In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Violence Policy Center?s License To Kill IV:
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Violence Policy Center's License To Kill IV:
In their own words . . . "just more rhetoric"
VPC misinforms public with improper use of statistics, unsupported statements, and outright fabrication to attack the successful CHL law in Texas.
MEDIA RELEASE
July 2, 2002
STATEMENT FROM TEXAS STATE RIFLE ASSOCIATION
From James Dark, Executive Director
Texas State Rifle Association
RICHARDSON, TEXAS and COLUMBUS, OHIO -- Texans often have unusual and colorful ways of dismissing the views of their adversaries in debate. Famed Texas hero Sam Houston once attributed a political opponent's differing views as being the result of the man's use of "water as a beverage."
I must confess to having similar thoughts when I recently saw the information released by the Violence Policy Center in its dramatically titled "License to Kill IV." This study uses skewed statistics and misinformation about the Texas Concealed Handgun Law to make the case to the citizens of Ohio and their elected representatives that these laws are a recipe for disaster.
The truth of the matter is that the exact opposite is true. Since the passage of the law, Texas is a safer place. Violent crime is down.
The Violence Policy Center used statistics from the Texas Department of Public Safety, which show the raw number of arrests of Concealed Handgun License Holders since the law went into effect on January 1, 1996. There are a number of significant problems with these statistics:
The statistics used by the VPC are for arrests, not convictions. These arrest statistics were recently compelled by state law to be removed from the DPS website and replaced with CONVICTION rates. To this day, the website simply contains a notice that the mandated information is "coming soon." The VPC is not interested in these new statistics because they will show that only 26% of CHL holders have ever been convicted of the crime of which they are accused, thus making VPC's small problem even smaller.
By using the number of arrests (as opposed to convictions), 5,314, with no comparison to anything else, they attempt to bring about a knee-jerk reaction because that SOUNDS like a big number. But in fact, when compared to the large number of CHL holders in Texas (about a quarter million), it creates a minute percentage. Further, when compared to the general population, CHL holders are 7.5 times LESS likely to commit a crime than someone without a permit. There is a good reason that this comparison wasn't made. It doesn't fit their spin.
The VPC cites figures that CHL holders are arrested at a rate higher than the general population for firearms related offenses. In most cases, if a CHL holder uses a firearm to defend himself, they will be placed under arrest. Even in the most justifiable of situations where deadly force is applied, it falls upon the proper authorities and grand juries to decide if charges will be pursued against a CHL holder. That CHL holders are arrested for weapons related offenses at a higher rate than the general population should surprise nobody. They have a much higher percentage of firearms than the general population. What the VPC will not share with you is how many of these CHL holders have ever been CONVICTED of a firearms-related offense. Again, it just doesn't fit their spin.
When Texas elected to pass a Concealed Handgun License Bill, it took a great step forward in allowing its citizens to exercise their inherent right to self-defense. The Texas law is one of the strictest in the nation, in regards to the qualifications needed to obtain the license. CHL holders in Texas are among the most scrutinized segment of our state's population. Licensees have passed state and federal background checks, fingerprint checks, complied with all tax and child support requirements, attend classes and pass a written test on all pertinent state laws, and pass a qualification test to ensure their competence with their weapon. Texas also has the highest licensing fee in the nation, at $140. The required classes focus on safety, responsibility, conflict resolution and use of a weapon as an absolute LAST RESORT.
The VPC also attempts to paint Texas CHL holders as criminals. Karen Brock of the VPC actually states that, "license holders are committing crimes, not preventing them." This statement is utter hogwash. There was never any expectation that every CHL holder would attain an infallible level of perfection and live a life free of sin. The fact that our CHL holders are statistically far safer than the general population speaks volumes about the efficacy of our program.
Brock also has no data to back up her statement that crimes are not being prevented. Normally people calling themselves "analysts" require something called "data." There simply are no statistics kept by anyone on crimes prevented by CHL holders. So how did Ms. Brock come up with this allegation? The answer is simple. In true VPC style, she made it up.
I called Ms. Brock and asked what data she used to support this statement. In the end, she admitted that there was none, and that it was "just more rhetoric." This statement did not surprise me, but I think that it might have shocked those who rely on the Violence Policy Center for their information.
The vast majority of incidents in Texas are resolved without gunplay. Almost without exception, incidents involving CHL holders de-escalate the instant that a handgun is produced. Far from the "rivers of blood" that critics said would flow down our streets, we have in fact had nothing of the sort.
Hopefully, the people of Ohio will see the shenanigans of the Violence Policy Center for what they are and see the true success story of the Texas Concealed Handgun License law. Texas is a safer place today than it was in 1995. Ohio can be a safer place next year if their legislators come up with a reasonable way to allow their law-abiding citizens to exercise their inherent right to defend themselves from criminals.
Contact: James Dark is the Executive Director of the Richardson, Texas based Texas State Rifle Association. For more information on the TSRA, see their website at www.tsra.com. For more information or to verify the author of this document, call (972)889-8772, or e-mail execdir@tsra.com.
Violence Policy Center's history of distorting the truth and outright lying has been well-documented. For more information on these gun-banning phonies, feel free to visit KeepAndBearArms.com's VPC Archives by going here: http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/VPC.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
In their own words . . . "just more rhetoric"
VPC misinforms public with improper use of statistics, unsupported statements, and outright fabrication to attack the successful CHL law in Texas.
MEDIA RELEASE
July 2, 2002
STATEMENT FROM TEXAS STATE RIFLE ASSOCIATION
From James Dark, Executive Director
Texas State Rifle Association
RICHARDSON, TEXAS and COLUMBUS, OHIO -- Texans often have unusual and colorful ways of dismissing the views of their adversaries in debate. Famed Texas hero Sam Houston once attributed a political opponent's differing views as being the result of the man's use of "water as a beverage."
I must confess to having similar thoughts when I recently saw the information released by the Violence Policy Center in its dramatically titled "License to Kill IV." This study uses skewed statistics and misinformation about the Texas Concealed Handgun Law to make the case to the citizens of Ohio and their elected representatives that these laws are a recipe for disaster.
The truth of the matter is that the exact opposite is true. Since the passage of the law, Texas is a safer place. Violent crime is down.
The Violence Policy Center used statistics from the Texas Department of Public Safety, which show the raw number of arrests of Concealed Handgun License Holders since the law went into effect on January 1, 1996. There are a number of significant problems with these statistics:
The statistics used by the VPC are for arrests, not convictions. These arrest statistics were recently compelled by state law to be removed from the DPS website and replaced with CONVICTION rates. To this day, the website simply contains a notice that the mandated information is "coming soon." The VPC is not interested in these new statistics because they will show that only 26% of CHL holders have ever been convicted of the crime of which they are accused, thus making VPC's small problem even smaller.
By using the number of arrests (as opposed to convictions), 5,314, with no comparison to anything else, they attempt to bring about a knee-jerk reaction because that SOUNDS like a big number. But in fact, when compared to the large number of CHL holders in Texas (about a quarter million), it creates a minute percentage. Further, when compared to the general population, CHL holders are 7.5 times LESS likely to commit a crime than someone without a permit. There is a good reason that this comparison wasn't made. It doesn't fit their spin.
The VPC cites figures that CHL holders are arrested at a rate higher than the general population for firearms related offenses. In most cases, if a CHL holder uses a firearm to defend himself, they will be placed under arrest. Even in the most justifiable of situations where deadly force is applied, it falls upon the proper authorities and grand juries to decide if charges will be pursued against a CHL holder. That CHL holders are arrested for weapons related offenses at a higher rate than the general population should surprise nobody. They have a much higher percentage of firearms than the general population. What the VPC will not share with you is how many of these CHL holders have ever been CONVICTED of a firearms-related offense. Again, it just doesn't fit their spin.
When Texas elected to pass a Concealed Handgun License Bill, it took a great step forward in allowing its citizens to exercise their inherent right to self-defense. The Texas law is one of the strictest in the nation, in regards to the qualifications needed to obtain the license. CHL holders in Texas are among the most scrutinized segment of our state's population. Licensees have passed state and federal background checks, fingerprint checks, complied with all tax and child support requirements, attend classes and pass a written test on all pertinent state laws, and pass a qualification test to ensure their competence with their weapon. Texas also has the highest licensing fee in the nation, at $140. The required classes focus on safety, responsibility, conflict resolution and use of a weapon as an absolute LAST RESORT.
The VPC also attempts to paint Texas CHL holders as criminals. Karen Brock of the VPC actually states that, "license holders are committing crimes, not preventing them." This statement is utter hogwash. There was never any expectation that every CHL holder would attain an infallible level of perfection and live a life free of sin. The fact that our CHL holders are statistically far safer than the general population speaks volumes about the efficacy of our program.
Brock also has no data to back up her statement that crimes are not being prevented. Normally people calling themselves "analysts" require something called "data." There simply are no statistics kept by anyone on crimes prevented by CHL holders. So how did Ms. Brock come up with this allegation? The answer is simple. In true VPC style, she made it up.
I called Ms. Brock and asked what data she used to support this statement. In the end, she admitted that there was none, and that it was "just more rhetoric." This statement did not surprise me, but I think that it might have shocked those who rely on the Violence Policy Center for their information.
The vast majority of incidents in Texas are resolved without gunplay. Almost without exception, incidents involving CHL holders de-escalate the instant that a handgun is produced. Far from the "rivers of blood" that critics said would flow down our streets, we have in fact had nothing of the sort.
Hopefully, the people of Ohio will see the shenanigans of the Violence Policy Center for what they are and see the true success story of the Texas Concealed Handgun License law. Texas is a safer place today than it was in 1995. Ohio can be a safer place next year if their legislators come up with a reasonable way to allow their law-abiding citizens to exercise their inherent right to defend themselves from criminals.
Contact: James Dark is the Executive Director of the Richardson, Texas based Texas State Rifle Association. For more information on the TSRA, see their website at www.tsra.com. For more information or to verify the author of this document, call (972)889-8772, or e-mail execdir@tsra.com.
Violence Policy Center's history of distorting the truth and outright lying has been well-documented. For more information on these gun-banning phonies, feel free to visit KeepAndBearArms.com's VPC Archives by going here: http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/VPC.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Comments
Mailing asserting he led push untrue, critics say
By Michael Dresser
Sun Staff
Originally published July 2, 2002
Supporters of a rival candidate in the 8th District congressional race accused state Del. Mark K. Shriver yesterday of misstating his legislative record by claiming a leadership role in the effort to pass Maryland's landmark gun safety bill two years ago.
The real leader, according to a well-known gun safety advocate, was state Sen. Christopher Van Hollen Jr., one of Shriver's opponents in the hard-fought primary for the Democratic nomination to face Republican Rep. Constance A. Morella in November.
Van Hollen partisans were circulating a Shriver mailing in which the two-term delegate, a member of the extended Kennedy family, said too many families have been affected by gun violence.
"That's why I led the fight for mandatory trigger locks to protect our children," the Shriver mailing says.
Van Hollen's campaign sent out a news release noting media coverage from the 2000 General Assembly session identifying Van Hollen as Gov. Parris N. Glendening's point man in the struggle to get the measure through the Senate.
During that session, Van Hollen took on the role of floor leader for the complex legislation on short notice after it was removed from the jurisdiction of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. He also represented the governor's allies in talks that averted a filibuster.
Van Hollen's handling of the assignment won him public thanks from Glendening and the gratitude of many gun control advocates.
The bill, among other things, requires all handguns sold in Maryland to come equipped with built-in trigger locks as of next year.
Carole Price, president of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse, said Shriver's claim of leadership in the trigger lock fight was "untrue."
"Mark Shriver cast a 'yes' vote for this important legislation, but he did not play a role in the considerable legislative battle to pass the trigger lock legislation in the state of Maryland," Price said in a statement circulated by the Van Hollen campaign.
Shriver, who lost two uncles,
John F. and Robert F. Kennedy, to gun violence, said he has an 18-year track record of working to takes guns off the streets. He noted that he was a co-sponsor - one of 29 - of the House version of Glendening's gun safety bill.
"I take a back seat to no one on this issue," he said. "This isn't politics to me. It's personal."
Van Hollen and Shriver are competing in a Democratic field that also includes former trade negotiator Ira Shapiro and lawyer Deborah Vollmer.
The suburban Washington district is receiving national attention because redistricting may have made it tougher for the popular Morella to hold her seat at a time when Democrats need to pick up six seats to gain control of the House of Representatives.
Copyright c 2002, The Baltimore Sun
Also see
Top Stories
Husband's political role questioned in Arundel
Executive Owens' spouse wasn't elected, critics say
Historic documents put away for restoration, preservation
Key's handwritten words locked up for safety's sake
No indictment of FBI agent in shooting
Pasadena man mistaken for bank-robbery suspect; 'Serious breakdowns' revealed; Anne Arundel grand jury deliberates 20 minutes
Sewage leak is termed 'modest'
Officials have not found source of Stony Run spill; city posts warning signs
College decline creates concern
Fewer full-time students at community colleges continue with studies; Data pose 'a major challenge'; Md. schools see drop in A.A. degrees, transfer to four-year institutions
http://www.sunspot.net/news/local/bal-md.gun02jul02.story?coll=bal-local-headlines
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Van Hollen Objects to Claim in Mailing
advertisement
_____Special Report_____
The Gun Fight
_____More Stories_____
Ehrlich Picks Gubernatorial Ticket Mate (The Washington Post, Jul 2, 2002)
A Fighter 'For What He Believes In' (The Washington Post, Jul 2, 2002)
Schaefer To Face Primary Opponent (The Washington Post, Jul 2, 2002)
First, the Run for the Money (The Washington Post, Jul 1, 2002)
Court Plan Throws Md. Races Into Chaos (The Washington Post, Jul 1, 2002)
Full Coverage: 2002 Md. Elections
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to The Post
By Jo Becker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 2, 2002; Page B04
Campaign literature mailed by congressional candidate Mark K. Shriver to tens of thousands of voters in Maryland's 8th District overstates the role the state delegate played in passing landmark gun control legislation, one of his rivals in the Democratic primary said yesterday.
The brochure, which hit mailboxes in the Montgomery County-based district during the weekend, says Shriver "led the fight" to make Maryland the first state to require built-in trigger locks on guns.
Shriver co-sponsored and voted in favor of the bill, which was authored by Gov. Parris N. Glendening (D). But it was state Sen. Christopher Van Hollen Jr., one of Shriver's three Democratic opponents, who was widely credited with leading the fight to pass the legislation during the 2000 General Assembly session.
Joseph C. Bryce, Glendening's chief lobbyist, has not endorsed either candidate and would not compare the two legislators. He did say Van Hollen was "integral -- he was the floor leader, and once we got it out onto the floor, he carried it."
Van Hollen said yesterday that "no one is questioning Mark's support for gun control -- that is not the issue." Van Hollen's campaign manager, Steven Jost, put it this way: "The issue is truth in advertising. There is a big difference between voting right on an issue and leading the fight. The voters need to know the distinction."
That distinction is one of the main thrusts of Van Hollen's candidacy in a race that offers few differences on the issues.
The candidates, who also include former Clinton administration trade negotiator Ira Shapiro and lawyer Deborah Vollmer, all support gun control measures, as does the incumbent they hope to oust, U.S. Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.).
Yesterday, Shriver said he was not going to debate Van Hollen on "specific pieces of legislation. . . . I've lived this on a personal basis and a professional basis, and I take a back seat to no one on this issue."
In his brochure, Shriver personalizes the gun control issue by saying that "too many families, including my own, have been touched by gun violence." Shriver is the nephew of President John F. Kennedy and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, both of whom were assassinated.
Two years ago, Van Hollen served as the governor's point person during the trigger-lock fight, crafting compromise amendments that overcame the opposition of conservative Senate Democrats who were blocking passage of the gun control legislation.
The bill passed through the House, where Shriver served, with far less difficulty, and afterward Glendening singled out Van Hollen for praise.
During the past legislative session, state Sen. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery) worked with Shriver and Van Hollen on a gun licensing bill. The legislation did not pass, but Shriver did help kill a bill that would have rolled back existing gun control measures.
"Both these guys have been important -- they've both been leaders -- and I'm not sure it is an important distinction as to who did what when," said Frosh, who has not endorsed either candidate. "All of these initiatives are things that require a coalition -- it's not just one person who drags a bill through."
Many of the leaders of Maryland's gun control advocacy movement are supporting Van Hollen, however. Yesterday, one called Shriver's characterization "untrue."
Carole Price, president of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse and state coordinator for the Million Mom March, lost her son in an accidental shooting in 1998. "Mark Shriver cast a yes vote for this important legislation, but he did not play a role in the considerable battle to pass the trigger-lock" requirement, she said.
The Democratic primary, which has divided the local party, will be held Sept. 10. The winner will face Morella, a 16-year incumbent and one of the House's most vulnerable Republicans, in a general election that will help determine whether the GOP, with its slim, six-member majority, retains control of the House of Representatives.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11247-2002Jul1.html
c 2002 The Washington Post Company
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
7/1/2002
Email
Print
Subscribe
Press Release
Contact:
Robin Olds
Hoosiers Concerned About Gun Violence
2511 East 46th Street
Indianapolis, IN 46205
Phone: 317-377-0700
www.hcgv.org
You've heard of the gun show loophole; what about the newspaper loophole?
Indianapolis, IN - The unregulated sale of firearms through classified ads in newspapers poses a potential threat to Hoosiers according to a report released on June 26th by Hoosiers Concerned About Gun Violence (HCAGV). The report, Newspaper Loophole a Potential Threat to Hoosiers, provides the results of a survey of newspaper classified advertising policy of Indiana newspapers.
The survey revealed that 14 out of 18 (78%) of Indiana's major newspapers accept classified ads for guns from unlicensed sellers. Of the newspapers that accept classified ads for guns, three newspapers stated that they take ads for rifles and shotguns only - no handgun ads, while the other 11 newspapers take ads for all guns - rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
The four Indiana newspapers that don't accept classified ads for guns from unlicensed sellers are the Huntington Herald Press, The Evening News (Jefferson), the Kokomo Tribune, and the Journal Courier (Lafayette).
Under the Brady law, federally licensed gun dealers are required to conduct criminal background checks on all buyers and maintain records of their transactions. However, unlicensed individuals selling firearms from a "personal collection" are not required to conduct background checks or keep records.
The report notes that most Americans have heard of the gun show loophole that allows unlicensed sellers to sell guns at gun shows without conducting a criminal background check on the buyer. But gun shows are just one venue for the unregulated sale of firearms by unlicensed sellers without criminal background checks. Other venues include flea markets, estate sales, firearm sales over the Internet, and firearm sales through classified ads in newspapers.
"We call the unregulated sale of firearms through classified ads in newspapers the newspaper loophole," said Robin Olds, executive director of Hoosiers Concerned About Gun Violence. "And like the gun show loophole, the newspaper loophole allows felons, domestic abusers, minors, and other persons in prohibited categories to buy firearms with no criminal background check, no record of sale, no questions asked. This puts Hoosiers at increased risk of gun violence."
To support its claim, HCAGV points to a 1999 incident in Illinois and Indiana. In June of 1999, Benjamin Nathaniel Smith, a member of a white supremacist hate group, attempted to purchase firearms from a federally licensed gun dealer in Peoria Heights, Illinois. However, the purchase was denied when a criminal background check revealed that Smith was subject to a court restraining order secured by an ex-girlfriend.
Shortly thereafter, Smith purchased two guns - a Bryco .38 caliber handgun and a Ruger .22 caliber handgun -- from Donald Fiessinger of Pekin, Illinois. Fiessinger advertised the guns sold to Smith in the classified section of the Peoria Journal Star newspaper.
Over the following July 4th weekend, Smith went on a shooting spree in Illinois and Indiana that targeted African Americans, Jews, and Asians, killing two and wounding nine others. Killed were Ricky Byrdsong, former Northwestern University basketball coach, and Won Joon Yoon, a South Korean doctoral student at Indiana University. The spree ended when Smith committed suicide following a police chase after his car was spotted in southern Illinois.
HCAGV recently sent letters to Indiana newspapers that currently take classified ads for guns. The letter asked newspapers to voluntarily stop taking classified ads for guns from unlicensed sellers. The letter noted that the Chicago Tribune and Philadelphia Enquirer recently changed their classified advertising policy stop taking classified ads for guns after the newspaper loophole was brought to their attention.
"We would like to commend those Indiana newspapers that have taken responsible action to prevent prohibited purchasers from being able to buy guns through classified ads in newspapers," said Kathleen George, president of HCAGV. "We hope that more Indiana newspapers will follow their example as an exercise of civic responsibility."
"This country needs to do more to prevent prohibited purchasers from gaining access to guns," added Lori Lovett, education director of the Indiana Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence. "Because of inaction by Congress and the Indiana legislature, we need to look at non-legislative initiatives to reduce gun violence. Closing the newspaper loophole is one such initiative."
The survey of Indiana newspapers was conducted by HCAGV as part of a national campaign to close the newspaper loophole - a project by 24 state and grassroots gun violence prevention organizations working in 16 states. Of a total of 282 newspapers contacted in the 16 states, 217 newspapers (77%) responded that they accept classified ads for guns. Sixty-five newspapers (23%) responded that they do not take classified ads for guns.
John Johnson, executive director of Iowans for the Prevention of Gun Violence, and coordinator for the national campaign, explained that the objective of the campaign is not to criticize newspapers for their current policy, but to explain the concern with the unregulated sale of firearms through classified ads in newspapers. "We are confident that other newspapers, like the Chicago Tribune and Philadelphia Enquirer, will reconsider their classified advertising policy in the interest of public safety," said Johnson.
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/alerts/reader/0,2061,552316,00.html
Date of Release: June 26, 2002
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Homicide rise changes mayor's. critics' perspective
By Sarah Schweitzer, Globe Staff, 7/2/2002
ast November, when the number of homicides in Boston had already climbed to its highest point in five years, Mayor Thomas M. Menino had a ready explanation: The killings had taken place indoors, many the result of domestic feuds turned bloody.
They were not, he said, the kind of random violence responsible for wreaking havoc in neighorhoods a decade earlier.
But the shooting Saturday of Trina Persad defies that explanation. The crime was random, a stray bullet intended for someone other than the 10-year-old. It occurred outdoors, in Jermaine Goffigan Park in Roxbury.
Now, the mayor who presided over one of the city's largest drops in crime with a series of initiatives that became known as the Boston Miracle, finds himself grasping for answers, and only promises of the city's safety to offer.
''I go out there and make sure I'm visible,'' Menino said during an interview yesterday. ''I go out there and tell people that the police are doing their best and assure people that we are not satisfied.''
Menino said the release of young men arrested in the late 1980s and early 1990s, combined with a proliferation of guns on the street, accounted for the rise in homicides. He also said the changing demographics of the city contribute to the problem.
''We have kids coming from all different cultures. They see violence every day in their own countries. That's why they come here, to escape all that,'' Menino said. ''But when they are here, they make the mistake of thinking they need to resort to violence.''
Yet Menino said identifying the cause of the problem is one thing, finding solutions another.
''I don't have a solution, I won't mislead people,'' he said. ''I tell everyone what we are doing and ask for help. It's everyone's problem. We have to work on this together.''
The city alone, he said, cannot stem gun violence.
''We as a goverment can put program after program into place,'' Menino said. ''But there has to be some sense of caring about life and a focus from parents on their children.''
Menino, like Police Commissioner Paul Evans, said he is still committed to reaching out to youth by using the combined resources of police, community groups, and local clergy. That approach was touted as a key factor in the dramatic decline of violence in the 1990s, a crowning achievement of the nearly decadelong Menino adminstration.
For the second consecutive year, Menino has watched the homicide rate rise, reaching 66 last year, according to the police department Web site, and on pace this year to match that number. For months, Menino brushed aside the homicide increase as a ''blip.''
When 3-year-old Malik Andrade-Percival was shot and killed in January, Menino hewed to the ''indoors'' explanation because Percival, one of the city's youngest shooting victims ever, had been shot in his home by an intruder battling his father, who had a history of gang involvement.
But Menino, like his critics, acknowledges that the Persad shooting - occurring just blocks from the newly rejuvenated Grove Hall business district that Menino has made a priority of his administration - has altered the tenor and content of the discussion.
''This one is different. Up until that point, there has been a rationale. Now there is no rationale.''
''This is a 10-year-old child. That changes everything,'' he continued. ''You don't expect a 10-year-old to be a victim.''
Menino was at home when he learned of the shooting. He visited Persad at Boston Medical Center on Sunday and again yesterday.
''It makes you think about life,'' Menino said. ''We worry about the small things. I worry about what people are saying about me in the press. But now I'm thinking about that mother sitting there watching her 10-year-old in the hospital bed.''
This story ran on page B7 of the Boston Globe on 7/2/2002.
c Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/183/metro/Homicide_rise_changes_mayor_s_critics_perspective+.shtml
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878