Home » Opinion » Editorials
Shaheen's approach: More treatment, fewer 'assault' guns
Three days after the unspeakable tragedy in Newtown, Conn., Sen Jeanne Shaheen, the senior senator from the pro-gun state of New Hampshire, proclaimed that the federal government must "get deadly assault weapons off our streets." Oh, boy.
To her credit, Shaheen has not been reflexively anti-gun in the Senate. In 2009 she voted to allow firearms in national parks. And on Monday she indicated that she did not view the problem as entirely gun-related. "We need a comprehensive approach that includes improving access to mental health services, better enforcement of our current laws, and we need to get deadly assault weapons off our streets," she said.
Her first point is an immensely important one. According to a review by the left-wing Mother Jones magazine, 38 of 61 mass-shooting perpetrators in the last three decades had some sort of mental illness. The most horrifying mass shootings in the United States in recent memory - Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, Columbine - all involved shooters with histories of mental problems.
Shaheen has long advocated expanded insurance coverage for mental illness. When she was a state senator she sponsored a bill requiring insurers to cover certain mental health issues, and she signed a law expanding such coverage when she was governor. She brings a lot of experience on this issue that might be useful in the Senate.
However, her statement about assault weapons is concerning. "Asssault weapon" is a term defined many different ways by many different people. If it means "automatic weapon," the federal government bans those made after 1986 already. If it means "semi-automatic" weapon, that would include every firearm that does not require manual cocking or reloading after every shot.
Politicians and anti-gun activists often use vague terms like "assault weapon" to stigmatize broad categories of guns or to hide their own ignorance about firearms. Shaheen needs to clarify what she means by "assault weapons," how she would propose removing them from "our streets," and why she thinks doing so would reduce mass killings.
READER COMMENTS: 0
- George Will: The benefits of prudence - 0
- Jonah Goldberg: Paul and Cruz vie to become Reagan's heir - 0
- Thomas Sowell: Liberal education policies hurt minorities - 0
- Charles Arlinghaus: Yes, our paltry rainy day fund is a really big deal - 3
- Rep. Terie Norelli: New Hampshire workers deserve higher minimum wages - 2
- Les Bernal: Why don’t casino advocates and executives patronize casinos? - 5
- David Harsanyi: Do most Americans agree with Demsocrats? - 3
- Sam Cohen: ‘No compromise’ gun groups shoot themselves in the foot - 10
- Kathy Sullivan: Scott Brown’s prospects for a U.S. Senate win are poor - 18
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Sens. Shaheen, Ayotte slam latest push for online sales tax - 0
- Bedford girls basketball team spreads the scoring wealth - 0
- New Hampshire high school athletes on the run (and jumping) in NYC - 0
- Ian Clark's High School Hockey: Teams anxious to play - 0
- Manchester Mayor Gatsas: Vote tells me Hooksett is satisfied with Manchester schools - 0
- After Pinkerton rejection, what's next for Hooksett students? - 0
- Nashua aldermen approve pair of union contracts - 0
- Was a crime committed? Nashua police are not certain - 0
- Nashua must decide on parkway project's bridge aesthetics - 0
SCORE workshop offers social media tips
Minimum wages: Maximum spin
Hooksett votes down Pinkerton schools deal
Hooksett has five new school board members
A CIA bombshell: Feinstein and the Fourth