The Unseen Here and Now . . .

2002 Archives

2001 Archives

2000 Archives

Stuart Revercomb

Stuart Revercomb is a marketing consultant and joyously married father of four children. He seems to remember someone once telling him he ought to be a writer. "The Unseen Here and Now" -- Thursdays.

E-MAIL

Click Here
to subscribe to
"Thursday's Fare"

A million moms?

Who would pick a fight with a million moms?

Ever seen any video of a mother grizzly defending her young in the wilderness?

Worse yet, ever see a soccer mom come out of the stands with just a small notion that some bigger kid is threatening one of her brood?

The guy that coined the phrase, "You're messing with the wrong hombre" had it all wrong. He should have said, "Don't mess with me -- my mom's just down the street there."

In short, if at all possible, Do Not Mess With A Mom.

Unfortunately for the National Rifle Association, they have done just that.

On Sunday this past week a million moms descended on Washington in support of, "common sense gun laws to protect our children."

Not that I would disagree with a million moms on anything, but I happen to think they're right.

And I think they've offered their views with balance and dignity and grace.

If you're a dyed in the wool, card-carrying NRA person and anti-gun control is a big part of the reason you get up in the morning, you can stop reading here, because the following may only make you want to send me 2 quadrillion less than supportive emails.

If, on the other hand, you're a "ban 'em until we're just like Britain" anti-gunner, you might want to pull up here as well, for within the context of American culture, custom and law such a view is equally impractical.

It's too bad, because I wish it were otherwise, but it's not -- so let's be realistic, shall we?

I am going to sweep all the other horrible "handgun violence statistics" away and concentrate on one: the most horrific.

Every day -- every single day of every week of every month of every year -- 14 children are killed by handguns, four of these at the hands of someone who intended to kill them. A mind numbing 10 by accident. Approximately 80 percent of these are shot by other children -- family members or friends who had no idea the thing in their hands was either real or loaded or both.

That's 14 children a day.

If you're a praying sort of person you might want to include the families of those that will die tomorrow in your prayers today. I don't imagine for a moment we can comprehend the depth of their loss.

Much less the full scope of the suffering that such numbers represent.

But simply put, they mean that 5,110 children will be shot to death this year by handguns in America -- 3,650 accidentally. To put that in some perspective, we have lost more than TWO TIMES as many children to handgun violence over the past 25 years than the 58,148 soldiers we lost in the Vietnam War. And the numbers are growing

Think it might be time to ponder the laws that govern such weapons?

Think maybe mandating trigger locks is a reasonable idea?

Seems prudent to me -- and apparently to many others as well.

Unfortunately, the organization that we should all be looking to take the lead in shaping such laws has instead adopted an incredibly mindless, near psychotic response.

Most of us have heard it before.

"No. Not now -- not ever ... Touch our laws, (written in a time when society bears no resemblance to the present), and the fabric of the Constitution that guarantees such freedom will come apart and before you know it the right to bare arms will be lost forever."

Can you say "knee jerk?"

How long will the less militant "sportsman" members of the NRA allow the carnage to continue as the more fanatical "second amendment" members in its ranks beat the drum of "hell no -- we won't give an inch?"

The growing support for such groups as "Handgun Control Inc." is building on the other side of the dam that has been the NRA's patent response all these years, and it seems likely that unless a reasonable and responsive dialogue is offered, the NRA stands to lose big when the walls finally come crashing in.

When that happens -- and I am convinced it will -- the sportsman who were once the backbone of the NRA are going to be some very unhappy campers. Because instead of the balanced laws that might offer sensible and reasonable safety for handguns, the "knee jerk" is likely going to come the other way, kicking the workable rights of gun owning American citizens right in the gut.

The members of the National Rifle Association will have nobody to thank but themselves.

And the non-members who own guns but refuse to get involved can pat themselves on the back as well.

The NRA was incorporated in 1871 by two ex-Union generals who were dismayed by the lack of marksmanship displayed by troops in the Civil War. According to its founders its aim was to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis."

I suspect the lack of social and moral marksmanship exhibited by their organization today would grieve them even more.

But surely not as much as the parents of the children who's lives will end tomorrow.

Maybe their cries and the collective voice of a million other mothers will make a difference.

Let us hope.