Gun Control: The Appeal to Emotion

On the morning of Jan. 8, 2011, Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords was a relatively unknown congresswoman from Arizona with little, if anything, to distinguish her from her colleagues. Would anyone reading this have been able to identify who Gabby Giffords was prior to the incident of that fateful morning in January?

Although receiving life changing injuries, Gabby was not the worst casualty that day. Six people died and eighteen others were wounded to varying degrees. Can you name any of them?

Gabby Giffords was licensed to carry a concealed weapon? As a citizen in New Jersey, unless you are retired law enforcement, you can kiss the idea of a concealed-carry permit good-bye? I guess history has answered why Gabby thought she might have needed a permit to carry.

Gabby Giffords chose not to carry her weapon on Jan. 8, and it's probably moot anyway, however, if someone else had a weapon and had used it on Jared Loughner some of the wounded and killed might have experienced wildly different outcomes, however, that doesn't fit the dialog.

Here is where we enter the Twilight Zone…the appeal to emotion. In a NY Times' editorial, “A Senate in the Gun Lobby’s Grip” (4-17-13), Gabby Giffords opined that the gun control bill that failed in the Senate would have “prevent(ed) future tragedies like those in Newtown, CT, Aurora, CO, Blacksburg, VA…”

OK, who can stare Gabby Giffords in the eye and disagree with her on gun control? Gabby’s is an emotional appeal, not a reasoned argument. What she is suggesting would not have changed one iota of what happened to her or at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Does it bother you to read that?

What are the parents of the Sandy Hook victims trying to accomplish by hiring lobbyists to represent them? Mark Mattioli’s 6-year-old son, James, was one of the victims at Sandy Hook. Mr. Mattioli’s opinion differs from that of the “represented” parents of the Sandy Hook victims, so I guess we could dismiss Mr. Mattioli as mistaken and say the others are correct; who makes that call?

Mr. Mattioli understands that limiting law abiding citizens’ access to guns would not have changed the situation that occurred at Sandy Hook. Who would care to debate him on that? Maybe Gabby can explain to Mr. Mattioli how it would be that his son would still be alive if Mr. Obam's legislation were, in fact, law.

Law abiding citizens have no inclination to go to their local schools on shooting rampages, in fact, law abiding gun owners just want to be left alone to use their guns for hunting and/or target shooting.

The problem we face in regard to gun violence is not a problem of legal guns but of illegal guns in the hands of criminals who don’t care about laws. Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the U.S. but the highest incidence of gun deaths in the nation and the deaths in Chicago due to gun violence are not a result of legal guns but illegal guns. What to do?

Consider all the hoopla about strengthening the NICS check (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) in relation to reducing gun violence. Submitting false information on ATF Form 4473 (part of the background check) is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison yet in January, Mr. Biden stated at a meeting with the NRA that “we simply don’t have the manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form…” Mr. Obama says we can be doing more to prevent tragedies like Sandy Hook but in 2009, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted 77 cases of the 71,000 instances of falsifying information as reported by the FBI.

Gabby, Gabby, Gabby…Allow me to introduce you to another woman who was in possession of a concealed carry permit when her life changed. Have you heard of Amanda Collins? Of course not, because, again, it doesn’t fit the dialog.

In 2007, Amanda was a student at the University of Nevada-Reno. Her parents encouraged her to get a concealed carry permit before going off to school. On the day of Amanda’s tragic incident she, like Gabby Giffords, was not carrying her firearm, but not voluntarily so, like Gabby. The university did not permit Ms. Collins to carry on campus. When she was attacked from behind and felt the cold steel of a pistol pressed against her head, she was defenseless against the man who brutally raped her on the floor of the parking garage just 50 feet away from the campus police station. That serial rapist, now on death row, went on to rape and murder again and was finally caught and sentenced for the abduction, rape and murder of another woman. Prior to his capture, Amanda’s fervent begging of the college to allow her to carry her weapon for protection finally paid off when the college allowed her to carry albeit grudgingly so; however, her permission to carry on campus ended the moment she graduated.

U. of N.-Reno gives away free condoms and advertises to all would-be criminals that it is a “gun free zone.” Lawmakers tell people like Amanda Collins that if one finds oneself in a situation similar to that of Ms. Collins, one would be better served by urinating, throwing up, or informing the attacker that you are menstruating or have a disease. Talk about a war on women. Colorado state senator, Evie Hudak, informed Ms. Collins after testifying before the Colorado state senate that statistics were not on Amanda’s side and that if she had a gun an attacker probably would have been able to wrest it from her and use it against her. Amanda’s reply, “Respectfully, senator, you weren’t there.”

This is all mental gymnastics. With no disrespect intended to the job our law enforcement personnel perform, be assured that the government and its law enforcement arm can do nothing to protect you when you are face to face with your attacker. Criminals do not allow you to call 911 or grant access to call boxes for help before doing their dirty work. We live in a dangerous world and no amount of wishing and hoping will make it different. Mr. Obama’s children attend a school that is guarded by 11 or so fully outfitted security personnel who carry semi-auto rifles. So why would someone like Adam Lanza choose to attack an unprotected soft target like the Sandy Hook Elementary School, a gun-free school, when he could go after a target like the Sidwell Friends School where there is some real competition and fire power?