• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

I shouldn’t be surprised when politicians use holidays to promote
their favorite project. After all, it’s a common political occurrence.
But Hillary Clinton, the New York senatorial candidate in waiting, took
the practice to a new level when she turned a Mother’s Day event into a
high profile call for more gun control. According to the New York Times
reporter Katherine Q. Seeley, “Hillary Rodham Clinton used an emotional
White House ceremony Saturday to call on Americans to press Congress to
‘buck the gun lobby’ and pass several gun control measures.” The
Saturday event at the White House featured a tearful Hillary showcasing
the parents of three children, who were either wounded or murdered in
the Columbine massacre. It wouldn’t surprise me to see gun prohibition
as one of her political priorities. What a team: Hillary Clinton and
Chuck Schumer!

So it wasn’t surprising that the Clinton summit on youth violence
held two days after Hillary’s Mother’s Day event, again showcased
Hillary as well as Vice President Al Gore and his wife Tipper. This high
profile event included representatives of the movie, music, broadcast,
cable, software and firearms industries, as well as clergy, law
enforcement personnel, doctors and academics. Of course, Bill and
Hillary’s good friends, Jim and Sarah Brady, were in attendance, while
The National Rifle Association was specifically not invited. Even CBS
news correspondent Eric Engberg commented on the guest list by saying,
“several Hollywood moguls ducked the meeting, the White House barred the
press and pointedly did not invite the nation’s best-known voice for gun
rights, Charlton Heston.”

James M. Broder of the New York Times predicted that “The President,
in effect, will try to find a space between the First Amendment’s
protection of free speech and the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the
right to bear arms.” So the summit on violence will produce a new
“study” on violence by Surgeon General David Satcher, who like Hillary
Clinton, has a definitely negative point of view towards the Second
Amendment. I predict that any report will parrot the Clinton proposals
for gun control legislation.

Although the summit was originally going to focus on violence and the
media, President Clinton mildly scolded the entertainment industry for
their excessive violence. He limited his recommendation to voluntary
restraints. The few representatives of the entertainment industry who
attended the “summit” were unwilling to admit any responsibility for
their gratuitous depiction of violence wherever it occurred: movies,
television or music. As Jack Valenti, the president of the Motion
Picture Association, who was invited,
said, “You can’t tell a director what to do, [but] an increasing number
believe they can expunge from their films the things that are
gratuitous.”

Of course, Bill Clinton will not attack the entertainment industry
because of their large financial support of the Democrats.
Coincidentally this weekend Bill Clinton flies to California to be at a
$1.5 million Democratic Party fundraiser hosted by David Geffen, the
Hollywood music mogul and co-founder of Dreamworks SKG studio.

If you want to know which amendment is going to suffer as a result of
the Columbine massacre; it’s easy with this president, just follow the
money. After all the First Amendment is being supporting by the promise
of $1.5 million now and much more later on, while antagonists of the
Second Amendment routinely are guests of honor at the White House.

The choice is easy. Go after guns and law-abiding gun owners. Both
Hollywood and the media will cheer you on. And on Capitol Hill fellow
Democrats will promote the anti-gun agenda. This week we are witnessing
the U.S. Senate debating the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Bill. As
of today the Senate has defeated all Democrat initiated gun-control
proposals.

Yet long after the rhetoric from the Clintons, Diane Feinstein, Ted
Kennedy, and others has died down, the real problem will remain. There
are, if one looks, some clues as to what the problem is and where the
answers lie. One of these clues is in 1995 federal study on juvenile
crime. The study, ***”Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse Initial
Findings Research Summary,***
http://www.tyc.state.tx.us/prevention/urbdelin.htm found that “boys who
own legal firearms have much lower rates of delinquency and drug use and
are even slightly less delinquent than nonowners of guns.”

The study looked at 20,000 randomly selected households and found
that the availability of legally owned firearms among teenagers was
inversely related to delinquency and criminal behavior. According to the
study, “Those who own legal guns have fathers who own guns for sport and
hunting. Those who own illegal guns have friends who own illegal guns
and are far more likely to be gang members.” In other words, it’s not
the gun, stupid; it’s the delinquent kid and his/her chosen friends.

Dr. Helen Smith, a forensic psychologist, who was not invited to the
White House summit, agrees with the “Urban Delinquency” findings and she
has some suggestions. She has just authored an article,
“It’s Not the Guns,”

where she exposes the HCI-Clinton proposition that ready access to guns
leads to juvenile violence. She writes, “The availability-of-guns
explanation assumes that otherwise harmless, even nearly normal, kids
become dangerous only in the presence of guns. The truth is that these
kids are dangerous anyway.” Her premise is that we are raising violent
kids who will use whatever they can find: propane tanks, timers, pipes,
bleach, or guns, and no one is paying attention until after the violence
erupts.

She goes on to say, “Political quick fixes … won’t solve the
problem. … Instead of symbolic solutions, we need more counselors in
schools, a “zero tolerance” program for bullying and ostracism at least
as tough as those aimed at weapons and drugs, and a recognition that
kids in trouble with juvenile authorities are most likely to pose a risk
in the future.”

Unfortunately, all we will see from this administration and most of
our politicians is feel-good rhetoric and more gun laws. If that doesn’t
cure the problem, the cycle of holding conferences, affixing blame, and
passing another gun law will repeat itself. After all, since 1968 we
have passed more and more gun laws and the problem of violence remains.
Sometimes, I wonder how long do we have to keep doing something that
doesn’t work before we finally realize it is not the solution. It’s a
crime that there are many troubled children who need real help, not a
quick fix like one more gun law.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.