(This is Part 1 of an ongoing series, where I will attempt to demonstrate how contentious any discussion on gun restrictions is, and how difficult it can be to engage in civilized, honest, and open conversation.)

From the comments in response to my blog:

“Paul you are a Hypocrite and a Liar, Why don’t you face facts. The Brady Bunch is little more than a Mouth Piece for the ACLU, and the Ultra liberal Wing of the Democratic Party. That the Brady Bunch is a thinly veiled “Hate group� that advocates the methods of the brown shirts, of Nazi Germany in 1933.�

-Melody, March 29, 2007

Thirty-two people were murdered with firearms at Virginia Tech, and thirty-two people are murdered with firearms every day in this country. We’ve asked politicians, strangers, allies, and activists, “What are you going to do about it?�

One response to that question has been given by independent groups of individuals in cities across America in recent weeks. In Virginia, New York, Maryland, Illinois, and Texas, ordinary people are demonstrating their outrage at our weak gun laws by staging “lie-ins� – where thirty-two people, dressed in black, lie motionless on the ground – to commemorate the thirty-two murder victims at Virginia Tech.

In the two months since the Virginia Tech shootings, there have been at least a dozen of these lie-ins nationwide. Some of the cities where activists have staged these protests are:

• McLean, Virginia (Photo)
• Silver Spring, Maryland (Photo)
• New York, New York (Photo)
• Chicago, Illinois (Photo)
• Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Lie-ins are also planned for Dallas and Houston this weekend.

Though these dramatic demonstrations of public outrage were not started or organized by the Brady Campaign (credit for these simple, powerful demonstrations belongs to Abby Spangler), we encourage our friends and activists to participate any way they can.

Along with the recent release of preliminary data from the FBI’s 2006 Uniform Crime Report came confirmation of what many observers had been expecting even before the preliminary data was made available: violent crime is on the rise across America.

Among the findings in the report:

• Violent crime nationwide increased for the second consecutive year
• Nationwide, there was an increase of 1.3 percent in violent crime
• At the same time, property crime decreased by 2.9 percent
• Robbery increased by 6 percent
• Cities with a population of 25,000 to 49,999 saw the same rise in violent crime as cities with a population of 250,000 to 499,999.

These findings mirror stories that had already been circulating, describing increased incidences of violence. Early last year, the New York Times reported on the rise of fatal incidents stemming from seemingly minor altercations:

“And while such crime in the 1990’s was characterized by battles over gangs and drug turf, the police say the current rise in homicides has been set off by something more bewildering: petty disputes that hardly seem the stuff of fistfights, much less gunfire or stabbings.�

Regardless of the cause of these clashes, it is clear that “trivial� fights are turning deadly more often now than they had in the past. In this kind of environment, one wonders why some suggest that more guns will reduce the number of people shot to death in petty disputes. We’ve tried that for many years now, and we once again see that adding more guns to the mix does not result in less violence.

But it’s not just big cities seeing a surge in violent crime. The spread of gangs, and cuts to law enforcement funding, have left smaller cities seeing a rise in their homicide rates as well. A report this January in the New York Times points out that:

“Among the 15 other cities with 100,000 or more people in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, 10 had increases in violent crime, including 4 in the double digits. And in those 15 cities, taken together, the number of homicides rose by 28 percent.�

Adding more guns has not solved the problem. It’s time for real solutions, not just more blind attempts to justify past failures by repeating the same mistakes over and over. We make it too easy for dangerous people to get weapons.

With the passage in Connecticut of a bill to require lost and stolen guns reported to police, more people are talking about ways that law-abiding gun owners can prevent their firearms from falling into the hands of criminals.

Coincidentally, the fight over an employee’s “right” to take guns onto company property is once again being ignited in Florida. These two stories come together in an Orlando Sentinel article detailing one of the risks of leaving firearms in unattended vehicles.

Gun thefts from motor vehicles are not tracked statewide, but 251 were stolen last year in Orlando and unincorporated Orange County, according to police reports. In 2001, Orlando police, the Sheriff’s Office and the 10 other law-enforcement agencies in Orange combined reported only 193 guns taken in car burglaries and car thefts.

The article also cites instances of vehicles being targeted by criminals who knew where to look for guns. It mentions that many guns stolen — from homes and from cars — go unreported, making it difficult for police to properly and quickly investigate crimes committed with those stolen guns.

In all the talk about the “rights” of gun owners, very little is said about the responsibilities of gun ownership. Safe storage, whether it’s to prevent a tragic accident at home, or to make it harder for a criminal to obtain a firearm by theft, is crucial and uncontroversial.

There is nothing safe about leaving a gun in an unattended (and often unlocked) vehicle.

Whether you label Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy’s NICS Improvement Act (HB 2640), approved by the U.S. House of Representatives last week, as “gun control” or “criminal control,” or just a way to “improve the reporting by states to the NICS systemâ€� (to quote Wayne LaPierre of the NRA), most of our leaders, police, and neighbors agree that we need to do a better job in preventing dangerous people from obtaining firearms.

The excuse that “criminals don’t follow the law” is a syllogistic excuse for inaction. Preventing a large percent of dangerous people from getting guns is a worthy goal, even if we concede that no law will ever be 100% effective. More and more people seem willing to embark on “first steps” toward effective laws to prevent gun violence, rather than sitting around waiting for the one perfect law to be devised.

In the last few days, many newspaper editorial boards have expressed this view. Some noteworthy editorials:

• Battle Creek Enquirer: States’ data must be part of background-check system
• Morning Call: Gun-rights and gun-control advocates can find common ground in the Senate
• Toledo Blade: The lesson of Virginia Tech
• Orlando Sentinel: Unite in support
• Washington Post: Gun sense
• New York Times: Why protect shady gun dealers?
• Denver Post: Gun reform with NRA blessing
• New York Daily News: NRA shows rare sanity
• Los Angeles Times: Small steps on gun control
• Fort Worth Star-Telegram: Good aim
  

Now, the U.S. Senate needs to take positive action with this legislation.