In the mix of news on March 15, a front page Concord Monitor article reported that high school students, faculty and supporters led dignified protests in Concord and around the country demanding action from those in power on guns. Just below that article, we learned that the New Hampshire Senate rejected, on party lines, local control over guns in schools. Meanwhile, in the same news cycle, the Washington Post reported that a teacher, trained in the use of firearms, accidentally discharged his weapon in a classroom injuring a student. What an ironic day in the news.
As a former member of the United States Congress representing New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional District, in another time and era, before Sandy Hook, I was well aware of the power of the NRA. While I did not seek their support, I confess that my staff and I considered the political implications of their weighing in against us in a state that prides itself on few regulations and a sense of relative safety in the use of firearms. I genuinely believed, at the time, that for New Hampshire little more needed to be done to ensure the safety of our citizens. I also maintained a view of the Second Amendment, at the time of the Heller decision in 2008, in line with the Supreme Court’s decision.
Since then, I, like many others, have been horrified by the surge in gun violence and the toll on our citizens both in terms of body counts and psychological harm. I have substantially revised my thoughts and feelings on these issues. First, I believe that the true meaning of the Second Amendment has been perverted by the NRA, the trade association of the gun manufacturers, to instill the notion that the Second Amendment prevents reasonable regulation of firearms. Much has been written, which I will not repeat, about the subject. Suffice it to say that neither the Founders, the Second Amendment, nor the conservative-tilting Supreme Court of the United States in “Heller” meant the Second Amendment to prevent reasonable regulation of firearms.
Next, I ascribe multiple reasons to the scourge of gun violence that plagues our nation. These include, but are not limited to: the success of the NRA in brainwashing the country; the repeal of the assault weapons ban; the steep rise in sales of deadly military assault weapons; the culture of violence in the media including the casual nature of violence on television and in video games; a constant state of war since 9/11; the isolation that can occur, especially in vulnerable male adolescents surging with testosterone, from social media addiction and dysfunctional family settings; and the failure of responsible adults in state and federal office from confronting the issues of American gun violence with more than obscene lip service. Thoughts and prayers will not solve the crisis we face.
In that light, allowing local school districts to keep guns out of schools and off school buses seems like a reasonable small step in the battle against gun violence. Surely, even in New Hampshire, even in our great state where we have enjoyed a proud tradition of responsible gun ownership, the events of recent years demand that we confront the challenge. Hiding behind a flawed interpretation of the Second Amendment won’t cut it any longer. Pretending that “It can’t happen here” indulges in a fantasy we can’t afford. Keep our kids safe. Keep our citizens safe. It’s time New Hampshire walked the road of reasonable regulation. Allowing local school districts to keep guns out of schools seems like a pretty good place to start. Enough is enough.
(Paul Hodes represented the 2nd Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2007 to 2011. He lives in Concord.)