The lesson from a particularly bloody week in the Valley
It’s been a bloody week in the Lehigh Valley and surrounding region, with eight people shot.
Six of them died.
What’s particularly sad is that this carnage continues to be acceptable.
If Pennsylvania officials had the courage to take a stand against gun violence, I wonder if some of those deaths and injuries could have been prevented.
This isn’t the first time I’ve lamented this. It won’t be the last.
Unfortunately, the only people my preaching seems to reach are the Second Amendment worshippers who tell me to shut up.
If more people would speak out, and speak out with their votes, something could be done. Common sense tactics wouldn’t interfere with anyone’s constitutional rights. And they could save lives.
Since last Tuesday, there were two road rage shootings in Allentown and three domestic violence double shootings in nearby counties. In each instance, someone got mad, possibly over something trivial. In the heat of the moment, they took out their anger with a firearm.
What if they didn’t have access to a gun? What if they previously had shown they could be dangerous and their firearms were temporarily removed?
Other states do that, with red flag laws.
The laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders, allow household members and law enforcement to ask a court to temporarily take guns from someone who has shown they are a danger to themselves or others. Those who are subject to the orders have an opportunity to contest them and prove they are not dangerous.
The idea has bipartisan support in the Pennsylvania Legislature, where legislation is pending. But Republican leaders refuse to bring the bills for a vote.
They are more concerned with appeasing their voting base and keeping a good rating with the National Rifle Association than with public safety.
That kind of law could stop some domestic violence shootings. It also could prevent threats from being carried out at a workplace or in a neighborhood where tensions have boiled.
Studies in other states have shown red flag laws can help.
Two of the domestic violence shootings came in households with previous interactions with police or allegations of abuse.
Monday, a man critically wounded his father’s fiancee and then fatally shot himself in Wind Gap. Authorities said police had been called to that residence in the past.
Also Monday, a man fatally shot his wife and then himself in Pottstown. Authorities said the shooter had a history of domestic violence.
The argument I always hear against laws aimed at reducing gun violence is that the laws wouldn’t stop criminals. I concur. Those who live a life of crime always will be armed, and they will find a way to get a gun.
Unfortunately, it’s not hard to get one even when you’re not allowed to legally own it.
The man charged in one of the road rage shootings last week in Allentown was banned from possessing a firearm because of a previous felony conviction, authorities said. He is accused of fatally shooting another driver who cut him off.
Not all shootings are committed by lifelong criminals, though. We can’t buy into the argument that there’s no point in changing the law because criminals never will obey the law. They aren’t the only ones shooting people.
Tougher background checks would keep guns away from some people who shouldn’t have them. State legislation is pending to require all firearms purchased at gun shows and all ammunition purchases to be subject to background checks.
State Attorney General Josh Shapiro is trying to stop felons from building their own “ghost guns,” by requiring people who buy unfinished gun frames to pass a background check. That effort is being challenged in court.
Gun violence isn’t an easy problem to solve. The reality is it never will be solved. But it can be addressed and reduced.
New tactics are needed. They could save lives, including some that were lost recently in our area.
Is anyone listening? Does anyone care?