SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
national rifle association
25 Years After Columbine, We Need to Talk About Who Commits Mass Shootings: Men
Until we’re willing to say, men’s gun violence, we’ll continue to miss the mark, falling short of any campaign to prevent these massacres.
Apr 20, 2024
Maybe there won’t be a copycat mass shooting to grotesquely mark the 25th anniversary of the Columbine massacre on April 20, 1999. But just as we can be certain there will be another solar eclipse, it’s only a matter of time before a hail of bullets will block out the sun for another community somewhere in America. What’s also true? Expect the shooter to be male, probably white.
In an effort to prevent mass shooters from attaining posthumous fame, today the media rarely reveals their names. Back in 1999, after high school seniors Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris murdered 12 classmates and a teacher in Littleton, Colorado, their names were widely broadcast and published.
A quarter century later, despite substantive actions to prevent mass shootings by a number of states—and, with vice president Kamala Harris now overseeing the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention—we still lead the world in this particular brand of murder. USA! USA! USA! (As horrific as the April 13 murder of six by an Australian man at a mall outside of Sydney was, he was only wielding a knife. I shudder to think of the level of carnage if he had been brandishing an AR-15, the weapon of choice in most mass shootings.)
Sure, there are rare occasions when women pull the trigger, but as certain as I am that we’ll never hear a news report begin with the words, “A gunwoman opened fire today…,” I believe that to minimize mass shootings, we must move the question of the gender of the shooter from the periphery to the center of a long overdue national conversation.
Australia, you might recall, banned automatic and semi-automatic weapons after a mass shooting in Port Arthur, Tasmania, on April 28, 1996. There a gunman opened fire in a cafe, slaughtering 35 and wounding 23. Then-prime minister John Howard, a conservative politician in office for just six weeks, was able to push through sweeping gun control legislation12 days after the shooting.
The legislative package he shepherded through banned selling and importing semi-automatic and automatic rifles, and shotguns, and required gun purchasers to explain the reason—and wait 28 days—before buying a firearm. Most significantly, the Australian law required a mandatory gun buyback. The government confiscated and destroyed nearly 700,000 firearms, cutting in half the number of households that possessed guns.
Prime Minister Howard said at the time, “People used to say to me, ‘You violated my human rights by taking away my gun.’ I’d tell them, ‘I understand that. Will you please understand the argument [that] the greatest human right of all is to live a safe life without fear of random murder?’”
Why, in 2024—a quarter century after Columbine, 12 years after Sandy Hook, eight years after Orlando, six years after Las Vegas, two years after Uvalde, and six months after Lewiston—is it so hard for U.S. legislators and gun owners to understand that?
In a world where leaders of all stripes use the term “a just war” with a straight face, working to prevent mass shootings feels more within our grasp then say, ending the war in Gaza. What to do first? Change how we talk about the issue. That means refusing to speak out against generic “gun violence.” Until we’re willing to say, men’s gun violence, we’ll continue to miss the mark, falling short of any campaign to prevent mass shootings.
This is not a condemnation of men. The vast majority of men are not mass shooters. For decades, I worked at a men’s center, published a magazine promoting a new definition of manhood, and championed revisiting how we socialize boys, as early as preschool. More and more men are rejecting conventional masculinity.
The weakened, shell-of-itself National Rifle Association coined the oft cited cliché, “Guns don’t kill people. People do” more than a century ago. Variations have long been used to thwart gun control legislation. It’s astonishing how little pushback there’s been.
“People kill people?” Really? Sure, there are rare occasions when women pull the trigger, but as certain as I am that we’ll never hear a news report begin with the words, “A gunwoman opened fire today…,” I believe that to minimize mass shootings, we must move the question of the gender of the shooter from the periphery to the center of a long overdue national conversation.
Now is a good time to listen again to entertainers Martin Mull and Steve Martin. They had it right when they penned the satirical sea shanty, “Men” with its one word chorus: Men, men, men, men.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Major Victory': NY Jury Finds Wayne LaPierre Liable in NRA Corruption Case
"The NRA has lost its leader, its power, and its wealth," said one campaigner. "Today's trial verdict is one more nail in the NRA's political coffin."
Feb 23, 2024
Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James and gun control advocates nationwide celebrated on Friday after a Manhattan jury found the National Rifle Association and the NRA's longtime former leader liable in a civil corruption case.
James, who launched the case in 2020, said on social media that "in a major victory, my office won our case against the NRA and its senior leadership for years of corruption and greed. Wayne LaPierre and a senior executive at the NRA must pay $6.35 million for abusing the system and breaking our laws."
After over three decades as the NRA's CEO, LaPierre stepped down in January. The 74-year-old cited health reasons but his resignation from the powerful gun lobbying group came just before the trial began, sparking speculation that he was trying to dodge accountability.
"For years, Wayne LaPierre used charitable dollars to fund his lavish lifestyle. LaPierre spent millions on luxury travel, private planes, expensive clothes, insider contracts, and other perks for himself and his family," James said Friday. "Wayne LaPierre blatantly abused his position and broke the law. But today, LaPierre and the NRA are finally being held accountable for this rampant corruption and self-dealing."
"In New York, you cannot get away with corruption and greed, no matter how powerful or influential you think you may be," she added. "Everyone, even the NRA and Wayne LaPierre, must play by the same rules."
The jury found LaPierre liable for $5.4 million but, because he already repaid some of it, he has to give the group $4.35 million. However, he's not the only executive involved in the case. Jurors also found that NRA general counsel John Frazer must pay $2 million, and former treasurer Wilson "Woody" Phillips violated his official duties. James wants the trio banned from serving in any leadership roles for charities that do business in the state—which will be decided by a judge.
"Jurors also found that the NRA omitted or misrepresented information in its tax filings and violated New York law by failing to adopt a whistleblower policy," according toThe Associated Press. The AP noted that "another former NRA executive turned whistleblower, Joshua Powell, settled with the state last month, agreeing to testify at the trial, pay the NRA $100,000, and forgo further involvement with nonprofits."
Welcoming the jury's decisions, Nick Suplina, senior vice president of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement that "we're two months into 2024 and the NRA has already managed to lose this trial, their longtime leader, and whatever political relevance it had left."
"This verdict," he added, "confirms what we've seen in recent elections, in state legislatures, and in the halls of Congress: The gun lobby has never been weaker and the gun safety movement has never been stronger."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AOC Blasts AIPAC as 'The NRA of Foreign Policy'
The New York Democrat was among lawmakers and others calling out the pro-Israel lobby group as it advocated against a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip.
Feb 21, 2024
As the American Israel Public Affairs Committee took aim at Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive lawmakers critical of U.S. support for Israel's war on the Gaza Strip, the New York Democrat compared the lobby group to the National Rifle Association.
After a CNN journalist noted on social media that an Israeli group submitted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a report on sexual violence allegedly committed during the Hamas-led October 7 attack on Israel, AIPAC claimed that "a cease-fire now keeps these rapist monsters armed and in power in Gaza," and mentioned multiple members of Congress, including Ocasio-Cortez.
The New York Democrat responded that "it is appalling that AIPAC is targeting women members of Congress who have survived sexual assault with this horrific rhetoric. Each and every day, their role in U.S. politics becomes a greater scandal. They are the NRA of foreign policy. Of course they don't want a cease-fire."
The other lawmakers targeted by AIPAC were Democratic Reps. Jamaal Bowman (N.Y.), Cori Bush (Mo.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress.
"I'm starting to think that AIPAC isn't just a puppet of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, but a partner," said Pocan. "They cover for his murdering of innocents in the course of supposedly going after Hamas and those actions aren't getting hostages released. They seem fine with that and don't mind the killing of kids."
In less than five months, Israel's blockade and bombardment of Gaza have killed at least 29,313 Palestinians and devastated civilian infrastructure, displacing the vast majority of the Hamas-governed enclave's 2.3 million residents.
Before October 7, the United States already gave Israel nearly $4 billion in annual military aid. The Biden administration has responded to the war by seeking a package worth over $14 billion, bypassing federal lawmakers to arm Israeli forces, and defending Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories at the ICJ on Wednesday.
AIPAC, meanwhile, has worked to oust progressive members of Congress in the November election. The group is also fighting growing global allegations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and demands for a cease-fire deal that would free hostages taken on October 7 as well as Palestinians imprisoned in Israel.
"A cease-fire means Palestinians will not be slaughtered by Israel every day. A cease-fire means medicine and food. A cease-fire means hostages come home," Jewish Voice for Peace political director Beth Miller said of the group's social media post. "AIPAC wants a total genocide of Palestinians, with full funding from the U.S. AIPAC wants death and destruction. That's it."
Organizer Melissa Byrne accused AIPAC of "exploiting sexual violence to keep a war going," adding that the group "prefers war to freeing the hostages and security for Israel and Palestine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular