I have worked with interfaith groups and political groups in
Texas and Iowa on this issue of gun violence.
I have signed petitions, talked with legislators, and walked in rallies
to stop gun violence. I have preached on
gun violence. I have talked with people
on both sides of the issue of legislating access to guns and ammunition, as
well as legislating the types of guns that are legal to purchase. I even moderated a television program on gun
control laws. So where am I now on this
very important issue?
When gun
violence erupts somewhere our country, people are energized to organize in
order to lobby legislators to support some sort of gun control
legislation. And so it was in December
2012 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. I was called by the Unitarian Universalist
minister who had served Peoples Unitarian Universalist Church in Cedar Rapids,
Iowa some 20 years before I was called to that congregation. His name was Jeremy Brigham. He had left the ministry to become a college
professor, but still was active in social justice causes. He wanted me to join with a number of other
civil and religious leaders to decide what we were going to do in response to
the escalation of gun violence in our country.
I agreed to attend. This group of
30 or so people met at the African American Museum of Iowa in Cedar
Rapids. There was representation from
the police department, many religious leaders and members of the city council,
as well as the county Board of Supervisors and a number of people who had been
working on the issue of gun control and/or gun violence for some time. We started by sharing our feelings of anger,
fear, and frustration about this latest incident, and then started talking
about what we could do. I pressed for us
to work locally because I saw little change happening on a state or national
level with a Republican governor in the statehouse and the National Rifle
Association (NRA) lobbyists in the nation’s capital. We decided to start with a gun buyback
program. The police were willing to
accept the guns that were brought in and destroy them, but they didn’t have
funds to purchase the guns. So the rest
of us started working on finding sources for funding a gun buy back in the
city. The city council then authorized
the buyback program and opened up a fund for people to donate into. Sgt. Cristy Hamblin took the lead on this for
the police department.
The police
were behind this because it might actually take a few guns off the streets, but
they were not holding any illusion that this step would affect gun violence in
the city in any significant way. They
saw this as more a symbolic act in the fight against gun violence. Our church and other churches donated to this
cause. Some private individuals donated,
but in the end, while we raised a few thousand dollars, we were unable to raise
enough money to launch the gun buyback program.
During this
process, I reached out to gun owners, particularly those in my
congregation. Yes, friends, there are
Unitarian Universalists who are responsible gun owners. One in particular wanted to work on this
issue on a larger scale. He was a member
of National Shooting Sports Association (NSSA), which coincidently has its headquarters
in Sandy Hook, Massachusetts. He agreed
to reach out to them and see if he could get them to write a statement
condemning the Sandy Hook shooting, and call for some reasonable measures to
curb gun violence. He had been active
and well respected by this organization and had hope that he could make a
difference by reaching out to them. His
request fell on deaf ears. After several
letters, emails and calls, he gave up.
Also during
this time, I moderated a show on gun control on the local ABC affiliate. We found an articulate and reasoned member of
the local National Rifle Association to be one of our panel members. What I remember from that program was how he
eloquently told the audience that gun control will not change gun
violence. He felt that mental health
legislation was called for, but gun control was really off the table for any
member of the NRA. He also talked about
the wrongheadedness of trying to control assault weapons. He said assault weapons were no different
than any rifle; they were just shaped differently. And that many normal looking rifles could be
altered to be semi-automatic or even automatic, so they would essentially be
the same as an assault rifle.
While he
was willing to participate in this television program, he was unwilling to meet
with the members of the coalition that I had been working with trying to curb
gun violence in the city. He felt that
we were trying to control guns, not gun violence, and he would have no part of
it.
Being able
to bring all parties to the table to discuss a path forward, working to reduce
gun violence was stalled. And I have
heard this very same thing from larger organizations working to reduce gun
violence, the Brady Campaign to Control Gun Violence, Mayors Against Illegal
Guns, and many others.
Last month
one of our local Unitarian Universalist ministers, Reverend Karen Mooney, got
involved with a group trying to support one day of no gun deaths in Chicago:
Thou Shalt Not Murder, Chicago : 3/27/2016.
A petition drive was started. And
there are events planned—one to teach people how to lobby and one reaching out
to the homeless in Chicago. I signed the
petition, but after my years of work in two other states, I wonder whether this
will make a difference.
My own
thoughts on gun violence have evolved over time. Right now I want to find a path to bring all
affected parties to the table, even members of the NRA. We have to work collaboratively to decide on
reasonable ways to curb this epidemic of gun violence in our country. Right now, I know that gun control
legislation will not pass, in this state or in our nation’s capital. And while there is a national consensus on
some issues around gun violence, the energy to make any changes seems to be
low. Right now, my passion for reducing
gun violence has been frustrated by the realities that I have faced in this
work.
I have hope
that something might happen because there are new people working on this
issue. There is an Independent Voter
Network (IVN) online that is trying to provide a platform for people to discuss
difficult issues like gun violence in a non-partisan way, and encouraging
independent-minded voters, public officials, civic leaders, and journalists to
work together. The IVN has a plan for
reducing gun violence which includes harsher penalties for gun violence,
improved mental health access and treatment, addressing illegal gun trade,
prison reform, the war on drugs (ending it), and background checks; in other
words legislating background checks for any gun purchase. I hope this group might be able to engage
independents and political leaders in this conversation and maybe make a
difference.
I cannot
tell you how sad I am about gun violence, the senseless deaths, the
proliferation of gun sales, and the lack of political will in our country to
effectively tackle this issue. And here
is my controversial comment for this service, I do not oppose gun
ownership. I am not a hunter; I am not a
gun enthusiast; I am not a gun owner.
But I have many friends, and some are Unitarian Universalists, who are
responsible gun owners, hunters, and gun enthusiasts. My father was a hunter and took me duck
hunting once. That was probably the most
miserable experience of my life. Cold,
wet, getting up before sunrise and loud rifles going off all around you. But the hunters around me loved this
experience. They also ate the ducks they
shot; they were not just killing for sport.
I am not here to tell hunters that they can’t go duck hunting. However, I do think that gun user education
and thorough testing to ensure a thorough knowledge of safe gun use should be
part of licensing any gun owner.
While I was
in Iowa, gun legislation was passed that was opposed by all the police
authorities. It allowed gun owners to
get licenses by taking online training and testing. Students were never required to actually
shoot a gun; they never had hands-on supervised training on how to safely load
or shoot a gun; they never even had to handle a gun. Yet they could be a licensed gun owner. Another part of this legislation stated that
the police can’t restrict issuance of a gun license unless there are very
specific reasons—like a felony conviction.
I have probably mentioned this at one time or another: my
mother owns a gun because she lives alone in Houston and is afraid someone
might break into her house. She has
never handled a gun and has never fired a gun in her life. Yet, she has a loaded gun in her home for
safety. I am deeply concerned that she
will harm herself with the gun if someone were to break into her home.
What are
your feelings about gun violence? Gun
control? The lack of political will to
bring all parties to the table to craft reasonable gun violence legislation?
In 1991,
the General Assembly of Unitarian Universalist churches passed a general
resolution encouraging all its member congregations to petition legislators to
enact and support laws such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of
1991 (HR7) in the United States. And the
1991 resolution also encouraged Unitarian Universalists to petition legislators
to include safety training programs as a mandatory condition that must be met
before firearms can be owned and used; and to petition legislators to enact and
support laws banning private ownership or use of machine guns, semi-automatic,
and automatic assault weapons. As you
probably know, Congress let the assault weapons ban in the Brady Bill expire in
2004. And the Supreme Court outlawed
state and local governments being compelled by the national government to do
background checks before gun purchases, which was also part of Brady Bill.
The
Unitarian Universalist Association website has a page of resources, films,
letters, and boilerplate petitions to help congregations learn how to talk
about gun violence and to work on issues of gun violence. Educating ourselves thoroughly on the issues
around gun violence in our country is vital if we hope to talk about the issues
intelligently with people on both sides of the gun control debate.
Martin Luther King, Jr. once preached: “By our
silence, by our willingness to compromise principle… by our readiness to allow
arms to be purchased at will and fired at whim, by allowing our movie and
television screens to teach our children that the hero is one who masters the
art of shooting and the technique of killing, by allowing all these
developments, we have created an atmosphere in which violence and hatred have
become popular pastimes.” I can’t help
but agree, but I also know I have spoken up again and again, and there have
been negligible results. Do I sit down
and quietly accept there is nothing I can do?
Do I wait until the next time people are shot? Where is the uproar, the outrage at last
week’s shooting in Kansas? And why do I
have the queasy feeling that if the shooting hadn’t happened during this caucus
and debate season, we’d be hearing more about it? Has our country become numb to gun
violence? I know I can watch more
violence on television without having a reaction or covering my eyes like a
used to. And I can hear about violence
on the news without feeling compelled to get out of my chair and make some
calls to see what I can do to make a difference or help those affected. I am overwhelmed. I am numb.
In December
of last year, a group rented space at our church to write cards of support to
those who have been affected by gun violence.
I was happy to rent them this space.
I talked to them to let them know that we, as Unitarian Universalists,
supported their work, and I told them I hoped that they knew this was a safe
place for them.
They were
going to meet here again this year to write more cards and talk about gun
violence in the safe space that is DuPage Unitarian Universalist Church. Then the Illinois Rifle Association (IRA)
somehow—we don’t know how—caught wind of this meeting. The date, time and location of this letter
writer’s meeing was publicly posted on the IRA’s webpage, along with a call to
all of its members to raid the letter-writer’s meeting in our building, in this
safe space that is our church. They
encouraged all their members to infiltrate this anti-gun meeting (even though
pretending to be anti-gun sympathizers was repulsive to IRA members), and
disrupt this meeting (because the IRA doesn’t want people to take away their
guns). The IRA was going to highjack
this meeting to speak out on gun rights.
The Illinois Rifle Association felt threatened by this group meeting at
our church. And so I alerted the police
and asked that a patrol car with a couple of officers stop by in case the IRA
tried to sneak into our church and disrupt the meeting. But the group writing cards and talking about
gun violence decided to cancel their meeting deeply afraid of the IRA. When I talked to this group later, they told
me they had to meet in secret because they are afraid of this organization and
like organizations being verbally abusive and threatening toward them.
In a recent article in Sightings online magazine I read: “No
matter your opinion on gun legislation, the loss of innocent life occasioned by
the senseless actions of violent individuals is overwhelming. It is
increasingly difficult not to be somewhat anxious about going to a large public
event, sending your child to school, going to the movies, or even attending
church. Considering gun violence an epidemic provides us with the opportunity
to transform the terms, context, and approach of our contemporary conversation.
Thinking in terms of “public health,” in particular, can be useful. It drags us
away from the heated rhetoric surrounding gun rights and allows us to shift the
conversation to a problem-solving plane.” ( Epidemic as Metaphor: Meaning and
Morality in our Narratives of Gun Violence By Philippa Koch. Dec 31, 2015, Sightings, University of Chicago
Divinity School)
People are scared, but change isn’t happening. Using different metaphors might help, but I
still believe that people in the IRA and the NRA will respond to any
conversation about moderating guns as a threat and will respond accordingly. Is that oversimplifying or objectification? Perhaps so, but that’s how I often feel.
I am try to be hopeful, but I do struggle with effective
next steps. Smart Guns, guns that only
respond to the owner’s touch, might help, but they are so many years away. I cannot be content to just wait and see if
someone else will do something, but at the same time, I am not sure what to
do. What I’ve done so far sure doesn’t
seem to have worked very well. Still, I
will support organizations that are working on this issue. I will educate myself on legislation and
possible solutions to this problem. I
will continue to talk to people on both sides of gun control legislation to
learn how they feel, how they understand gun violence, and what they are
willing to do to reduce gun violence.
And then another child dies and nothing we do seems to be enough.
What I ask you to do, with me, is not forget those who are
killed by guns.
“Each of us is an indescribable assemblage, a person;
each of us is different from all who have gone or who will
follow after.
Each of us has inherent weaknesses and strengths;
whether we are homely or beautiful,
each person is loved for what we are,
and to those who love us the loss will be unique and
everlasting.
each friend departed leaves us wounded,
even as a mother holds a tender sorrow for the baby which is
no more.
For each person is a thousand people;
each person dies a thousand times before
their last ending writes a finish to their early days.”
I invite you into a time of silence to bring to mind those
who you want to remember who have died from gun violence. And when the chime sounds, you can speak
their names out loud.
(chime)
Let us always remember.
May we know that our work will be a sign of hope. May we not refuse to do the something that we
can do. So may it be.
