    Now ask yourself, assuming YOUR child was in that school:

    Wouldn’t it have been better if a trained police officer with a gun had been able to shoot this murderer before he killed so many children?

    Wouldn’t it have been better if a trained security officer with a gun had been able to shoot this murderer before he killed so many children?

    Wouldn’t it have been better if a trained volunteer with a gun had been able to shoot this murderer before he killed so many children?

    Wouldn’t it have been better if a teacher or administrator with a gun had been able to shoot this murderer before he killed so many children?

    If you agree with the first, what would prevent you from agreeing with the last? Be honest – only a willingness to literally sacrifice our children on the altar of political correctness, is all. If YOUR child had been an intended victim, don’t even bother to tell the lie that you wouldn’t prefer that an armed defender be present than to have all the gun control laws in the world.

    I am completely uninterested in political correctness or those who espouse it, but am very interested in the safety of our children. Given the power to implement policies in society to accomplish that, I would choose to have “unmarked” adults in my children’s schools carry concealed over every other procedure or policy, as that is proven to be by far the most effective solution to the threat.

  6. Jeff Pittman Says:

    Nice of you to delete my post that completely disproves your rant.


  1. TAKE 2: Bring it on — But the gun culture in America has got to change » Mississippi Business JournalMississippi Business Journal - December 17, 2012

    […] >> Read complete post here … […]

Leave a Reply