A Call to Action from the Nation's Nurses in the Wake of Newtown - page 4

Reposting from PSNA Communications email. Karen A Call to Action from the Nation's Nurses in the Wake of Newtown More Than 30 Nursing Organizations Call for Action in Wake of Newtown Tragedy ... Read More

  1. Visit  NRSKarenRN profile page
    3
    Marion Wright Edelman sums it up better than I

    Marian Wright Edelman: It Is Time to Act to Protect Children Against Gun Violence


    Right now the pervasive culture of violence in America only reinforces the sense of threat both children and adults feel. This year's Black Friday shopping set a record for gun sales: The FBI reported 154,873 requests for background checks from shoppers wanting to buy guns on the day after Thanksgiving alone. Those numbers are not about what many people think of as the "criminal" gun culture involving guns bought and sold on the streets. These are the guns being sold to the millions of Americans who are willing and able to go through background checks and follow all existing laws and proper legal channels so that they can either buy guns for their own pleasure or their own theoretical protection. It appears the Newtown shooter's mother fell into this very large category of Americans. There were 16.8 million background checks in 2012, nearly double the number 10 years ago. What is it about American culture that encourages tens of millions of Americans to either use guns as a form of entertainment or feel so fearful they believe they need guns in their homes, including semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips designed specifically to kill large numbers of other people, to feel a sense of safety?

    Why are we so terrified of one other, even during periods when actual crime rates go down? There is an obvious connection between that feeling of terror and the culture of violence that saturates Americans in violent language, violent imagery, and violent entertainment. Right now, instead of responding as parents and a nation by saying no to the culture of violence, we are apparently responding by defensively arming ourselves with more and bigger weapons. If that cycle of violence and fear is having such a deep psychological impact on adults, how do we expect our children to navigate or survive it?

    The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reports a gun in the home is more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide, or unintentional shooting than it is to be used in self-defense, and other studies have found guns in a home are more likely to kill or injure a family member or friend than a stranger. Guns lethalize anger and despair. Gun owners who know these facts seem to either discredit the research behind them or hold to the belief their own guns and families would certainly be the exception. If the Newtown shooter's mother knew those risks she likely felt the same way. In fact, if her son had only used her guns to kill her or kill himself, it would have been an outcome that would never have been national news. Instead, the weapons she apparently chose to buy and bring into her home were used to kill her, her child, and 26 other people who were all somebody else's mother, child, or both.
    pattyjo, Mollypita, and herring_RN like this.
  2. Visit  kcmylorn profile page
    1
    I am just opininionating here- I read yesterday, that kid's mother also grew up around guns. She was described as being from a "gun culture". She grew up in New Hampshire- which has many rural areas. The paternal side of my family is from NH and still exclusively lives there. I was not from NH. I grew up and have lived all my life in suburban metro areas- It would be out of character for me to have any kind of gun. For that kid's mom- it was not. She was a "stock broker" and then a SAHM. But she did have a mentally unstable fragile kid living in the same house with her and the guns. It has also been reported, she tried to help and had the means to do so. I don't think she was on her A game and excerised good judgement about a gun access in the house with a mentally unstable fragile kid. For her guns in the house were normal. I would be very interested to find out when she bought those guns.

    I think this still goes back to the "root cause" -- the mental illness. I wonder while we are assuming that since she had considerable means to obtain and provide this mental healthcare, what was the quality of mental healthcare he received? I don't think high priced care, necessarily means quality care. It was also written that she was planning on moving out to Washington state to seek care for him,that she was with growing concern for him per her interviewed friends, that the kid dressed in the same green shirt and khaki pants every day when in high school per his interviewed former class mates, he was a computer wiz( per his former class mates and high school teachers) and his computer at the house was destroyed, possibly beyond investigators being able to put back together. The custody terms of the divorce was( as reported by the AP press) the kid lived with mom and what ever her decision was about kid's care was the decision. The kid has not been in contact with dad for a few years. It sounds to me like dad signed away his parental rights to that kid over to the mom during the divorce- dad's abandoment, rejection and now mom wants to move to a diferent state-a disruption in a daily routine in some one who wears the same clothes day in and day out. Isn't that a psychiatric disease?
    I don't think gun laws are going to solve this problem.
    Last edit by kcmylorn on Dec 22, '12
    janhetherington likes this.
  3. Visit  Laurie52 profile page
    2
    It sounds to me like dad signed away his parental rights to that kid over to the mom during the divorce- dad's abandoment, rejection
    Everything that I have read said that Adam cut off any contact with his father and older brother. I think that this was a very trouble boy for a very long time. This is proboably not the child I would teach to shoot and would not have guns in the house while he was there. Locked up or not, he clearly was able to access them.
    jadelpn and Tina, RN like this.
  4. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    1
    Quote from herring_RN
    Time to Act Now To Restore Our Ravaged Mental Healthcare System
    by Deborah Burger

    Registered nurses across the country mourn the loss of life marked by the shooting of innocents in Connecticut. This should be a clear wake up call for the White House, Congress, and state and local legislators to take action to address causes of the violence, including restoring the devastating cuts that have occurred to mental health services across the U.S.
    Every day a massive tragedy is being played out on a smaller scale everyday in emergency rooms, in mental health facilities, and on the streets across our country, where, with sometimes devastating consequences, mental health is underfunded to a shocking, and sometimes deadly degree. ...

    ... Members of National Nurses United, the nation's largest organization of nurses, say it is time to act with both short term and long term responses. It is incumbent on all of us to:
    • Demand private healthcare systems reverse the pervasive cuts to mental health services, especially by profit-focused institutions which view mental health as an easy target for cuts because it is less profitable and has fewer public advocates.
    • Increase federal, state and local funding of public mental health programs and public health clinics, which play a crucial role in identifying persons with potentially violent mental health problems.
    • Require health insurance companies to provide full coverage for mental health services, and require parity in mental health coverage with other health services.
    • Restore school nurses and counselors who are frequently a first target of school budget cuts.
    • Challenge the stigma of mental health that undermines mental health programs and stigmatizes people needing mental health care, the overwhelming majority of whom are not violent.
    • Guarantee health care for everyone, including mental health services, based on patient need, not ability to pay, as in improving and expanding Medicare to cover everyone.

    Sadly, this growing emergency comes as no surprise to America's nurses who are on the front line of our nation's mental health crisis. ...

    ... Evidence is in on the mental health crisis (please read further)

    Time to Act Now To Restore Our Ravaged Mental Healthcare System | Common Dreams
    The National Nurses United (NNU) officers and board voted to approve the above.
    I can only guess why they didn't mention weapons. My guess is that:
    In California and probably other states we already had a position on restoring our public health system that included mental healthcare.
    Any attempt to regulate the sale of firearms causes some to assume that someone wants to take away all guns.
    Since the little innocent children were killed there are plans to again try to regulate them I think nurses can choose to take sides as they think best.

    I do think a discussion and action to improve mentasl healthcare is needed.
    Mental illness is not new. I hope we can do better.

    BBC Documentary on some history of mental health care:
    Last edit by herring_RN on Dec 22, '12 : Reason: Add information
    tewdles likes this.
  5. Visit  InfirmiereJolie profile page
    1
    Why is it we always talk about mental health care, NRA fans useing to avoid the topic of assult weapon bans? Many people who use these semi-automatic weapons are not mental. They claim they are mental for their defense cases, but otherwise their scheming/planning certainly is not by a person who cannot think, but someone who knows what they are doing, coldly. They are simply this - cold.

    By focusing on mental illness, this simply ignores the problem that these weapons are on the street and being used by legitimate planners. You cannot ban all violent TV or shows, this is unreasonable. Further, you cannot expect to give counseling and expect this alone is enough. Many of these same people had been seen by counselors and phychologists beforehand - it didn't stop them. Even those who were not, would it have really stopped them? Unlikely, as it seems they knew exactly what they were doing, planning it, and the history of these attacks disproves it.

    No matter how many times this comes up, mental health planning is not going to stop it. The history of people getting spoken to and doing it anyway disproves it.
    janhetherington likes this.
  6. Visit  PMFB-RN profile page
    5
    Quote from Laurie52
    I realize that gun ownership is a constitutional right, and I have no objections to anyone owning a musket and making their own ammunition for them. This was the weapon available when the second ammendment was signed.
    Ya sure. Since paper, pen and the printing press were the only form of media available when the 1st Ammendment came about we should ban radio, TV and the internet. After all the internet provides a medium for the rapid disimination of child porn and makes possible the spreading of terrorists ideologies. Certainly cell phones must be banned since there weren't around when the constitution was signed and they are often used to detonate IEDs and murder people.
    Sheesh, your logic sort of freaks me out.
  7. Visit  HM-8404 profile page
    5
    Quote from MBARNBSN
    This is the basis of the it's-a-slippery-slope argument, where Fear-Mongers afraid of the government taking all of your weapons away justifies ANY and all weapons being available to normal average citizens no matter how dangerous or how ridiculous!!! Fortunately, you guys (to include the NRA that is only in business to support the GUN MANUFACTURERS and not the Second Amendment, which does not protect the need for assault weapons in the hands of civilians) are not going to get away with pushing this garbage argument this time. Especially not after 20 babies were killed and everyone in this country and around the world was paying attention.

    Assault weapons and high capacity clips are not necessary for CIVILIANS of any kind to own. There is not a single civilian that needs access to these things to hunt for sport because they are mass people killers and have no other use!

    By the way, not everyone who kills people is mentally ill! So, keeping these weapons out of the hands of mentally ill will not solve the problem of preventing the next mass shooting... This argument just kicks-the-can-down-the-road and distracts from the need to remove access of high capacity clips and assault weapons out of the hands of ALL civilians, just like the NRA and Gun Manufacturers wants.
    A little information for people that know less about guns than they think they do... Any magazine in an assault style weapon can be changed in less than 5 seconds. So is there really a difference if a shooter has a 30 round magazine or 3 10 round magazines. When will people start blaming the real cause of these incidence, crazy evil people.
  8. Visit  InfirmiereJolie profile page
    0
    Quote from PMFB-RN
    Ya sure. Since paper, pen and the printing press were the only form of media available when the 1st Ammendment came about we should ban radio, TV and the internet. After all the internet provides a medium for the rapid disimination of child porn and makes possible the spreading of terrorists ideologies. Certainly cell phones must be banned since there weren't around when the constitution was signed and they are often used to detonate IEDs and murder people.
    Sheesh, your logic sort of freaks me out.
    "Paper, pens, printing presses, radio, TV, the internet, cell phones" are NOT used to kill people as or be massive weapons. There is NO logic in this spiral argument. Guns (especially the semi-automatic kind) are PRIMARILY used to injure or kill another living thing. This is there #1 meaning. The others cannot be used for this without GREAT STRAIN and basically, pointless.
  9. Visit  InfirmiereJolie profile page
    0
    Quote from HM-8404
    A little information for people that know less about guns than they think they do... Any magazine in an assault style weapon can be changed in less than 5 seconds. So is there really a difference if a shooter has a 30 round magazine or 3 10 round magazines. When will people start blaming the real cause of these incidence, crazy evil people.
    Not if you ban assault weapons. Do you REALLY want to go up against one? I don't think so.

    Are you REALLY going to use an assault weapon for hunting deer, rabbits, ect.? NO. It is NOT USEFUL. You can do it without a semi-automatic weapon. There is no use for these weapons except for NON-RECREATIONAL use AKA killing massive amounts of people.
    I don't understand why nurses WOULDN'T be for a ban of assault weapons. Afterall, nurses are the ones who has to care for the injured after all of this. They would want LESS people dieing and going to the hospital, wouldn't they? This is caring.
  10. Visit  PMFB-RN profile page
    0
    We are not talking about little small muskets we are talking about massive killing machines!
    *** Not really. The round fired by the Bushmaster is fairly weak, not usually considered adiquate for deer hunting. It is however widely used for hunting fox, coyote and prairie dogs. The weapon is fairly small and low powered compaired to nearly any other centerfire rifle.

    We do not these out on the streets and I read IndiCRNA's comment that it didn't do anything.
    *** That is a fact. At no time during the 1994-2004 so called "ban" were the "banned" firearms unavailable for immediate purchase. Same with magazines holding more than 10 rounds that were also banned at that time.
    There isn't any way to get rid of them. There are literaly millions of similar firearms in cilivian hands. Almost nobody will give them up. We know this from recent history. I wouldn't reguardless of the law if I owned any. The only thing that can be done is what was done in 1994 ban the manufacture of certain types of firearms based strictly on cosmetic apperence or brand name. The effect of what available on the shelves of gun shops with be minimal.

    Over the summer around the time of the Colorado shooting I talked to someone who said the item used was basically the same he used when in the military, but just SLIGHTLY different.
    *** Here is the main difference. The M4 or M16 he used in the military is an assault rifle. That means it is capable to "select fire" meaning the shooter can select semi auto mode so that in order to fire the weapon the trigger must be pulled and for each trigger pull one round is fired. It is also capable of full auto firing. Meaning that when the trigger is pulled the rifle fires and continues to fire so long as the trigger is held down. The rate of fire is very high, usually around 600 rounds a min. Such firearms are illegal for cilivian possesion (with certain exceptions) and have since 1938.
    The rifle used in the recent tragadies looks similar to the military weapon but is NOT capable of select fire or full auto fire. The shooter must depress the trigger each time she wants to fire the rifle. In this reguard it is no different that a huge variety of traditional hunting rifles that have been used for the last 100 years or so.

    He strongly was for this ban of these massive killing machines!!
    We need these gone!
    What would be your realistic suggestion of how to make these relitivly small and low powered weapons unavailable? Banning them will not get rid of them. Are you going to send police to break into people's homes and confiscate their property? Whet do you think will happen if that is attempted?
  11. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    0
    Quote from InfirmiereJolie
    Why is it we always talk about mental health care, NRA fans useing to avoid the topic of assult weapon bans? Many people who use these semi-automatic weapons are not mental. They claim they are mental for their defense cases, but otherwise their scheming/planning certainly is not by a person who cannot think, but someone who knows what they are doing, coldly. They are simply this - cold.

    By focusing on mental illness, this simply ignores the problem that these weapons are on the street and being used by legitimate planners. You cannot ban all violent TV or shows, this is unreasonable. Further, you cannot expect to give counseling and expect this alone is enough. Many of these same people had been seen by counselors and phychologists beforehand - it didn't stop them. Even those who were not, would it have really stopped them? Unlikely, as it seems they knew exactly what they were doing, planning it, and the history of these attacks disproves it.

    No matter how many times this comes up, mental health planning is not going to stop it. The history of people getting spoken to and doing it anyway disproves it.
    Most people with mental illness never become violent.
    But can you that the July 2011 attacks in Norway, the Tucson, Arizona., shooting that wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting, and the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, didn'tinvolve perpetrators with mental illness?



  12. Visit  HM-8404 profile page
    3
    Quote from InfirmiereJolie
    I agree with RESTORING the The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and the Federal Assault Weapons Ban which was in place in the 1990's like NRSKarenRN.

    Basically there are copy cats on the street since it expired and one was used in Colorado last summer. Not good!!!!
    Do you actually know what happened when that ban went into effect? Here's an example, Chinese made SKS's sold for $99. That included a brand new "assault rifle" and 100 rounds of ammo. I purchased 3 plus 6 high capacity magazines. An AR-15 dropped in price to little over $400. When the ban started gaining strength in Congress the gun manufacturers ramped up production and flooded the market, making them affordable for everybody. In essence, there were more guns in the public's hands but yet crime dropped? That ban worked wonders, huh?
    Sadala, KeyMaster, and PMFB-RN like this.
  13. Visit  HM-8404 profile page
    1
    Quote from InfirmiereJolie
    Not if you ban assault weapons. Do you REALLY want to go up against one? I don't think so.

    Are you REALLY going to use an assault weapon for hunting deer, rabbits, ect.? NO. It is NOT USEFUL. You can do it without a semi-automatic weapon. There is no use for these weapons except for NON-RECREATIONAL use AKA killing massive amounts of people.
    I don't understand why nurses WOULDN'T be for a ban of assault weapons. Afterall, nurses are the ones who has to care for the injured after all of this. They would want LESS people dieing and going to the hospital, wouldn't they? This is caring.
    Showing your knowledge of weapons here. If given the choice I had much rather be shot with a .223 caliber Bushmaster AR-15 than a standard police issue .38 or 9mm handgun. It will do much less damage than they will. The only real advantage the .223 has over the others is accuracy at a distance out to 500 meters.

    For the record, I have gone up against assault weapons before. Much larger 7.62mm AK-47's.
    PMFB-RN likes this.

Need Help Searching For Someone's Comment? Enter your keywords in the box below and we will display any comment that matches your keywords.



Nursing Jobs in every specialty and state. Visit today and find your dream job.

Top
close
close