Michael Tabman's Blog: Crime Scene - Posts Tagged "gun-control"

We all have our opinions as to what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Those differing opinions have led to spirited and even hostile debate. But, there is only one opinion that matters.

While the 2nd Amendment argument was not necessarily settled, the Supreme Court made a bold statement in its October 2010 decision in the McDonald v. Chicago case when Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote, "It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty." The decision did not address all issues of state versus federal rights and the reality that no right is without limits. We often cite the prohibition of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater as a reasonable limit on free speech. If we can limit free speech, we should be able to limit the right to bear arms.

Having grown up in New York City, I was accustomed to an environment where nobody I knew owned a gun. Despite the high crime rates, I was comfortable with those strict gun laws as were almost all people I knew. When I became a police officer in Fairfax County, VA, I began to change my mind a bit; I felt people should be allowed to maintain guns in their homes for self defense. However, there is a clear line separating the right to have a gun in your home for self defense or hunting as opposed to stockpiling automatic weapons and high capacity magazines.

With two mass shootings occurring in a short time period, the gun law debates will heat up. As I stated in my blog following the Aurora, Colorado shooting, I still believe the debate will dissipate and the gun laws will not change. The strength of the gun lobby and the NRA, the lack of political will and the fleeting public resolve render the argument for gun control impotent.

I admire and strongly believe in the basic tenets of our Constitution. Yet, we cannot lose sight that the Constitution was written in an era that accepted slavery and hung a man for stealing a horse – so legend has it. Times change and the Constitution allows for change while still protecting our civil rights.

If we do not take a strong stance now, we will get what we ask for.

Here we are - another shooting in a public venue. This was not a mass shooting as occurred at the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin or the movie theater in Colorado, but no less tragic. In the heavily visited area surrounding New York City's Empire State Building, one man fatally shot another man in what appears to be a workplace violence related incident. The New York City Police Department responded quickly, killing the assailant after he trained his weapon on them, perhaps in a suicide-by-cop.

The New York City Police Department is one of the most well-trained and prepared police departments in the country, if not the world. Their readiness to respond to dangerous events has been further honed and improved upon since their stellar performance on 9/11. Many years of my career in the FBI were spent on task forces with NYPD. I admire and respect the department and the individual detectives and officers. I am honored to have as one of my closest friends a retired NYPD detective with whom I worked more than 25 years ago. Accordingly, the point I am about to make should not be considered as criticism in any manner.

One difference in this recent New York City shooting that tells a very revealing story is that innocent bystanders were hurt by rounds fired by the police. Again, this is not a criticism of the police. But that reality must cause us to stop and think. If that can occur in a confrontation with highly trained and capable police officers, what may have happened if average citizens, armed with guns had responded? Some would argue that the threat may have been eliminated earlier. I doubt it. Citizens, even those who have received minimum training for a carry permit do not have the training, experience and presence of mind of a New York City cop. Had armed citizens responded, we may have been looking at a more deadly if not catastrophic event.

The answer to fighting gun violence is not to flood our streets or college campuses with more guns. Logical, common sense gun control laws are the most practical response. No laws and no law enforcement activity can completely stop crime or tragedies from occurring. No rights are absolute and beyond some controls and restrictions. Gun control laws can and should respect the rights of law-abiding citizens who wish to own guns for self defense, sport or hunting. Yet, gun control laws with well grounded rules and procedures can also slow down the process and make obtaining a weapon more difficult for those who should not own any type of gun. Every step that must be taken gives our authorities an opportunity to intervene and thwart another shooting.

There is a middle ground that can be reached. Everyone must be willing to give up a little for the common good. Just as rights are not absolute, neither is security. But, we must do all that we can to give ourselves a fighting chance.