U.S. Sen. Carl Levin: Guns Hurt Our Children Most

[marmar]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 26, 2009 Contact: Senator Levin's Office
Phone: [phone]


Guns Hurt Our Children Most


Mr. President, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 3,184 children and teens died from a firearm in the United States in 2006, a six percent increase from 2005. This breaks down to the life of an American child being taken every two hours and 45 minutes by someone wielding a gun. More than five times as many, or nearly 17,500 children and teens suffered a non-fatal gun injury that year, a seven percent increase from the previous year.

The 2009 Children’s Defense Fund’s report “Protect Children, Not Guns” illustrates the problem even more pointedly. The report, which provides key findings on children’s gun deaths, states that more preschoolers were killed by firearms in 2006, than were law enforcement officers in the line of duty.

This type of violence is preventable. It only requires action. The Children’s Defense Fund’s report makes a number of recommendations about how to protect children from gun violence. Among other things, they recommend schools provide nonviolent conflict resolution courses for all students and communities create positive activities for children and teenagers to reduce the influence of gangs and drugs. They also recommend passage of such common sense gun safety legislation as closing the gun show loophole, strengthening the Brady background check system and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.

We cannot afford to sit and watch as so many young lives are irrevocably destroyed by gun violence. Passage of common sense legislation would help end these types of tragedies.


http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=319324

[Statistical]

1. "For the childen"

How many of those children are 19.9 years of age, harden criminals and involved in a drug war with a rival gang?

If the Nazi party every rises in the US their slogan will be "for the children".

[marmar]

3. I don't think someone 19.9 (WTF?) years of age would qualify as a child....

..... Just a thought.

[Statistical]

4. Yup that is why they lumped together children AND teens to pump the stat +100%

They are getting slightly less hysterical. It use to be CHILDREN and young adults (which census defines as anyone up to age 25).

The number is about half that if you use the normal definition of a child (0-17)

Per CDC WISQARS: 1,593
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html

Do custom search firearms and custom age bracket.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. If only the CDC agreed with you.

[TheWraith]

20. They do according to the CDC. Sometimes they include people up to age 25.

Again, to pump up the stats. Some of the stuff this press release suggests is good, some of it is BS. Gang prevention is a fine idea, but not likely to happen when kids are still stuck in a hopeless situation in our impoverished inner cities, where their choices in life are work a string of crap jobs at McDonalds and Walmart, or deal drugs. Robust anti-poverty measures are the only thing that will really improve our gang problems.

"They also recommend passage of such common sense gun safety legislation as closing the gun show loophole"

There is no "gun show loophole." A private individual can sell their personal firearm without a background check anywhere, including at a gun show or at the parking lot of an Arby's. A person acting as an unlicensed dealer in firearms is committing a federal crime, which the ATF can and does arrest people for.

"and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban."

The AWB banned bayonet lugs and flash suppressors, not actual guns. We have a permanent AWB here in New York State--it has not reduced crime in the least, partly because career criminals do not use rifles. They're too big and too hard to dispose of. Handguns will always be the weapon of choice for gangs and muggers. That's why rifles of all types, not just the "scary looking rifles" the AWB affected, account for less than 3% of crimes involving a gun nationwide.

[Katya Mullethov]

24. It would be neither reasonable nor honest .

But that's what happens .

[bobbolink]

2. Just out of curiosity... how does this relate to the supposed numbers of abortion?

Is there a possible point to be made here?

[bluestateguy]

5. Oh here we go

We have common sense legislation on the books. Let's enforce it. Then we can talk.

[Recursion]

6. Moral panic! Ignore the fact that youth violence is at the lowest level in decades

"These kids today" are by every measure less criminal, less violent, and less likely to be victims of violence than kids 15, 20, or 30 years ago (except "theft of items over $100", and that's just because iPods have only been around for a decade or so).

There is not an epidemic of violence sweeping the country; we're at a historic low, actually.

[bobbolink]

22. I certainly didn't read it as an indictment of children and/or youth.

It was a statistic of VICTIMS, not PERPETRATORS.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. I'm not so sure about that. After all 19 year olds killed while committing crimes are included.

[Recursion]

33. Who do you think is shooting teenagers? Middle-aged guys? NT

[appal_jack]

7. Unrec for double-speak

"Common sense legislation" as described by Senator Levin on the matter of guns and the 2nd Amendment is neither "common" nor particularly sensible.

I can agree fully with Levin about "schools provid(ing) nonviolent conflict resolution courses for all students and communities (and) creat(ing) positive activities for children and teenagers to reduce the influence of gangs and drugs."

However, he loses me when he trots out the old, tired mantra of "closing the gun show loophole, strengthening the Brady background check system and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban."

Yes, unfortunately, Dem's can also play the double-speak game, and Levin is excelling at Orwellian-linguistic-contortions here. It's still an unconstitutional FAIL though.

-app

[epiphany]

12. Well said.

+++

[SteveM]

43. Everytime a major Democrat rips a stinker like Levin's, the rest suffer...

How can any Democrat (be it in Montana, North Florida, or New Mexico) run locally when he/she has to answer nationally for this crap?

[rgbecker]

8. Welcome MarMar to the DU firing range. The gun nuts are sniping for those that would suggest

any kind of gun control. Forget the statistics, we are talking constitutional rights here. Basically any other topic goes on DU but not Gun Control.

[marmar]

9. I expected it......

Flash the bat signal and they come running....and gunning.

[Abq_Sarah]

15. If you tried very hard

You might be able to be just a bit more insulting.

I've got an idea... let's put restrictions on the 1st amendment that prevent ignorant people from expressing opinions. Sound good?

[marmar]

17. You first....

[Name removed]

23. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SteveM]

44. And... here you are! Out of breath? (nt)

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. "The gun nuts" you speak of can't make it. They are all down at the local Priory of Sion

chapterhouse, attending a lecture by President Obama's secret imam.

Then there's a raffle later, featuring an autographed copy of "Judge Crater: My Years In Hiding" and the
big prize:

Amelia Earhart's round-the-world Lockheed Electra, fully restored!

[virginia mountainman]

30. Any Kind?? WTF!?!?!

20,000 laws are on the books right NOW...

Thats a damn lot of restrictions already on a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT....

[epiphany]

10. Sorry but he is an idiot who has no clue about the alleged 'loophole'

or what "assault weapons" are or are not. A few more like this guy and we will give the White House back to the Republicans in a couple years.
Bah.

[marmar]

11. Enjoying your evening out at DU?

:freak:

[epiphany]

13. Yes. Thanks.

...

[appal_jack]

25. Welcome to DU epiphany

:hi:

Supporting all the rights of a free people can get a little controversial 'round these parts, but we hold our own.

-app

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

14. Those 18 and 19 year old gang banging children. No sense in being honest I guess.

[marmar]

18. Yeah, all teens who get shot are gangbangers.....

..... What ignorant hubris.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

19. Almost as ignorant as acting as if I said that.

[eqfan592]

45. Ya know, do you really think...

...you're fooling anybody by placing the word "all" in front of anything in order to attempt to imply that somebody actually said that "all" teens who get shot are gangbangers?? Especially when a person can just scroll up and SEE that, in fact, the person didn't say that? I have a hard time believing you're honestly that stupid.

Your tactics are that of the worst type of ignorant freper. You simply can't stand when somebody points out that the "statistical evidence" you so dearly cling too is so full of holes it resembles a hunk of swiss cheese more than a scientifically conducted study. Oh yeah, "we're" the ones that are ignoring the evidence. Please. Take a good look in the mirror, marmar. The only ones who are ignoring reality around here are you and your ilk.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

21. The CDC says that 1,430 children died from guns in 2005.

[Euromutt]

28. Actually, it's motor vehicles that "hurt our children most"

According to WISQARS, in 2006, in the age group 0-19, there were 7,031 deaths and 1,225,754 injuries inflicted with motor vehicles.

[krispos42]

29. Yeah, and a lot of the people pulling the trigger are 'children' as well

Keep in mind that 2002-2003 the statistics took a dip.




Here are the absolute numbers, from the DoJ, of murderers and murdered.

[virginia mountainman]

31. UN Rec-ed, for pure pandering, and outright lies..

What a load of pure BULLSHIT, we Democrats have been working hard to loose the gun grabber label, and this "so called" Democrat comes along...

Paws off my civil rights.....

[aikoaiko]

32. And another Democrat does damages to our credibility on matters related to guns.

Pure fear mongering.

[Euromutt]

34. For the hell of it, let me give this a light fisking

Mr. President, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 3,184 children and teens died from a firearm in the United States in 2006, a six percent increase from 2005.

You can "prove" anything if you select just two data points. The firearm death rate is a fraction of what it was in 1991, and preliminary data from the FBI indicates that firearm homicides dropped in 2007 relative to 2006, and dropped again in 2008.

This breaks down to the life of an American child being taken every two hours and 45 minutes by someone wielding a gun.

Note the bait-and-switch (taken directly from the CDF paper). First, he's talked about "children and teens," i.e. everybody under the age of 20. The commonly accepted definition of "child" is ages 14 and under. According to WISQARS, the number of firearms deaths in the age group 0-14 (i.e. children) was 409, so about one every 21 hours and 25 minutes. And if that still sounds like a lot, the number of motor vehicle traffic deaths for that age group was 1,828; one death every 4 hours and 47 minutes.

The death toll involving firearms primarily occurs in the age group 15-19, 2,809 of the firearm deaths listed on WISQARS, and of those, 57.8% (1,625) involved 18-19 year-olds; people old enough to vote or enlist in the armed forces.

The report, which provides key findings on children’s gun deaths, states that more preschoolers were killed by firearms in 2006, than were law enforcement officers in the line of duty.

Oh hey, where did those specific numbers go that he was so fond of earlier? The fact that he's wrong: there were 32 firearm deaths among 3-4 year olds, against 50 LEO deaths (counting 46 felonious killings and 4 unintentional ones). Levin has padded his numbers by classing 5 year-olds as "preschoolers" even though they fall within the K-12 system, thus adding another 24 deaths for a total of 56.

Of course, one major distinction is that preschoolers don't wear body armor, while LEOs often do. The FBI's Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) 2006 reports that of LEOs feloniously killed, 27 were wearing body armor, of whom only 1 was killed by a bullet (.30-06) that penetrated the actual armored part of his vest. Six others were killed by bullets that penetrated between side panels, through armholes or neck openings. Nineteen died as results of GSWs to the head (15) and neck/throat (4). There is little doubt that body armor is highly effective at reducing what would have been fatal GSWs to nonfatal ones.

This type of violence is preventable.

Easier said than done. It's not a coincidence that the demographic most at risk of dying in motor vehicle collisions or from GSWs are young (16-24) males. It's been well established that testosterone increases one's appetite for taking risks, and this is the demographic that, on average, has the highest levels of testosterone in the general population. It's also fairly well documented that both the perpetrators and the victims of homicide are disproportionately young, black, urban males; the demographic most vulnerable, due to socio-economic circumstances, to be drawn into the illegal drug trade. It's all very well trying to "create positive activities for children and teenagers" but the fact is that if those activities don't enable the boys in question to make money with which they can support their families, they're not going to "reduce the influence of gangs and drugs." And because the drug trade is illegal, homicide is essentially the only way permanently settle "business disputes," and no amount of "nonviolent conflict resolution courses" is going to change that.

What would really help is ending the so-called "War on Drugs" and reforming the criminal justice system to focus more on rehabilitation rather than punishment. The latter is largely responsible for the fact that we're now on our third or fourth generation of "prison orphans"; kids whose father is serving his nth sentence (if he isn't dead) and therefore have no role models other than the local dealers. Cue that financial incentive I mentioned earlier; you may not live to see 30, but you can live like a hip-hop star in the meantime.

They also recommend passage of such common sense gun safety legislation as closing the gun show loophole, strengthening the Brady background check system and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.

Oh, fucking yawn! They couldn't come up with anything more original? How is any of this relevant to the issue under discussion? The majority of firearms crimes are committed with handguns of types that wouldn't be covered by a renewed so-called "assault weapons" ban. The thing that everyone seems to gloss over in these "exposes" about gun shows is that the sellers do all demand proof of age and residence of the state in question, in compliance with the Gun Control Act of 1968, so it's not like anyone's flogging handguns to under-21s at gun shows. And what does "strengthening the Brady background check system" even mean, and how is it supposed to limit gun violence directed at minors?

We cannot afford to sit and watch as so many young lives are irrevocably destroyed by gun violence. Passage of common sense legislation would help end these types of tragedies.

Sounds like Sen. Levin is under the impression that guns cause crime, rather than that crime creates a demand for guns. If only there were fewer guns, we'd have less violence. Well, as it happens, there's historical evidence to suggest that the homicide rate in the English Home Counties in the 14th century was higher than the American homicide rate today, and guess what? The only guns were unwieldy and slow-firing hand cannon, which didn't see much use off the battlefield.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

36. Pretty good for a light fisking.

[DonP]

37. Right next to the "Dems won't take you guns - you stupid gun owner" post!

It's so ironic it makes me want to cry or scream, not sure which.

This stupid letter spent most of the day right next to a thread full of mocking posts by a host of ignorant folks about how stupid gun owners must be to think that Obama, or any Dem, would ever take their guns.

So right here next to it we have a letter to the Prez from a senior Senator calling for more gun restrictions and using crap statistics to support his call for another set of laws.

Gee, what kind of dummy would you have to be to think that some "Dems" want to take you guns or further restrict your 2nd amendment rights.

Maybe one who reads what some Dems write?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

38. Yep.

[slackmaster]

35. He's wrong, of course

To get that number you have to include 18- and 19-year-olds. Technically they are "teens" but they are also legally adults.

Far more people over 20 are killed or commit suicide with firearms.

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

[spin]

39. Politicians often babble bullshit and nothing happens...

But I did like some of the ideas Senator Levin presented.


This type of violence is preventable. It only requires action. The Children’s Defense Fund’s report makes a number of recommendations about how to protect children from gun violence. Among other things, they recommend schools provide nonviolent conflict resolution courses for all students and communities create positive activities for children and teenagers to reduce the influence of gangs and drugs. They also recommend passage of such common sense gun safety legislation as closing the gun show loophole, strengthening the Brady background check system and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=319324


If closing the gun show loophole by requiring a background check for all sales of firearms including all private sales, I'm for it. I also favor making the Brady background check far better by having the states input more information faster and working on methods to detect the individuals who are seriously mentally unstable.

Of course the idea of reauthorizing the assault weapons ban has to come up as it is extremely important to liberal Democrats. All I can say is the original ban did nothing which is why it was allowed to die. Liberal Democrats need to stop beating it. It's a dead horse.

Still I feel more emphasis should be placed on targeting drug gangs to reduce teen violence and death Drug gangs and teens often go together...

An 18-year-old U.S. soldier is accused of being the triggerman in the death of an informant. The victim is believed to be the first ranking Mexican drug cartel member to be killed in the U.S.

El Paso – Three teenagers, including a U.S. soldier, have been charged with capital murder for their roles in the contract killing of a Mexican drug cartel lieutenant who was cooperating with U.S. authorities, police said Wednesday.

Army Pfc. Michael Jackson Apodaca, 18, and Christopher Duran, 17, were arrested Monday. A 16-year-old boy, whom police did not identify because of his age, was arrested Wednesday.

Investigators said Apodaca, an El Paso native who joined the Army last year, admitted taking money from a mid-level cartel official to be the triggerman
http://www.streetgangs.com/news/3-teens-charged-in-cartel-slaying/

LAREDO, Tex. — When he was finally caught, Rosalio Reta told detectives here that he had felt a thrill each time he killed. It was like being Superman or James Bond, he said.

“I like what I do,” he told the police in a videotaped confession. “I don’t deny it.”

Mr. Reta was 13 when he was recruited by the Zetas, the infamous assassins of the Gulf Cartel, law enforcement officials say. He was one of a group of American teenagers from the impoverished streets of Laredo who was lured into the drug wars across the Rio Grande in Mexico with promises of high pay, fancy cars and sexy women.

After a short apprenticeship, the young men lived in an expensive house in Texas, available to kill whenever called on. The Gulf Cartel was engaged in a turf war with the Sinaloa Cartel over the Interstate 35 corridor, the north-south highway that connects Laredo to Dallas and beyond, and is, according to law enforcement officials, one of the most important arteries for drug smuggling in the Americas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/23killers.html?_r=1&ref=world

We should treat drug gangs as terrorists (which they are). This will have a hell of a lot more effect than banning assault weapons.

[PavePusher]

40. I could go for part of that...

"If closing the gun show loophole by requiring a background check for all sales of firearms including all private sales, I'm for it."

Only as long as there is no additional fee (tax payer supported), absolutely no registration (no data recorded except that a check was made and approved/disapproved), available 24 hours/day, all NFA restrictions are removed (nation wide) and instituted 5 days after the same check is made manditory for buying books.

[spin]

41. The fee would only be the standard fee charged for a background check...

No registration except that the seller would have a copy that proves the buyer passed the check on the date.

[gorfle]

42. I'm curious.

They also recommend passage of such common sense gun safety legislation as closing the gun show loophole, strengthening the Brady background check system and reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.

I'm curious how eliminating private firearm sales at gun shows is going to reduce the death rate of people aged 0-19?

I'm curious how they would propose strengthening the background check system and what effect they think this would have on the death rate of people aged 0-19?

I'm curious as to how an assault weapon ban will affect the death rate of people aged 0-19, since they are already hardly ever used in crime?