Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
55031459
label
Children Violence
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
55031459
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Children Violence
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Melanne Verveer's Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
55031459
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
2068127-20130534S-075-001-2022
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a21bd73afb1e57c2
ocrText
CHICOREN VIOLENCE
Youth Development/After School/
Violence
PRESERVATION
PHOTOCOPY
flicheldiens bioldnee
Jason H. Schechter
04/30/99 08:56:51 AM
Record Type: Record
To:
See the distribution list at the bottom of this message
CC:
Subject: 1999-4-29 Katie Couric Interview
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 30, 1999
INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT
BY KATIE COURIC
The Library
The White House
April 29, 1999
4:25 P.M. EDT
Q
Mr. President, first of all, thank you very, very
much for talking with us this afternoon. We really appreciate
it.
Senator Trent Lott called your proposed gun control
legislation the typical knee-jerk reaction, and Congressman Tom
DeLay accused you of exploiting the issue for political benefit.
You would say to them?
THE PRESIDENT: That's ridiculous, and down deep they
know it. I think -- you know, what I tried to say the other day
is that we have a culture with too much violence in it for our
children, and we need to address that -- television, the
Internet, the whole range of things. But we also have a culture
in America full of good people who are devoted to hunting and
sport shooting, whose political views on these issues I think
have been manipulated to create a movement that has terrified a
lot of members of Congress from taking the most elemental
precautions to keep criminals and keep children from having guns
that they shouldn't have, that any other society in the world
would take.
Q
Good people
THE PRESIDENT: And that's why we have -- well, what I
mean is, most of the people that are involved in serious hunting
and sport shooting, they're law-abiding, they pay their taxes,
they do what they're asked to do for the country -- they're fine
people. But they have been convinced that the most modest,
sensible ways of keeping society safer are some kind of camel's
nose in a tent that will end up in the loss of their rifles, and
that's ridiculous.
You know, the Brady Bill has kept over a quarter of a
million felons, fugitives and stalkers from getting guns. Who
knows how many people it saved. But we've got loopholes in the
Brady Bill. We've got loopholes in the assault weapons ban.
We've got loopholes in the restrictions on these bit ammunition
clips. We don't apply background checks at gun shows, which we
ought to. We don't apply background checks to the purchase of
explosives, which we ought to. These are sensible measures that
will keep people alive.
Q
Who are these people being manipulated by? The
National Rifle Association?
THE PRESIDENT: The National Rifle Association, and
some of these other groups as well.
Q
The NRA, by the way, Mr. President, is getting
ready to meet in Denver. If you could have a cup of coffee with
Charlton Heston before that meeting gets underway, what would you
say to him?
THE PRESIDENT: I would say it's -- you ought to be
Moses and lead your people out of Egypt into the Promised Land.
You ought to think about how we can protect the rights of hunters
and use the good things the NRA's done to educate children, young
people on gun safety, for example. And stop wasting your energy,
when we try to say that a juvenile that commits a violent crime
shouldn't have a gun. Stop wasting your energy when we try to
reinstitute the waiting period for the Brady Bill, or close the
assault weapons loopholes, or close the loopholes in the Brady
Bill -- or, say that we ought to have a background check for
explosives, or a background check at these gun shows. That's
what we ought to do.
This is designed to keep people alive, for goodness
sakes. This has nothing to do with the right to hunt or to
engage in sporting contests.
Q
Mr. President, do you believe any elements of your
gun control package might have prevented the tragedy in
Littleton?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have to have all the facts.
We know that they were involved with explosives. We know they
had an assault pistol. We also -- one of the things we didn't
talk about is that I want to strengthen the tracking -- weapons
tracking capacity of the government when weapons pass through
multiple hands. There may have been a gun show sale involved
here. Depending on who bought it, we don't know what the
background check would have occurred.
What we do know is that if all these proposals were in
place, they would save more lives more places. Just the Brady
Bill alone has kept a quarter of a million people from getting
guns who had questionable backgrounds. There's no doubt in my
mind that a lot of lives were saved. The assaults weapons ban is
a good thing, but there are too many loopholes in it and we want
to close them. This just makes sense.
I
President Clinton, you've admitted that access to
guns is just part of the problem. Another part is parenting in
this country, or lack thereof. What are parents doing wrong?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me tell you a story, because I
don't think it's so much as what they're doing as maybe as what
they're not doing. A member of the Congress who is a friend of
mine and I had a conversation the other night, and he had just
been with a high school and he asked the students at the high
school this was a few days after Littleton -- how many of them
had talked to their parents about this. And he said only a small
minority raised their hands.
And one young woman stood up and said, I had to stand
in front of the television and tell my parents we were going to
not watch any more television until we talked about this, because
I think they were afraid, they didn't want to deal with the fact
that this could happen in other places in America.
I think that what we have to do is to, first of all,
tell parents they have to assume responsibility for their
children's television and video games and all that. They have to
assume their family responsibility for that. But they also have
to know insofar as they possibly can what's going on in their
children's lives and minds, and we have to work with them to help
them develop the skills necessary to determine if their kids need
help, and then get the help they need, whether it's counseling or
mental health services or whatever.
Q
That sounds great, but, do you enroll every parent
in America in parenting classes?
THE PRESIDENT: No. I think what you need is --
Hillary's told me this morning -- we got up and we talked late,
late last night about this and then we got up this morning and we
were talking again and she said I thought it was a great
idea she said, what's worked in this country to change
societies? We just had a big announcement today from Secretary
Shalala that teen pregnancy's gone down for another year.
There's been a national campaign against teen pregnancy, a real
movement that asked all sectors of our society, starting with
parents, but including everyone else, to do something on this.
We've seen a decline in drunk driving, largely spurred,
I think, by Mothers and Students Against Drunk Driving. We saw a
national campaign to get people to wear their seatbelts when they
were driving. And she said, and I agree, we need a national
campaign that mobilizes all these things -- that doesn't pretend
that guns are the issue, that culture is the whole issue, that
parents are the whole issue, that school safety is the whole
issue, but deals with all of this together. If the American
people make up their mind that we're going to do better on this,
we'll do better.
Q
But as you know, Mr. President, parents and
children and families are bombarded with these violent images
every day -- on television, in the movies, video games reward
children for obliterating figures with virtual bullets and bombs.
Many parents want to do the right thing, but these cultural
influences are so enormously strong, they feel as if they're
swimming against this tide.
THE PRESIDENT: They are. I have two or three things
to say about that.
First of all, the First Amendment prohibits us from
banning some of these things, but we now have a television rating
system, to go with the movie rating system. We will soon have
all new televisions with a V-chip in them, so the rating systems
can be enforced by parents. We are seeing more and more
technology develop which will allow some web sites to be blocked
by parents, if they're inappropriate.
We first have to try to get parents more control over
the exposure of their children to the culture of violence. The
second thing we have to do is to challenge the entertainment
industry to minimize the use of gratuitous violence and not to
present it in a way that will desensitize people to the pain, the
agony and, ultimately, the finality of violence.
Q
But for many of those people, that's their stock
and trade.
THE PRESIDENT: It is, and there's a market for it.
The American people buy it. They purchase it. They lap it up.
But I think we have to face the fact that kids today are growing
up in a culture that is more violent, culturally violent. The
crime rate has been going down for six years over all, but the
images are violent. And, therefore, children that are more
vulnerable are more likely, A, to be desensitized to violence and
then to actually be desensitized to the impact of their employing
violence.
But I think in the end you've got to take it back to
the fact that we all have responsibilities and it starts with
parents. We have to help convince our children that they should
not have their actions controlled or directed outside them, and
they shouldn't let other people define what kind of people they
are. And we've then got to do more in the schools -- with
counseling, with mediation, with getting mental health services
where they need it. And we've got to then ask ourselves what are
the further responsibilities of the entertainment community, what
are the responsibilities of the government.
Go back to the gun industry -- something they could do,
that I think would be great -- I'm talking about the
manufacturers, now -- they ought to voluntarily come forward, as
many have, and say, we're going to have more child trigger locks.
They even are now developing technologies where a thumbprint can
be imprinted on a gun and only the people who have the print can
fire the gun. There are lots of things that can be done, but if
we're all caught up in this and it becomes our obsession, I know
we will do better. I know we will.
Q
Some members of Congress have asked for an
emergency summit meeting at the White House, with leaders of the
entertainment industry. Do you plan to have that summit?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I plan to bring some high-level
folks from the entertainment industry and from other sectors of
our society that I think can be active here, together at the
White House in the near future, and then figure out how we can
put together the elements of a national campaign. I think the
entertainment industry is going to have to be a big part of it.
What I think is a mistake is, I think it would be a
mistake for the people who don't want to offend the NRA to blame
Hollywood; and the people that don't want to offend Hollywood to
blame the NRA -- instead of keeping our children and their safety
and their future in mind, and asking ourselves, what should we do
about guns, what should we do about culture, what should we do
about the schools, how can we help the parents and what is
government's responsibility. Those are the big questions. We
should ask and answer all of them, not just one.
Q
Mr. President, can you say to Hollywood
executives, look, I need your help? Or is it tough to put
pressure on them, given the fact that they've been so supportive
of you and so generous to your campaigns?
THE PRESIDENT: No. No, it's easier for me to do, I
think in some ways, because I know them. Keep in mind, the first
time I went out to Hollywood and did this in a highly public way
was in late 1993. And then we got a lot of Hollywood executives
in and they played a major role in the development of the
television rating systems, which was essential to make the V-chip
work.
So we got a lot of support out of the entertainment
community for the rating systems and for the V-chip. We've
gotten a remarkable amount of support in the years since from the
high-tech community for control technologies on the Internet. So
I think that -- they don't go as far as I wish they would often
on the violent content of some movies and some television shows
and some video games. But there has been progress made.
- 5 -
MORE
- 5 -
One of the big problems we've got now is to make sure
parents understand how to use the V-chip on television and
understand how to use the blocking technologies on the Internet.
Most parents are like me, they're not nearly as computer literate
as their children are. And we've got a big job there to do.
But, yes, I have no problem asking them to do more and
challenging them to do more. That's easy. The difficult thing
is to ask all of those questions of all of those people I
mentioned. That's why I think the First Lady's idea of having a
national campaign in which we all get caught up is the right way
to go here.
Q
And, yet, it inevitably gets so mired in politics
and the best of intentions, it seems, are --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the only thing that gets
mired in politics on this score, really, is when you have to pass
a bill in Congress that's opposed by powerful interest groups.
But, otherwise, I think at a community level and in terms of
empowering the schools and the parents and organizing groups to
demand changes, I think it will be pretty straightforward.
And even in Congress -- as I told this group I spoke to
a few days ago, if the American people want change badly enough,
the Congress will respond. They'll go beyond partisan politics,
they'll go beyond interest group politics. If they believe the
American people want it bad enough, they'll respond.
Q
Mr. President, thank you again for your time. We
really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
END
4:40 P.M. EDT
Message Sent To:
11/08/93
23:45
202 296 5854
NEW YORKER
002
tant aunt. 1100 Deen
degree murder. Neighbors II) Maviair
said was taken to " hospital for treatment
WITH
Mansions, an apartment complex just east
of an undisclosed ailment. 15 scheduled to
anis's bathroom Write 541 In: sound of
of the Anacostia River in Northcast Wash-
be arraigned in D.C. Superior Court today.
beatings seemed to come :rom that bath-
ington, said Adams is pregnant and told
Some residents said that for the last
room.
them it will be her first child. One neigh-
month they had heard the screams of a
"The child would cry and cry.- said
bor said Adams told her she sometimes
child. But the people in Adams's building
White, who said she didn't even know the
DONNA BRITT
Angry Wilder Offers Long Li
Promoting
Gangstas
For Profit
n the last few weeks. three
major "gangsta" rappers have
been arrested and charged with
serious crimes.
On Sunday. Tupac Shakur. the
promising actor ("Poetic Justice"),
was charged with shooting two
off-duty police officers 5 Atlanta.
Monday, Flavor Flav of the group
Public Enemy was charged in New
York with attempting to kill a
neighbor he suspected of having sex
with his girlfriend. And in Los
Angeles, Snoop Doggy Dogg was
arraigned on murder charges after
his.bodyguard fired shots that killed
a man from a car Dogg was driving.
Now ] can't know if these guys
are guilty. But as a square who
knows only about nine individual
"gangsta" rappers by name, I do
know that a full third of the men I'm
familiar with whose raps celebrate
violence have been charged with
Virginia Gov. L Douglas Wilder (b). left. greets Fairtax County Board Chairman Thomas M. Dan
violent crimes.
right, at a state Chamber of Commerce lunch in New York. Between them is Gov.-elect George
Speaking of crimes. here's part of
a news release for the debut album
of the hard-core singing-not
rap-group DRS (Dirty Rotten
Scoundreis):
Health Plan Proposed for Sm
"Gangsta Lean." says the release.
offers "Dope [cool] lyrics for the
real niggaz a lesson on how to
Benefits Package Presented to Commission Is Similar
get paid, & slice of the average day
in the hood. and an insight into the
tool state lawmakers chose when they el
mind of the endangered young black
By Amy Goldstein
acted far-reaching health reforms this yea
male."
and Richard Tapscott
The unveiling of details today intensified
"There's never been a gangsta
Washington Post Staff Witers
high-stakes lobbying campaign by doctor
singing group singing about
BALTIMORE, Nov. 4-Maryland officials
chiropractors and mental health workers e
drive-by shootings the release
boasts. "You can't be soft in the
today proposed a controversial standard
ger to secure coverage for their own bran
world they talk about." Tough talk
health benefits package for employees of
of care.
notwithstanding. the world of
small businesses that would cover preventive
A standing-room-only crowd listened as
gangsta rap fans contains a
care and abortions while encouraging pa-
task force made its recommendation to a PO
surprising number of suburban kids,
tients to join health maintenance organiza-
erful gubernatorial health commission tl
industry specialists say.
tions.
must adopt a standard benefits plan in 0
The Maryland benefits proposal, similar in
month.
See BRITT, B4, Col 1
emphasis to the health plan President Clinton
The Maryland Health Care Access 8
has presented to Congress, was the central
Cost Commission, which was created by 1
11/08/93
23:47
202 296 5854
NEW YORKER
003
B4 FRIDAY. NOVEMBER 5. 1993
THE WASHI
DONNA BRITT
Making a Killing Off Gangsta Music
BRITT. From Bl
beat up women for deciding what to do with their
own bodies-excuse me. for "not delivering the
Group members. who call their album "Real Nigga
goods" or the "poom-poom."
News for the world," call themselves even worse:
I'd like your bosses at Capitol and executives at
Jad Bait the Merciless; Deuce Deuce the Shooter.
other labels to recognize whom they're helping to set
Endo the [excrement] Starter: and Pic the "Bitch"
up: misguided artists who-perhaps like Tupac
Killer.
(Interscope), Flav (Def Jam/Chaos/Columbia) and
They individually offer thanks to God in the liner
Dogg (Interscope)-glamorize brutality and must
notes of an album with cuts suggesting that men
feel that major record labels signing off on their
hold a reluctant "bitch" down because "I'm breakin'
sickness validates Their living it out.
off a piece and I'm passin' it around." and "I don't
But wait-those accused thugs are grown-ups
care about killing
cause mama didn't raise no
who are paid handsomely. right?
punks."
Absolutely. So please, set me up with your
Did I mention that the album's haunting
accountant. who no doubt can tell me who pays the
beautifully sung title cut, which memorializes
kids who hear this vocal vomit and internalize it. or
murdered homeboys, is the District's No. I song,
who buy DRC's album because. hey. the fellas can
According to WPGC (FM-95.5)? Distributor Capitol
sing.
Records has a hit on its hands.
Surely the entertainment world-along with the
Maybe that explains Capitol publicist Stacey
drug dealers and gunrunners-can't be the only
Murray's breathless take on other "Gangsta" tracks.
ones getting rich off random death. So set it up so
"Nigga With a Badge." she writes. "is a scathing
that I can SPP the with-interest earnings of the 2-, 5-
indictment of homeboys that 'turn' on their
and 11-year-olds whose playgrounds get sprayed by
gang and join the other side."
bullets from submachine guns wielded bv the killers
Then rhere's "Strip," which DRS says IS about a
you glamorize. Show the dollars set aside for the
girl who, after deciding during sex or even after the
families of victims who might have lived if a turncoat
act that she didn't "want to give up the poom-poont."
"nigga with a badge" had been around to help them.
cries rape. The song, Murray writes, will "raise
DRS told the rruth: it's a "hustle," "a lesson on
some eyebrows
with a pointed message for girls
how to get paid."
who tease but don't want to deliver the goods,"
Record execs have a great hustle. Since almost
Murray then invites journalists interested in this
none live in the "hood" you 50 hiply refer to, they
"retreshingly original" album to call if they'd like to
needn't worry about the poison they help spread in
"set something up."
it.
Yeah, girlfriend. Once I get my eyebrows down, I
I know: Capitol is just a purveyor of art whose
wanna set something up. Since I couldn't reach you
sole responsibility is seeing that art is disseminated.
by phone yesterday, I'll lay it out here.
So let's cut to my "dopest" fantasy: Setting up the
First, 1 want your company to set up a fund in
Capitol execs of your choice. on a crime-raked
which a quarter for every dollar earned by Capitol
corner in South Central L.A., Southeast
for sales of "Gangsta Lean" goes to a job program
Washington, Denver or Chicago to deliver this
benefiting folks in the community DRS purports to
much-needed art, up-close and personal. to those
represent.
most affected.
Next I want to set up an appointment between
Maybe after they experience a vulture's-eye view
you and some real women who were raped or who
of the lifestyle that DRS's "fun" and "checky" songs
got their heads kicked in by guys who, like the
promote, their next news release won't make me
"refreshingly original" Scoundrels. feel it's cool to
want to cop a gangsta lean over the nearcst tollet.
Corrections Officers Held in Smuggling
D.C. Jail Workers Charged With Taking Bribes, Transporting Drugs
Bv Ruben Castaneda
The six people arrested yester-
guards union about starting a random
Washington Post Stan Wrent
day pleaded not guilty before U.S.
drug-testing program. Officers cur-
District Judge Rovre Lambert.
rently are subject to drug testing as
For the fifth time in four years.
Lambert ordered cash of the
What to look for, and what to do if there's a problem.
How Safe Is Your Child's
Left: At an
Indianapolis
high school,
students
are searched
by a metal
detector.
Below:
School?
Children eat
in a, school
cafeteria in
Philadelphia.
Whether
As a parent, you should make sure the
counseling and after-school activities.
they are
school is taking effective steps in such
Finally, school safety involves more
concerned
about
cases, but you should also watch what
than just what goes on in the schools.
violence or
goes on at home. And if you have weap-
Violence is often instigated during af-
how food
ons at home, be extremely careful that
ter-school programs, such as sporting
is prepared,
children do not have access to them:
parents
events or parties, where emotions run
should know
A surprising number of weapons found
high. Young people must have time for
how to get
in schools are brought from home.
fun without an adult watching over
information
Gangs are a real problem in urban ar-
them, but it is important that those
and get
involved.
eas. Some cities have developed school
times are not completely unsupervised.
programs that help students discuss the
In areas where students walk to school,
appeal of gangs, attempting to steer
parents often get together to set up sys-
Atteberry/Indianapolis Star/Sipa
them toward other forms of group activ-
tems in which they volunteer to walk
ity. In many areas, churches and syna-
a particular beat right before or right af-
gogues have played a role by providing
ter school, to make sure the area around
the school is safe.
Leen/Matrix
In each case, be sure the children
feel comfortable, safe and trusted.
Food. The recent focus on the safe-
BY COLIN GREER
ty of food in fast-food restaurants has
heightened concerns about school food.
T SEEMS THAT, MORE AND
flict management cen-
There's no reason you can't find out if
more, parents are bombarded
ters"-places where kids
school food is safe to eat. Simply orga-
PRESERVATION
PHOTOCOPY
I
with reports of dangers in their
can bring their disagree-
nize a parents' group and send a repre-
children's schools: from oth-
ments and have them
sentative into the school kitchen to see
er students, from school food,
judged by a third party, of-
how they prepare the food. If you check
from school buildings them-
ten a jury of their peers.
out the kitchen, look at the following:
selves. How real are these
Some schools have class-
Is there training for staff on health is-
dangers, and what can parents
es on managing anger, keep-
sues? Do they know to scrub their hands
do about them? In this article, PARADE
ing fights from escalating
with soap and water not only after go-
looks at some of the problems-in par-
and preventing violence.
ing to the bathroom but also after han-
ticular violence and accidents. A fu-
Other schools have in-
dling raw meat? Is the kitchen gener-
ture article will examine the physical
creased the visible presence
ally clean and vermin-free? What were
dangers in our schools, including lead,
of adults by getting parents
the results of the most recent health in-
redon achestos and
how food
ons at home, be extremely careful that
ter-school programs, such as sporting
is prepared,
children do not have access to them:
events or parties, where emotions run
parents
should know
A surprising number of weapons found
high. Young people must have time for
how to get
in schools are brought from home.
fun without an adult watching over
information
Gangs are a real problem in urban ar-
them, but it is important that those
and get
involved.
eas. Some cities have developed school
times are not completely unsupervised.
programs that help students discuss the
In areas where students walk to school,
appeal of gangs, attempting to steer
parents often get together to set up sys-
Atteberry/Indianapolis Star/Sipa
them toward other forms of group activ-
tems in which they volunteer to walk
ity. In many areas, churches and syna-
a particular beat right before or right af-
gogues have played a role by providing
ter school, to make sure the area around
the school is safe.
Leen/Matrix
In each case, be sure the children
feel comfortable, safe and trusted.
Food. The recent focus on the safe-
BY COLIN GREER
ty of food in fast-food restaurants has
heightened concerns about school food.
T SEEMS THAT, MORE AND
flict management cen-
There's no reason you can't find out if
more, parents are bombarded
ters"-places where kids
school food is safe to eat. Simply orga-
I
with reports of dangers in their
can bring their disagree-
nize a parents' group and send a repre-
children's schools: from oth-
ments and have them
sentative into the school kitchen to see
er students, from school food,
judged by a third party, of-
how they prepare the food. If you check
from school buildings them-
ten a jury of their peers.
out the kitchen, look at the following:
selves. How real are these
Some schools have class-
Is there training for staff on health is-
dangers, and what can parents
es on managing anger, keep-
sues? Do they know to scrub their hands
do about them? In this article, PARADE
ing fights from escalating
with soap and water not only after go-
looks at some of the problems-in par-
and preventing violence.
ing to the bathroom but also after han-
ticular violence and accidents. A fu-
Other schools have in-
dling raw meat? Is the kitchen gener-
ture article will examine the physical
creased the visible presence
ally clean and vermin-free? What were
dangers in our schools, including lead,
of adults by getting parents
the results of the most recent health in-
radon, asbestos and electromagnetic
to volunteer a few hours of
spection? (There should have been one.)
fields (see box on next page).
their time. This does not
Try not to act confrontational. The
have to be schoolyard duty
staff may be glad to change the way
Violence. First of all, it's important
-in fact, experts suggest that it's bet-
they do things if you offer helpful ad-
to realize that most of the violence in
ter for parents to do something more
Parents can make schools
vice rather than criticism. If they are
schools is not the extreme kind we see
productive, like helping in the office or
not responsive to your concerns, how-
on TV, with kids wielding guns and hang-
volunteering as a teacher's assistant. The
safer by spending a few
ever, contact your district superinten-
ing out with street gangs. It's more mun-
idea is to show children that their par-
dent, then your area health authority.
dane: fights breaking out between two
ents care about what goes on in school,
Infections. In most cases, children
students, bigger kids bullying littler
not to make students feel patrolled.
hours of their time there.
who have been vaccinated cannot be
kids, threats and counterthreats.
Cases that involve weapons are rare,
To curb violence, it's essential to
but they deservedly receive a great deal
The idea is to show that
infected by classmates with those ill-
nesses. And schools (even kindergartens
establish a relaxed, positive climate in
of attention. Reports of guns or knives
and day-care centers) almost always re-
the school. That's not always easy-es-
in school need to be dealt with firmly
PRESERVATION
you care, not to make
quire students to have all relevant vac-
PHOTOCOPY
pecially if the problem has escalated—
by the school administration. Officials
cinations for their age before they are
but parents can play an important role.
should (and usually do) institute strong
Some schools have instituted "con-
measures when weapons are involved.
children feel patrolled.
admitted. Requirements vary from state
to state, but the common vaccines re-
PAGE 8 NOVEMBER 7, 1993 PARADE MAGAZINE
quired include polio, diphtheria/
tetanus/pertussis (whooping cough),
haemophilus influenzae type B, hepa-
titis B and measles/mumps/rubella
(five vaccines). There's little chance of
your children contracting any of these
diseases once they've been inoculated.
Kids who didn't get vaccines when
they were younger can still get them
Introdu
when they enter school. As long as
they didn't contract the diseases dur-
ing the time they went unvaccinated,
they can count themselves as (very)
lucky. Once they're vaccinated, even if
it's done late, they're safe.
The main thing is to be sure children
are vaccinated on a regular schedule
before they enter school. Many parents
are surprised to learn that vaccinations
A New S
are not a one-time affair. Consult your
community health board to see what's
recommended. If you can't afford to
pay for the vaccines, the board also can
tell what provisions may be available
in your state for financial assistance.
Traffic accidents. School buses
should be like any other vehicle-kids
should wear seatbelts and be super-
vised. Talk with your children to learn
Or A
if their buses seem safe. If you have
doubts, ask permission to ride on the
bus one day yourself. As with the
kitchen staff, be respectful of the bus
drivers-theirs is a hard job. In some
school districts, two adults are as-
signed to each bus: one driver and one
person to make sure the kids don't get
dangerously unruly. If paying for an
extra person is too costly, organize a
New Sup
group of parents to take turns acting as
bus-safety monitors.
How can parents make sure that
teenagers-who are starting to drive
themselves-are safe? One way is to
organize minibus services, paid for by
the group of parents. That way, if the
teens are at an after-school sports event
or a party, they know that if things get
Campbel
CONDENS
out of hand, they have a safe ride
home-even if the person they came
with doesn't want to leave.
P
Cream of
Chicken & Broc
Colin Greer, who is president of the
New World Foundation, often writes
for PARADE on social issues.
SEND US YOUR QUESTIONS
An area of concern for parents is
danger from the school's physical
environment-including contami-
SOUP
nation from lead, radon and as-
bestos; hazardous-waste sites near
school areas; and computer termi-
Here's a new soup that can help yc
nals or electromagnetic fields. For
a forthcoming article that will deal
new dinner. From Pasta Primavera
PHOTOCOPY
with these issues, send your ques-
It may start as a soup, but it doe
PRESERVATION
tions to: Safe Schools, Parade, P.O.
Box 4814, Grand Central Station,
Campbell's Never Underestimate
New York, N.Y. 10163-4814.
PARADE MAGAZINE . NOVEMBER 7, 1993 . PAGE 9
LYNN MINTON REPORTS:
groups for every situation in this
FRESH
country except virginity. I'm not
LAUGH
saying that every male or female that
is a virgin should scream their sexual
VOICES
R
status from the rooftops. But you
shouldn't have to be ashamed of it
PARAD
either. And I am tired of boys being
BY BUNNY HOEST AND JOHN REINER
'Why isn't there a
excluded when the issue of virginity is
discussed. Women are told that it is
virgin support group?'
okay to be a virgin; men should also
be told that, and not be pressured by
"I'm tired of being
their sexually active friends.
sexually harassed
"I mean, some girls I know are
in school-usually
pregnant right now. Some have babies
it's by a group
already. Girls my age. It seems like
of boys standing
they are pressured into having sex in
together by the
order to keep their boyfriends. Girls
lockers and making
act real funny around boys. Once they
comments about
have a boyfriend, it's like they live
each girl as she walks by. Like about
only for him.
breast size. Or things like, 'If I was
"I don't want a boyfriend. It seems
in a room with you, I'd do this and
like when a girl has a boyfriend, he
that to you.'
kind of takes control of her. I don't
"If you admire me, come and talk
want that. And I don't want to become
to me by yourself. I mean, I'm a girl,
a pregnant teenager. Right now, I'm
you're a boy-respect me. My
studying hard, and I don't need all
brother, he's 13 right now, and he
that responsibility."
seems okay. But something happens
-Jenelle Roberts, 16,
to them when their hormones start up.
Union, N.J.
"Don't bother Daddy...He's processing the day's di
"Why isn't there a virgin support
Teenagers: Have you been sexually ha-
group? It seems like there are support
rassed? Please tell us what happened.
HOWARD HUGE®
'A lot of times, school is just so dull and boring'
We asked the gifted actor Leonardo DiCaprio, 18, whom you may remember
from the TV series "Growing Pains," how he felt about school:
"I was frustrated-I
For me, it's all about
wasn't happily
learning things. I
Caton-Jones/Sygma
getting a person
interested in a subject
know it's up to you,
by linking a lot of
to a degree, but a lot
happiness to it, a lot of
of times school is just
joy in doing it. That was
so dull and boring,
lacking for me-and
it's hard for a kid
maybe for a lot of other
to learn in that
kids in this country."
environment. You
go to school, you go
Leonardo starred in
to this class, go to
"This Boy's Life" with
"Tie score. Twenty seconds to go. The Cowboys have a t
that class, study this,
Robert De Niro (on
and you want to go for a walk?!"
study that, get your
video) and will appear
homework, go home.
with Johnny Depp and
There's hardly ever
Juliette Lewis in "What's
Leonardo DiCaprio
any vibrance there. I
Eating Gilbert Grape."
needed to go to a place where I was
Teenagers: How do you feel about
excited about what I was learning.
your school? Let us hear from you.
RIGHT TURN
Unfavorite lines parents say to teenagers
ON RED
PERMITTED
BUT NOT
7
"I can't stand it
RECOMMENDED
"My mom says, 'You can talk to me
when one of my
about anything.' But when I do, she
parents asks me if
gets mad! And I hate it when, after I
I want to go
break up with a boyfriend, she says,
somewhere with
'I didn't like him anyway.'
them, and I say
"I'm really a fashion-conscious
'no'-and then
person, but my mother and brother
they automatically
like to ask me questions like, 'What
make me the bad guy, trying to make
do you have on?' What's that
me feel guilty. (They say, 'Oh, if
supposed to mean?"
that's the way you feel.')"
-Tracee M. Beasley, 19,
-Mike Geha, 14, St. Joseph, Mo.
Statesboro, Ga.
PHOTOCOPY
Write Lynn Minton, Box 5103, Grand Central Station, New York, N.Y. 10163-5103. Please
include daytime phone number. Personal replies, regrettably, are not possible.
PRESERVATION
PAGE 10 NOVEMBER 7, 1993
11/02/93
13:35
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Counsel to the Secretary
for Drug Abuse Policy
Washington U.C. 20201
FACSIMILE
PLEASE NOTIFY OR HAND-CARRY
THIS TRANSMISSION TO THE
FOLLOWING PERSON AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE:
Name:
Ann Bartley
Address:
Office of the First Lady
Phone #:
Fax #:
456-6244
Number of pages being transmitted (including this one):
8
FROM:
Angela Duran (Piter Edelman)
FAX number:
202-690-6167
Office Number:
202-690-6641 or 6056
COMMENTS:
Attached is a copyof are work plan, -
copy of actitter from Peter to the just lady,
If you need any further information, litime
and a list of the groups + their chairs
know.
11/02/93
13:36
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
002
October 1993
INTERDEPARTMENTAL WORKING GROUP ON VIOLENCE
WORK PLAN
I. Statement of Purpose
We live in one of the truly violent countries in the world.
The President has already proposed a major crime bill that speaks
to law enforcement measures to reduce violence, including the Brady
bill. The working group is to complement that effort with a focus
on additional prevention measures to dry up the flood of violence
now occurring. Effective law enforcement also prevents violence,
but it should be evident by now that we will continue to have waves
of additional perpetrators if we do not undertake broader
prevention strategies in addition. Our efforts must be "both-and,"
not "either-or."
Our subject is physical harm that is inflicted intentionally
or recklessly by people on other people. This encompasses the
violence in our streets that consists so dramatically of violence
by youth against other youth but also victimizes and terrorizes
people of all ages, the violence within families that victimizes
women and children and increasingly the elderly, the violence
between groups that stems from hate and ignorance, and the violence
of sexual assault. Specifically, we will divide into six groups,
on youth violence, family violence, intercommunal violence, sexual
assault, firearms, and media. They are described more fully below.
There are some premises to guide us. One, while national
leadership is essential, lasting solutions must be based in
neighborhoods and communities. Neighborhoods will need outside
assistance, and 50 will community-wide endeavors and commitments,
but wide citizen and civic participation in generating and
implementing solutions is essential at all levels. A second
promise is that a variety of approaches must be contemplated, both
because prevention is multidimensional and because local needs and
strengths will differ from place to place. Three, resources are
limited.
II. scope of our Report, and Deadlines
We are to produce both short-term and long-term ideas,
offering options for immediate steps and a blueprint for the next
few years for policy development, including needed research. We
need not produce an exhaustive set of recommendations, but rather
a report that lends itself to good decision-making about next
steps. We need to pay attention to other relevant activity within
the Administration, to avoid duplication. And we will want to find
ways to tap the tremendous amount of expertise and information that
exists around the country on the subject.
11/02/93
13:37
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
003
Page Two
This is an action-orionted inquiry with a short time horizon
for completion. Our overall deadline is the end of December. We
want an interim progress report from the groups and subgroups by
November 12. We want the final reports from the working groups by
December 10 so that we can iron out any inconsistencies and
otherwise put them in final form. The group and subgroup chairs
and the overall steering group will meet on October 26 and November
18 at 1 p.m. to review progress and work out any overlaps that have
developed. We will, tentatively, make an interim report to the
Domestic Policy Council in November, to get feedback and make mid-
course corrections.
We are tar from the totality of activity within the
Administration on the subject. The President will undoubtedly
speak out before we complete our work, as he already has. And
there have been relevant Administration proposals since day one
last January, many of which have already been enacted. Empowerment
zones and family preservation are but two examples that have major
implications for prevention of violence.
III. Format of Group and Subgroup Reports
Each report, whether it is of a group or a subgroup, should be
approximately 20 pages in length, The length WIIL
obviously vary somewhat, since the tasks vary somewhat in their
scope. Reports should done on Word Perfect 5.1, and a diskette
should be turned in with the hard copy.
Reports should be structured as follows:
I. Size and scope of the current problem in the area assigned to
the group or subgroup, including some description of the history
and the causes of the problem.
II. Current policies and programs, both federal and other
(including state and local government and other public
institutions, corporate, foundation, church, trade union, civic and
other private institutions, and neighborhood). What actually works
and what doesn't work? What are the major duplications and/or
disconnects in the policies and programs?
III. Proposed remedies, again federal and other, including:
- legislative proposals
- proposals for reconfiguration of and interdepartmental
cooperation regarding existing federal programs and
policies
- leadership and speech ideas for the President, cabinet
members, and others who should speak out on the issues
11/02/93
13:39
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
1
004
Page Three
- initiatives technical assistance activities to assist grass-roots
- media and communications strategies of all kinds
- actions of all kinds that might be undertaken by
institutions and individuals in all parts of American
society
IV. including: Research and evaluation agenda for the problem set in question,
-- identifying the risk factors and protective factors
for the violence area in question, by analogy to those
related to drugs and alcohol, with intervention
strategies designed to take these factors into
consideration; and
- collecting information on effective programs for use
in the creation of other programs.
IV. Configuration of the Groups
The six groups will be:
1. Youth (which will actually consist of five subgroups without an
overarching main group)
2. Family, including child abuse, domestic violence (interspousal
and interpartner), and elder abuse, and also including development
and prevention issues for ages zero to three
3. Intercommunal, including hate violence
4. Sexual assault
5. Firearms
6. Media
The five youth subgroups will be:
a. Youth development. This will be the largest, and the closest to
an overarching main youth group. It will have a specific task of
exploring the possibility of an interdepartmental youth development
initiative, but it also will have the broader charge of considering
"primary" prevention or youth development policies more generally
for both in-school and out-of-school youth, with consideration of
necessary policies for children of all ages to foster healthy youth
dovelopment. This subgroup will have to pay particular attention
to the work of the next three subgroups listed below to minimize
11/02/93
13:40
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
005
Page Four
overlap.
b. Juvenile justice. The charge to this subgroup is at a minimum
to compile best practices regarding differential responses to youth
who have already committed violent crimes and court-related youth
who can still bonefit from interventions in lieu of traditional
incarceration or institutionalization. Best practices regarding
reintegration into the community following institutionalization are
on the agenda. too. The subgroup might conceptualize some
demonstrations, too.
c. Schools. Education will of course participate in both of the
above groups, as well as others, but this group will be
particularly concerned with antiviolence curricula and mediation
and conciliation initiatives. The Dept of Ed is of course already
working on these issues, SO the purpose of the group is in part for
them to get the advice and possible participation of other
departments regarding programs in this area.
d. Place. The responsibility of this subgroup will include ideas
that strengthen places for which HUD takes responsibility. This is
at least about public housing, although the idea of place (or
community) goes beyond HUD's specific arcas of responsibility. Law
enforcement strategies involving partnership with neighborhoods to
reclaim street corners from drug dealers and thereby prevent "hot
spot" violence on those corners would be included here, too. so,
violence. too, would proposed actions regarding bars that are hot spots for
e. Process. This group will be chaired by shay Bilchik and will
work, perhaps with Denver and Omaha as case examples of cities with
which DOJ has already started to work, on conceptualizing a model
planning process for communities to deal with youth violence,
including an approach to simplitying the process of approaching the
federal government for assistance in the youth area.
11/02/93
13:41
2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
006
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Secretary
Washington. D.C. 20201
October 27, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: The First Lady (via Carol Rasco)
FROM: Peter Edelman
SUBJECT: Violence Working Group
Carol asked me to provide you a brief overview of the
interdepartmental working group on violence, chaired by Phil
Heymann, Madeleine Kunin, and me, and also involving Dr. David
Satcher, the new head of the Centers for Disease Control. This is
a 7 agency effort (HHS, Justice, Ed, Labor, HUD, Agriculture, and
ONDCP, plus Domestic Policy Council and now VP staff) to do a quick
3 month look at the violence problem broadly defined, current
programs and policies, and what should be done at the federal level
and more generally, including an agenda for further research.
We are defining violence to include youth/street violence,
intra-household violence, hate violence, and sexual assault. We
have interagency working groups and subgroups in all of these
areas, plus groups on guns and on the media, involving altogether
close to 100 people from the various agencies. They will also do
some consultation with outside experts, Hill people, and people
from communities around the country as they do their work. We will
submit a report to Carol for transmission to you and the President
at about the end of the calendar year, so we will obviously not
cover the subject in totality.
The report should help by collecting in one place state-of-
the-art information about the problem and current federal efforts.
It will contain suggestions and options for immediate-term actions
and proposals and for longer-term strategies. We are already
seeing payoffs from gotting the agencies to talk with one another.
They are learning about activities within other parts of the
government that they did not know existed, and they are seeing ways
to work together. The firearms group, chaired by Eldie Acheson and
Dr. Mark Rosenberg of the Centers for Disease Control, is
especially exciting because it is the first time to my knowledge
that law enforcement and public health experts have looked at the
gun problem on a joint basis.
This is obviously not the be-all and end-all of the
Administration's discussion and action on violence. From the crime
bill to the President's emphasis on violence in his public
speeches, to the violence prevention implicit in everything from
Head Start expansion and family preservation to empowerment zones,
we have been working on violence prevention from day one.
11/02/93 13:43 2026906167
HHS DRUG COUNSEL
007
Page 2
Nonetheless, I hope this effort will give us the basis for moving
forward. I look forward to meeting with you and discussing all of
want. this, and am of course ready to provide any further information you
11/02/93
13:43
2026006167
HHS DRUC COUNSEL
008
Interdeportmental Working Group On Violence
Group Clrairs
Youth Development Ann Rosewater, HHS
401-5180/401-5770
Bill Modzeleski, ED
401-3030/401-1069
Bob Litman, DOL
219-8660/219-5455
Juvenile Justice
John Wilson. DOI
307-5911/514-6382
Schools
Bill Modzelewski, ED
401-3030/401-1069
Place
Julie Fagan, HUD
708-1197/708-0690
Process
Shay Bilchik, DOJ
514-4637/514-6897
Family
Janet Harmett, HHS
401-9220/205-3598
Intercommunal
Susan Liss, DOJ
514-4016/514-2424
Ed Moses, HUD
619 8201/708-0690
Sexual Assanlt
Kevin DiGregory, DOJ
514-9724/514-6034
Carolyn Hightower. DOJ
307-5948/514-6383
Fircarms
Eldie Acheson, DOJ
514-4601/514-2421
Mark Rosenberg, IIHS
404-488-4690/404-488-4422
Media
Allan Rivlin, HHS
690-7578/690-5673
Michele Cavataio, ED
401-1000/401-3093
OCT-25-93 MON 11:27
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 01
Craver, Mathews, Smith & Company, Inc.
300 North Washington Street
Falls Church
Virginia 22046
Telephone: (703) 237-0600
Fax Machine: (703) 237-0622
FAX
Date:
Fax number:
To:
Ann Bartley
Organization:
From:
Jackie Blumenthal
Total number of pages including this cover sheet: 15
Notes / Comments:
as requested
The information contained in this facsimile message is intended only for the use of the individuals to whom it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is prohibited by law. If the reader of
this massage is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
telephone at (703) 237-0600. Thank you.
OCT-25-93 MON 11:27
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 02
CRAVER, MATHEWS, SMITH & COMPANY, INC.
300 North Washington Street Suite 200 Falls Church, Virginia 22046 703/237-0600
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ann Bartley
Office of Hillary Rodham Clinton
FROM: Jackie Blumenthal
DATE: October 25, 1993
SUBJECT: Violence Campaign
I'm sending you a copy of my original anti-violence memo as you
requested. I had hoped to find the time to update it with new
information and thinking -- but my real job is very demanding right
now. I will, however, be writing some more on this which, of
course, you're welcome to have.
What I wanted to do was to recast my ideas into a format that would
suit the political needs of the Administration regarding violence
prevention and crime control and to describe the particular
benefits of having Hillary carry this message.
There are some suggestions in my memo of the kinds of community
groups that could become national examples to be replicated. But
I'm also attaching a list of violence prevention programs that
could serve as a good starting point for building a national
campaign from the bottom up.
And I'm sending along the copy for a direct mail letter I just
wrote that highlights how the costs of violence can be used to
further aspects of prevention. This is one part of my thinking
that I haven't written down elsewhere yet -- so just ignore the
direct mail rhetoric.
Please don't hesitate to call if I can help in any other way. I
have a pretty good outline in my head of how this kind of campaign
could be run and marketed in a way that not only challenges the
roots of violence and gives people a sense of control over their
fears but also manages to win the crime issue for the Adminstration
on legitimate "new Democrat" terms -- even when there's no money to
spend.
Hecycled Paper
OCT-25-93 MON 11:28
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P.03
CRAVER MATHEWS, SMITH & COMPANY, INC.
300 North Washington Street Suite 200 Falls Church, Virginia 22046 703/237-0600
Melanne Verveer
melanne: Rahm asked me for
TO: Rahm Emanuel
this But I think some
FROM: Jackie Blumenthal
version of this rough outline
DATE: September 19, 1993
would be a great vehicle
SUBJECT: Campaign Against Violence
for Hillary Julie
I've been working to develop a campaign against violence that
targets a broad range of problems -- wife battering, child abuse,
guns, unsafe streets, rape -- and that's designed to involve women
in efforts to solve these problems. Instead of women just focusing
on "violence against women, I think there's a great potential to
mobilize "women against violence."
So, I'm not sure if the bits and pieces of research I've collected
will suit your needs -- which, if I understand correctly, relate
ultimately to passage of anti-crime legislation. But I'll give you
a summary of the information that I've collected so far, and my
thoughts about what you might be able to do with it.
I've started by defining three remedies to the violence problem:
1. Forging Community Connections
Community/neighborhood based organizations choose the problems
they want solved: e.g., close a crack house, assign police to
regular beats, increase lighting in public areas, get city to
allow buses to make flexible stops for late-night passengers,
encourage homeowners to keep porch lights on, hold self-defense
training sessions. Key question: What would it take to make
you feel safe?
[Ellen Foley, Violence Against Women Coalition, Minneapolis,
MN; Street Patrol/Pink Berets, San Francisco; National
Training and Information Center, Chicago, "Hot Spot Campaign";
Couth Street Survivors, Boston; Comito Pro Paz en el Barrio,
Aliso-Pico neighborhood of East L.A.]
[Also, Chicago Alliance for Neighborhood Safety; National
Center for Community Policing; Center for Neighborhood
Technology, 2125 W. North Ave., Chicago, IL 60647]
A clearinghouse could collect information about such community
public safety projects so that other communities can replicate
successful efforts. Ideas filter up from grassroots into the
national debate. People have a chance to exert some control
over their lives. Together they can face their fear and do
something about it.
Recycled Paper
OCT-25-93 MON 11:29
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P.04
Memo to Rahm/2
2. Enacting Public Safety Laws
Community groups are united citywide, statewide and nationally
to support anti-violence legislation or policies.
Local example: Push police to establish a "pro-arrest policy"
to deal with domestic violence. This means when police are
called into a domestic dispute, if violence has occurred, the
batterer is automatically arrested. In Quincy, MA, no women
have died from beatings in the five years since such a program
was adopted (how many died before; check this).
State example: Advocate increased funding for mental
institutions to get potentially dangerous people off the
streets; work for tough anti-stalking laws
Federal example: Gun control laws; Violence Against Women Act.
[I heard the President say just yesterday that it was
time for the grownups to take the guns away from kids but
that some people were too afraid of the gun lobby to do
it. Well, the President could set a good example by
standing up to the gun lobby himself to fight for tough
laws that require permits for handguns and ban assault
weapons -- both of which have majority support even among
gun owners.]
[Also, did you know that the Violence Against Women Act
has 64 Senate co-sponsors and 191 in the House but it's
stuck in some House committee? This legislation could be
a P.R. bonanza for you if you get behind it and make sure
it's adequately funded. The Act asks for about $500
million over three years but domestic violence alone
costs taxpayers more than 10 times this amount in just
one year. See stats attached on cost of domestic
violence, cost of rape and cost of fear.]
3. Changing the culture of Violence
Community-based organizations can also join together to
pressure Hollywood and the TV and music industries to restrict
violence in their products.
[Some study exists that shows how the incidence of violent
acts increases following the release of violent movies
and/or the airing of violent TV shows; check this.]
[Cong. Ed Markey's committee has already begun this fight
by calling for a "V-chip" mechanism that allows parents
to blocks violent programming from their TV -- similar to
labeling of albums for offensive language.]
Groups can work with schools to implement anti-violence and
conflict resolution curricula.
OCT-25-93 MON 11:29
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 05
Memo to Rahm/3
[The Center for the Prevent of Handgun Violence's STAR
program; Southern Poverty Law Center's Teaching Tolerance]
Celebrities and sports figures (Michael Jordan, in particular)
could be recruited to discourage violent behavior.
Thoughts about a White House role in stimulating a grassroots
response to violence along the lines outlined above:
-- When Louis Freeh was sworn in he called for "mobilizing all of
America's resources to solve the root causes of the problem." More
prisons aren't enough; law enforcement can't do it alone. But along
with better social policies, you have to face the reality that an
appalling number of Americans either fear being a victim of violence
or have been victims of violent acts. [See stats]
-- A good theme would be: [crime] Prevention is as important as
prisons.
-- By recognizing and encouraging community action against violence,
the White House acknowledges the problems real people face day after
day. What you might need is a White House/Justice Department working
group -- or even just an anti-violence liason to communities --
charged with cataloging existing community groups that address local
problems of violence and serving a clearinghouse function for sharing
their experiences with other budding organizations. Part of this
effort could be to encourage cooperative relationships between
community leaders and law enforcement officials which could
strengthen everyone's sense of security.
-- You could also involve the Department of Education in supporting
anti-violence curricula and other connections with anti-violence
efforts in the schools.
-- White House communications operations could make sure that
violence fighting activities of local groups are publicized locally
and are connected to the administration's anti-crime efforts by
arranging some high-level White House or Justice Department
acknowledgement of successful community efforts on a regular basis.
-- Local activists would be available as congressional witnesses and
for public events when key administration crime legislation is on the
table. Work done in support of grassroots anti-violence efforts
could translate into constituent lobbying for particular bills you
care about.
-- Basically you could build your own connections to an independent
grassroots lobbying force that's baced on fighting violence at home
but is available for supporting administration efforts to enact anti-
crime laws in Washington. The added benefit is that such an effort
brings people together, builds communities, gives people control over
their lives, empowers local entities while still resonating with all
that "new kind of Democrat" tough-on-crime rhetoric.
OCT-25-93 MON 11:30
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P.06
Memo to Rahm/4
What follows are statistics or anecdotes I've collected that help
make a case for a broad-based effort to fight against all forms of
violence at the same time:
-- People are so desensitized about violence that the L.A. Coroner's
office is doing a land-office business selling beach towels and
coffee mugs that display the chalk-outline of a murder victim. They
opened their own store and instantly sold out all the beach towels.
-- There are three times as many animal shelters in this country as
battered women shelters. Yet more than 21,000 women are beaten up
every week; 3,000 die from domestic violence every year. 30-40% of
women seen in emergency rooms are treated for injuries resulting from
spouse or acquaintance abuse. 25% are battered during pregnancy.
The Senate Judiciary Committee reported this year that more than 1.3
million women reported being victims of domestic violence.
-- Super Bowl Sunday is the most violent day of the year for women,
with the highest number of domestic violence reports.
-- From 1981-91, the number of reported child abuse cases increased
120%. In 33-70% (?) of wife abuse cases, child abuse is also
involved.
-- According to the FBI, the national rate for violent crime reached
an all-time high in 1991; 24% higher than 1987.
-- A woman is forcibly raped every six minutes. (NOW-LDF)
-- According to The Sentencing Project, there are 1.2 million people
behind bars in this country. We have the highest incarceration rate
in the industrialized world. And we spend $24 billion every year for
prisons and jails. Building more prisons to deal with the crime
explosion is like dealing with AIDS by building more hospices.
-- Howover, the Senate Judiciary Committee reported this year that
98% of rape victims will never see their attacker incarcerated. 52%
of men arrested for rape will be rearrested within 3 years.
-- US Burcau of Justice Statistics reports that the direct cost to
victims who reported rape to authorities in 1990 was $63 million
(medical care, psychological care, lost wages for time with police or
in court, possible break up of family, etc.)
-- The AMA estimates that domestic violence costs $5 to $10 billion
in helath care expenditures, lost wages, criminal litigation and
incarceration. Foster care resulting from families broken up by
violence could add anadditional $5 to 10 billion a year. Some
economics experts estimate that employers incur between $3-5 billion
in expenses annually due to absenteeism caused by domestic violence.
(UUA)
-- 25.3% of women (2.9% of men) "never" walk in their neighborhoods
alone after dark; 52% of women (25% of men) cross the street when
they see someone who seems strange or dangerous (Riger, Gordon, The
Female Fear)
OCT-25-93 MON 11:31
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P.07
Memo to Rahm/5
-- 61% of women (32% of men) say they feel unsafe in their own
neighborhoods (Jackson, "How to Make the World a Better Place for
Women...")
-- 1 in 4 kids carries a gun to school every day (CPHV); 35% of
children think they will be shot to death at an early age (Joyce).
-- 38% of kids agree that "the threat of violence has made me change
where I go, where I stop on the street, where I go out at night, what
neighborhoods I walk in, who I make friends with, and other things
like that." (Harris survey for Joyce Foundation)
-- 66 men, women and children are murdered every day of the year.
(HCI)
-- In 1992, the Journal of the American Medical Association declared
that gun violence has become a public health emergency.
*****
This is as far as I've gotten on my project. I hope it helps. I
think the key to this whole thing is cataloging what's out there in
the communities already and then seeing how you can forge the
connections you need. But there are a lot of benefits beyond just
getting symbolic visuals and testimony in support of your efforts.
For example, if you do get the Crime Bill through (which will
surprise me) you want. people to know exactly what you're doing for
them and why. And, conversely, if the Crime Bill fails again, you
want them to be totally pissed off because of what they're not
getting in the way of crime prevention.
Also, I don't know why the Administration doesn't take a more public
stance in support of the Violence Against Women Act, given its broad
congressional support and the fact that you need to continually serve
that broad base of women who helped get you elected. For suburban
women, in particular, I bet the violence issue is even more
significant politically than the health care issue.
Let me know if I can help in any other way. I'm very committed to
the concept of a national campaign against violence.
OCT-25-93 MON 11:31
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 08
THE STAR PROGRAM
National Directory of Violence Prevention Programs
Ad Hoc Croup Against Crime
Center for Prevention and Control
Kansas City Health Department
of Interpersonal Violence
City Hall, 10th Floor
Wayne State Univ. School of Medicine
Kansas City, MO 64106
540 E. Canfield
Mark A Mitchell, Deputy Director
Detroit, MI 48201
(816) 861-9100
Dr. John Waller, Director
Agape (The Love of God for Humankind)
Challengers Boys Club
650 Greenwich Road
5029 South Vermont Avenue
Ware, MA 01082
Los Angeles, CA 90037
Brayton Shanley, Director
Lou Dantzler, Director
(413) 967-9369
(213) 971-6161
Alternatives to Violence Project
Chicago Intervention Network
15 Rutherford Place
Department of Human Services
New York, NY 10003
500 Pershitgo Court
(212) 477-1067
Chicago, IL 60611
(312) 744-1815
Andrew Glover Youth Program
100 Center Street
Children's Creative Response to Conflict
Manhattan Criminal Court, Room 1541
Box 271
New York. NY 10013
Nyack, NY 10960
(212) 349-6381
(914) 358-4601
Boston Conflict Resolution Program
Coming Together
Boston Area Educators for Social
11234 East Valley Boulevard
Responsibility
El Monte, CA 91731
11 Garden Street
Mike Duran, Director
Cambridge, MA 02138
(818) 575-4003
William Kreidler
(617) 492-8820
Committee for Children
(Youth Violence Prevention
Board of Cooperative Educational Services
Curricula, Grades 1-8)
Programs to Aid Schools in
172-20th Avenue
Preventing Bullying
Seattle, WA 98122
Pinesbridge Road
(206) 322-5050
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Nathaniel M. Floyd
The Community Access Team
(914) 245-2700
Hayward Police Department
300 West Winton Avenue
BUILD (Broader Urban Involvement
Hayward, CA 94544
and Lcadership Development)
Lillian Genser, Director
1223 North Milwaukee Avenue
(415) 784-7013
Chicago, IL 60622
(312) 227-2880
Community Board Center for
Policy and Training
Center for Peace and Conflict Studies
149 Ninth Street
Wayne State University
San Francisco, CA 94103
5165 Gullan Mall
Gail Sadalla
Detroit. MI 48201
(415) 552-1250
(313) 577-2424
193
OCT-25-93 MON 11:32
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 09
THE STAR PROGRAM
National Directory of Violence Prevention Programs
Education About Law
El Teatro Jalapeno
Street Law Program
Fresno Community Education
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
Fresno Unified School District
Cleveland State University
Tulare and M Streets
1801 Euclid Avenue
Fresno, CA 93721
Cleveland, OH 44115
David Ricardo, Director
Elisabeth T. Dreyfuss, Director
(209) 441-3482
(216) 687-2344
Gang Awareness Resource Program
The Consultation Center
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office
Adolescent Prevention Programs
11515 South Colima Road
389 Whitney Avenue
Whittier. CA 90604
New Haven. CT 06511
(213) 946-7916
Katherine Grady, Coordinator
(203) 789-7645
Gang Crime Section
Chicago Police Department
Crisis Intervention Network. Inc. (CIN)
1121 South State Street
415 North 4th Street
Chicago, IL 60605
Philadelphia, PA 19123
(312) 744-6328
(215) 592-5600
Gang Violence Reduction Project
East Boston Community Health Center
California Youth Authority
10 East Gove Street
4629 East Brooklyn Avenue
East Boston, MA 02128
Los Angeles, CA 90022
Dr. Peter Stringham
(213) 227-4114
(617) 569-5800
Gangs Network Project
El Centro De La Communidad Unida
1200 A Avenue
Delinquency Prevention/Gang
National City. CA 92050
Intervention Program
(619) 336-4400
1028 South 9th Street
Milwaukee, WI 53204
The Grace Contrino Abrams Peace
(414) 671-1483
Education Foundation
P.O. Box 19-1153
Emerge
Miami Beach, FL 33119
280 Green Street
(305) 576-5075
Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 547-9870
Harvard Negotiation Project
Building Bridges: High School Conflict
Eyes on the Prize
Resolution Curriculum
480 Shamut Avenue
500 Pound Hall
Boston, MA 02118
Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 536-6900
Debra Kolb, Director
(617) 495-1684
Facing History and Ourselves
16 Hurd Road
House of Umoja (Unity)
Brookline, MA 02146
1410 North Frazier Street
Margo Strom, Director
Philadelphia, PA 19131
Marc Skvirsky, Program Director
Sister Falaka Fattah, Director
(617) 232-1595
(215) 473-2723
194
OCT-25-93 MON 11:33
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 10
THE STAR PROGRAM
National Directory of Violence Prevention Programs
Humanity House
National School Safety Center
Alternatives to Violence: A Course in
4165 Thousand Oaks Blvd., Suite 290
Solving Conflict Peaceably
Westlake Village, CA 91362
475 W. Market Street
Ronald D. Stephens, Director
Akron, OH 44303
(805) 373-9977
(216) 864-5442
New Center Associates
International Association for the Study of
Where Have All the Children Gone?
Cooperation in Education
A Teen Violence Prevention Program
Center for Teaching and Learning
2051 W. Grand Boulevard
University of North Dakota
Detroit, MI 48208
Grand Forks, ND 58202
(313) 895-4000, ext. 707
Professor Mara Sapon-Shevin
(701) 777-2674
"Ouch" Violence Prevention Project
Wilder Foundation
Kids Against Crime, Inc.
919 Lafond Avenue
P.O. Box 22004
St. Paul. MN 55104
San Bernadino. CA 92406
Eugene Urbain, Director
Linda Warsaw, Youth Director
(612) 642-2015
(714) 882-1344
The Paramount Plan: Alternatives
Miami Police Department Gang Detail
to Gang Membership
Community Relations Section
Human Services Department
400 N.W. 2nd Avenue
City of Paramount
Miami, FL 33128
16400 Colorado Avenue
(305) 579-6620
Paramount, CA 90723
(213) 531-3503
Middle Atlantic/Great Lakes
Organized Crime Law Enforcement Network
Parent Management Training
(MAGLOCLEN)
Oregon Research Institute
850 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 206
Eugene, OR 97401
West Trenton, NJ 08628
Gerald R. Patterson
(800) 345-1322
(503) 485-2711
Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women
Peer Negotiation Project
Physicians Plaza Building
Judge Baker Guidance Center
570 Asbury, Suite 201
295 Longwood Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
Boston. MA 02115
(612) 646-6177
Robert Selman
(617) 735-7724
National Association for
Mediation in Education
Philadelphia Crisis Intervention Network (PCIN)
425 Amity Street
415 N. 4th Street
Amherst. MA 01002
Philadelphia, PA 19123
Ann Gibson, Director
(215) 592-5631
(413) 545-2462
Philadelphia Injury Prevention
National Crime Prevention Council
Program
1700 K Street, N.W., 2nd Floor
Department of Public Health
Washington. DC 20006
500 South Broad Street
S. Jonann Wild, Youth Director
Philadelphia, PA 19146
(202) 466-6272
(215) 875-5637
195
OCT-25-93 MON 11:33
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 11
THE STAR PROGRAM
National Directory of Violence Prevention Programs
Pittsburgh Peace Institute
Senior Tutors for Youth in Detention
139 Wrightman Street
1301 Solano Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15217
Albany, CA 94706
Liane Norman
(415) 753-7800
(412) 361-5900
Society for the Prevention of Violence
The Prevention Center
3109 Mayfield Road, Room 207
29 Commonwealth Avenue, 8th Floor
Cleveland, OH 44118
Boston, MA 02116
Ruth Weltmann Begun, Director
Ralph Fuccillo, Director
(216) 371-5545
(617) 267-8553
South Shore Women's Center
Prevention Project
Violence Is a Choice Curriculum
University of Washington
14 Main Street
School of Social Work
Plymouth, MA 02360
Seattle, WA 98101
Susan H. Edwards, Youth Outreach Coord.
J. David Hawkins
(617) 746-2004
(206) 543-5640
Southern California Council on Battered
Relationships Without Violence
Women
Texas Gulf Coast Chapter
Skills for Violence-Free Relationships:
March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation
A Curriculum for Ages 13-18
6910 Fannin, Suite 223-C
P.O. Box 5036
Houston, TX 77030
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(713) 796-1463
George Thomas, Director
(213) 937-1344
Resource Center for the
Prevention of Family Violence
Stop Black-on-Black Violence
Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health
Community Mental Health Council
150 Tremont Street
8704 S. Constance Avenue
Boston, MA 02111
Chicago, IL 60617
(617) 727-0941
Carl Bell, M.D., Director
(312) 734-4033
Say Yes. Incorporated
3840 Crenshaw Boulevard. Suite 217
Student Anti-Violence Education Program (SAVE)
Los Angeles, CA 90008
Families of Murder Victims, Inc.
(213) 295-5551
1421 Arch Street, 7th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Sharing & Caring About Myself & Others
Julie Good, Program Director
(SCAMO) c/o
(215) 686-8033 / (215) 686-8078
102nd Street Elementary School
1963 East 103rd Street
Teens on Target
Los Angeles, CA 90002
Trauma Foundation
Jesse Coleman, School Counselor
San Francisco General Hospital
(213) 569-8141
Building One, Room 400
San Francisco, CA 94110
School Mediation Associates
Deane Calhoun, Director
702 Green Street, #8
(415) 821-8209
Cambridge, MA 02139
Richard Cohen, Director
(617) 876-6074
196
OCT-25-93 MON 11:34
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 12
THE STAR PROGRAM
National Directory of Violence Prevention Programs
Teen Troubleshooters
Wholistic Stress Control Institute
Washington Heights-Inwood Coalition, Inc.
P.O. Box 42481
652 West 187th Street
Atlanta, GA 30311
New York, NY 10033
Pennie C. Trotter, Director
(212) 781-6722
(404) 344-2021
TIES
Youth Development, Inc.
Dorchester Youth Collaborative
1710 Centro Familiar, S.W.
1514A Dorchester Avenue
Albuquerque. NM 87105
Dorchester, MA 02122
(505) 841-2400
Emmett Fogert
(617) 288-1748
Turning Point Family Services Program
12912 Brookhurst Avenue, Suite 150
Garden Grove, CA 92640
Anthony Borbon
(714) 636-3823
U.S. Department of Justice Community
Relation Service
5550 Friendship Boulevard
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
(301) 492-5929
University of Illinois Intervention Project
Department of Psychology
P.O. Box 4348
Chicago. IL 60680
Rowell Huesmann, Leonard Eron, & Nancy Guerra
(312) 413-2625
Vietnamese Comm. of Orange County, Inc.
3701 West McFadden Avenue, Suite M
Santa Ana, CA 92704
(714) 775-2637
Violence Prevention Program
Contra Costa County Health Dept.
75 Santa Barbara Road
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
Larry Cohen, Director
(415) 646-6511
Violence Prevention Project
Health Promotion Program for Urban Youth
1010 Massachusetts Avenue
Boston, MA 02118
Linda Bishop Hudson. Director
(617) 424-5196
Carnegic Council on Adolescent Development and Education Development Center contributed to this listing.
197
OCT-25-93 MON 11:34
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 13
HANDGUN CONTROL, INC.
OCTOBER RENEWAL
{G:\HCI\REN\HCIOCTRE.JBJ:pg1) (CAM:93.09.23:JB/JJ) 10.08
"The outrageous costs of violence in this country
stem in large measure from the fact that this is
the only country in the world where teenagers can
roam the streets at random, with semiautomatic
weapons and be better armed than the police."
-- President Bill Clinton
Speech to the Nation on Health Reform
September 22, 1993
Dear HCI Member:
We couldn't have said it better! In fact, President
Clinton's passion on this issue -- evident to all who watched him
on TV -- is matched only by ours. And we strongly support his
challenge to all of us: to take responsibility for ending the
behavior that drives up the costs of health care for everyone.
As a loyal member of Handgun Control, you've already accepted
that challenge. With your generous support, you have been
instrumental in helping us try to end the epidemic of gun violence
which plagues our nation. And right now it is time for you to
renew that critically important support for another year.
Bo I urqe you to please use the enclosed form to
renew your membership and return it to me as soon
as you can with your most generous renewal gift.
We need your continued support to greatly intensify
our campaign for strong, national gun laws.
Although we are closer than ever before to finally enacting the
Brady Bill, we still need your help so that we can convince
Congress to ban assault weapons legislate against gun
trafficking ... and outlaw possession of handguns by children.
You see, beyond the incalculable costs in pain, in suffering,
in ruined lives and senseless death, there's no question that gun
violence also exacts another toll by costing Americans billions of
dollars in health care.
In fact, researchers at the University of California at San
Francisco added up $20.4 billion of costs for all firearm deaths
and injuries in 1990. And according to the National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control, you and I and all taxpayers end up
paying more than 80% of these costs.
And this already appalling cost to our society, in human lives
and in dollars, is multiplied by another factor -- the fear of
random shootings that each one of us must confront every day.
That's why your renewed support is so vitally
OCT-25-93 MON 11:35
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 14
- 2 -
important. There's so much for us to do in the
coming months. We must be able to keep up the
momentum we've built to move beyond the Brady Bill
and to enact other gun laws. And we must be able
to jump -- at a moment's notice -- on any argument
or action that can sway votes in Congress.
For example, I can't understand why 102 people dead every day
from gunfire isn't enough to persuade Congress to act. But if
"money talks" is a lever that will pry badly needed gun laws out of
Congress, then we need to use it.
Take our fight to enact the Brady Bill, for example. We
presented the common-sense argument: why not give the police five
working days to check the backgrounds of handgun purchasers to weed
out criminals and the mentally unstable? Also, why not give people
who are buying a gun in the heat of anger or desperation some time
to cool off?
But there are other facts -- dollars and cents arguments --
which also argue for the Brady Bill. Every time a criminal buys
a handgun, the potential cost to society when that gun is used to
shoot someone is hundreds of thousands of dollars per person
shot. Plus the cost of police work to catch the criminal ... the
cost of trial ... and the skyrocketing cost of keeping the
criminal behind bars.
The Miami Herald wrote a story recently that chronicled
events and totaled expenses after a shooting incident when a 16-
year-old with a .357-magnum handgun shot a 17-year-old in the
face. It's a stunning narrative of the costs of gun violence.
The direct costs to the victim -- emergency care just to
keep him alive, nine months of hospitalization, physical therapy,
training in wheelchair skills, the cost of the wheelchair,
building ramps at home, and on and on -- added up to $549,604.46.
Remember that you and I are stuck with about 80% of that bill when
hospitals and doctors raise prices to cover uncompensated costs.
The costs of apprehending and prosecuting the shooter totaled
$111,930.37. But consider this: the perpetrator is scheduled to
remain in prison until 2027 -- for an additional cost to the
taxpayers of $839,4521 Then, when the victim's parents are no
longer able to care for their son, he will need help from the
state to live, either at home (estimated at $100,000 a year) or
in an institution (cctimated at $40,000 a year). And if you
factor in the victim's potential lost wages, as the Herald did at
$30,000 a year for 40 years, that adds another $1.2 million to
the cost of just one shooting incident.
So, that's $661,534.83 in direct expenses and upwards of
$2 million in lifetime costs for one bullet from a handoun in the
wrong hands! But who can put a price tag on a precious young
life totally ruined just because a 16-year old was able to
obtain a gun? And, of course, no one can deny that the
OCT-25-93 MON 11:35
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 15
- 3 -
ramifications of gun violence go far beyond the mounting deaths
and our growing fears.
The toll in suffering, lives lost and billions of dollars
in health care costs all add up to the urgent need for
strong gun laws. And to the importance of your renewed
commitment to Handqun Control.
Together we must continue to harness the public outrage over
the lack of gun laws in this country -- growing faster than ever
thanks in part to President Clinton's continued exhortations
about gun violence and use that outrage to strengthen our
demands for enacting lifesaving laws.
With your ongoing help, we will be in position to move
forward beyond the Brady Bill -- to the rest of our national
gun policy:
** A ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and
combat hardware like large-capacity ammunition clips.
The Journal of the American Medical Association reported a
shocking fact about assault weapon violence: The multiple wounds
inflicted by assault weapons are so destructive -- and the
incidence of these shootings is increasing so rapidly -- that
military trauma physicians now receive their combat wound
training in urban hospitals. Today's emergency rooms are
beginning to resemble M.A.S.H. units during wartime!
And, of course, now that we have some idea of how much it
costs to treat a gunshot victim who was hit with only one bullet,
you can imagine how much those expenses increase for victims of
assault weapon fire. The Journal of the AMA estimates that
initial, intensive care treatment alone for a single victim could
total $150,000 -- just for the first few days of hospitalization!
Worse still, in Los Angeles, at least 20% of those seen in
emergency departments for treatment of assault weapon injuries
were innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire. Such an
outragcous cost to society in lives, in terror and heartbreak,
and in cold cash -- from the proliferation of weapons that have
absolutely no place on the streets of America! These weapons
for mass mayhem must be banned. And with your renewed commitment
we will have them outlawed!
** A national law that prohibits individuals from purchasing
more than one handgun a month.
We helped Virginia enact a law like this in response to the
fact that the major portion of guns confiscated from crimes in
New York city were originally purchased in Virginia. Gun
trafficking is a menace that must be controlled. While the Brady
Bill can help prevent over-the-counter gun sales to criminals --
a recent study reports that nearly one-third of those convicted
OCT-25-93 MON 11:36
CRAVER MATHEWS SMITH CO
FAX NO. 7032370600
P. 16
- 4 -
of gun-related felonies bought their guns from a retail store --
we must also stop illegal gun sales. Gun sales in back alleys or
from car trunks can definitely be reduced by making it very, very
difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to buy dozens of guns at
one time.
** Outlawing possession of handguns by children.
Another rapidly increasing concern is the problem of kids and
guns. Under federal law, children can't buy guns -- but the law
doesn't prevent them from possessing them or from carrying them
openly in public! Only 13 states and the District of Columbia
directly prohibit all minors under 21 from openly carrying
handguns. As the headlines about guns in schools become more
frequent and the ages of gun-carriers get younger and younger --
it's clear that gun-toting kids are a serious threat to all of us.
We hope to bring all these legislative battles -- and others --
into Congress in the coming months. We simply cannot let Congress
think that the only courageous action we expect from them is to
pass the Brady Bill.
America must have a comprehensive policy toward guns -- a
waiting period to keep guns out of the wrong hands, a ban on
assault weapons to protect us all, and laws to stop gun trafficking
and much, much more.
only then will public safety be ensured. Only then will we be
able to save the billions of dollars that gun violence costs our
society. And only then will you and I and our families be free to
live without the pervasive fear of gun violence that today
restricts almost our every move.
As a member of Handgun Control you give us added clout with
Members of Congress and help us pay for the tremendous costs of
waging these legislative campaigns for gun laws.
Jim and I are very grateful for this support. And we both urge
you to stay in this fight with us. Together, we can take action
against America's gun violence epidemic and all of its costs to
society. Please renew, today! Thank you.
Sincerely,
Sarah Brady
Chair
Drunh Violence
John Ferguson
America's
Truck Drivin' Storyteller
November 26, 1993
Ann Bartley
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania NW
Washington DC 20500
Dear Ms. Bartley,
This is in reference to the letter John sent on November
7, 1993 concerning the Highway Safety Awareness Tour.
Enclosed is an article concerning the tour in our local
newspaper. We still would like to hear from The White House
in support of this program.
You may reach me at 502-369-7350 and I can relay the
message to John when he calls in from the tour.
Sincerely,
Carol Ferguson
P.O. Box 171, Sonora, Kentucky 42776
Driving home a sobering message
At left, Sonora Elementary
students were studying a
transportation unit in their
classes when Sonora trucker
and storyteller John Ferguson,
51, above, dropped by for a
visit. The trucker left
Elizabethtown Tuesday on a
journey that will take him
across the nation to warn
students against drinking and
driving. He will participate in
the second Highway Safety
Awareness Tour, sponsored by
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
N-E/Jayme Burden
and the Interstate Truckload
Above, students from Sonora Elementary School explore the semitruck of driver John Ferguson Tuesday.
Carriers Conference.
PHOTOCOPY
Trucker takes MADD message about drunken driving across U.S.
By BOB VILLANUEVA
"This worked out real well for
school students about drinking
States, the truck
For his latest tour, Ferguson
Staff Writer
them," Ferguson said of his visit
and driving. Ferguson will
driver/storyteller is not new to
frequently will be joined by state
as the students were studying a
provide the students information
visiting schools. During his
and corporate officials to get the
A Sonora trucker left
unit on transportation.
about trucks and truck driving.
travels, Ferguson often stops by
sober message out. He has even
Ferguson will be taking on a
The general message will be
schools to introduce students to
invited first lady Hillary Clinton
Elizabethtown Tuesday to begin a
journey that will take him across
more serious role beginning
"Drunk Driving Destroys Dreams
the world of trucking.
to participate in part of the trek,
the United States to warn
Monday when he will participate
- Drive Smart, Drive Sober."
Ferguson has also "adopted"
but SO far he has not received a
students against the perils of
in the second Highway Safety
"As long as you don't preach to
two schools, one in San Antonio,
reply.
drinking and driving.
Awareness Tour, sponsored by
them - if you tell them your
Texas, and one in Louisville, and
With his departure Tuesday,
But first John Ferguson, 51,
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
personal experiences and stories
he frequently corresponds with
the Sonora trucker is taking a
stopped at Sonora Elementary
and the Interstate Truckload
- they'll listen," Ferguson said.
them. In fact, a student from the
tour that will end Dec. 10 in
School and did what he often
Carriers Conference.
Though this is his first
Texas elementary sent Ferguson
Washington, D.C., causing him
does: he showed students what a
The tour will include guest
experience taking such a message
her small blue teddy bear, clad in
for the first time ever to miss
semitruck looks like up close.
speakers who will address high
3,200 miles across the United
dress and beads, for luck.
Thanksgiving at home.
MADD
TM
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
2nd Annual
MADD and ITCC Highway
Safety Awareness Tour
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
ITCC
ATA
DELIVERING AMERICA'S FREIGHT
Tour Runs From
November 29 - December 10, 1993
NEEDIT
MEDIA STOPS
Date
Location
Press Conference
Monday, November 29
San Diego, CA
10:00 a.m.
Tuesday, November 30
Las Vegas, NV
10:00 a.m.
Wednesday, December 1
Phoenix, AZ
10:00 a.m.
Thursday, December 2
El Paso, TX
10:00 a.m.
Friday, December 3
Amarillo, TX
10:00 a.m.
Monday, December 6 *
Oklahoma City, OK
10:00 a.m.
Tuesday, December 7
Little Rock, AR
10:00 a.m.
Wednesday, December 8
Nashville, TN
10:00 a.m.
Thursday, December 9
Raleigh, NC
10:00 a.m.
Friday, December 10
Richmond, VA
9:30 a.m.
Friday, December 10
Washington, DC
1:30 p.m.
John Ferguson
Biography Information
John Ferguson, president, Unique Way, Inc., Sonora, KY, will be driving the
entire 3,200-mile truck route for the Second Annual MADD/ITCC Highway Safety
Awareness Tour. He will be driving a customized Volvo-GM tractor that will be pulling
a Great Dane trailer with the anti-drunk driving message: "Drunk Driving Destroys
Dreams--Drive Smart, Drive Sober."
Ferguson is an owner-operator and storyteller of trucking tales and adventures. A
professional truck driver since 1974, he balances his over-the-road business with
performances before school children, community groups and other truck drivers.
Ferguson has placed in the top 20 winners of the Interstate Truckload Carriers
Conference Independent Contractor of the Year Contest for five consecutive years. In
addition, he has recorded his tales on cassette tapes that are sold at truckstops nationwide.
He is also a frequent guest on truckers' radio programs and has written columns for
Trucker News, Land Line and Tale Trader, a storytellers' newsletter. He recently visited
the White House and spoke with Hillary Clinton about health care legislation for truck
drivers.
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
MADD
MADD and ITCC Highway
Safety Awareness Tour
ITCC
DELIVERING AMERICA'S FREIGHT
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
A Joint Public Awareness and Safety Program by Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference and MADD
ITCC/MADD "Red Ribbon Roll Call"
This is a list of the Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference (ITCC) member companies
who have requested red ribbons so they can "tie one on" this holiday season. As of October 15,
1993, there are 200 member companies listed who have requested a total of 121,900 red ribbons.
Alabama
Lane Trucking, Inc., Dothan, AL
Malone Freightline, Birmingham, AL
Poole Truck Line, Inc., Evergreen, AL
R & D Trucking Co., Inc., Florence, AL
Whatley Contract Carriers, Hope Hill, AL
Arizona
Swift Transportation, Inc., Phoenix, AZ
Arkansas
J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., Lowell, AR
Daymark Foods, Inc., Russellville, AR
Pinnacle Transportation Service, Inc., N. Little Rock, AR
Pride of the Country Carriers, Inc., Conway, AR
California
Freymiller Trucking, Inc., Bakersfield, CA
Holland Hitch Co., Mountain View, CA
Colorado
Monfort Transportation Company, Greeley, CO
Trans-Western Express, Ltd., Denver, CO
Connecticut
Landstar System, Inc., Shelton, CT
2200 MILL ROAD
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314
(703) 838-1950 FAX: (703) 836-6610
recycled paper
Florida
AG Carriers, Inc., Tavares, FL
Economy Transport Inc., Tampa, FL
Ranger Transportation, Inc., Jacksonville, FL
Silver Eagle Transport, Inc., Jacksonville, FL
Transport Insurance Specialists, Inc., Melbourne, FL
Georgia
Dorsey Trailers, Inc., Atlanta, GA
Kennesaw Transportation, Inc., Woodstock, GA
Idaho
Austin's Express, Inc., Twin Falls, ID
Illinois
Dan Lodesky Trucking, Inc., Gurnee, IL
Farm Service & Supplies, Marengo, IL
Gully Transportation, Inc., Quincy, IL
Munson Transportation, Monmouth, IL
Pals Cartage Co., South Holland, IL
PFT/Roberson, Farm City, IL
Indiana
Burlington Motor Carriers, Daleville, IN
Denny Transport, Inc., Jeffersonville, IN
Hiner Transport, Inc., Huntington, IN
Hi-Way Dispatch, Inc., Marion, IN
KAT, Inc., Chesterton, IN
Laker Express, Inc., Indianapolis, IN
Overland Transportation System, Inc., Indianapolis, IN
Sunrise Express, Inc., Fort Wayne, IN
Iowa
Barr-Nunn Transportation, Granger, IA
CRST, Inc., Cedar Rapids, IA
Crouse Cartage Company, Carroll, IA
Decker Truck Line, Inc., Fort Dodge, IA
Heartland Express, Inc., Coralville, IA
Mike Brooks, Inc., Knoxville, IA
R & A Trucking Enterprises, Waterloo, IA
(Iowa cont.)
Smithway Motor Xpress, Inc., Fort Dodge, IA
Tri-State Transportation, Dubuque, IA
Umthun Trucking Co., Eagle Grove, IA
Warren Transport, Inc., Waterloo, IA
Kansas
Roberts and Oake, Inc., Overland Park, KS
Tollie Freightways, Inc., Kansas City, KS
Kentucky
LF C Transportation Co., Inc., Louisville, KY
Mercer Transportation Co., Louisville, KY
Unique Way, Inc., Sonora, KY
Louisiana
Merchants Dutch Express, Inc., Monroe, LA
Maryland
D. M. Bowman, Inc., Williamsport, MD
Expedited Services, Inc., Hagerstown, MD
Glacier Refrigerated Express, Federalsburg, MD
MG Refining & Marketing, Bel Air, MD
R. W. Bozel Transfer, Inc., Baltimore, MD
Massachusetts
Refrigerated Food Express, Avon, MA
Michigan
Eaton Corp., Kalamazoo, MI
ETV Trucking Inc., Grand Rapids, MI
Gra-Bell Truck Line, Inc., Holland, MI
Van Eerden Trucking Co., Inc., Wyoming, MI
Minnesota
B.J. Transport, Inc., Eagan, MN
Bud Meyer Truck Lines, Inc., Lake City, MN
Dart Transit Co., St. Paul, MN
(Minnesota cont.)
Fortune Transportation Company, Windom, MN
J & R Schugel Trucking, Inc., New Ulm, MN
Minn-Dak Transport, Inc., Pelican Rapids, MN
Schanno Transportation, Inc., St. Paul, MN
Wilson Refrigerated Express, Rochester, MN
Mississippi
KLLM, Inc., Jackson, MS
Missouri
American Central Transport, Inc., Liberty, MO
Champion Distribution Services, Poplar Bluff, MO
Contract Freighters, Inc., Joplin, MO
Crowder College Truck Dr. Trng. Safety, Neosho, MO
D & D Sexton, Inc., Carthage, MO
ITT Capital Finance, St. Louis, MO
Kissick Truck Lines, Inc., Kansas City, MO
M & I Truck Line, Inc., Kansas City, MO
Prime, Inc., Springfield, MO
RPM Freightways, Inc., Kansas, MO
Transport Distribution Company, Joplin, MO
Witte Bros. Exchange, Inc., Troy, MO
Nebraska
Cornhusker Motor Lines, Inc., Omaha, NE
Nationwide Transportation, Inc., Omaha, NE
Romans Motor Freight, Inc., Yutan, NE
Seward Motor Freight, Inc., Seward, NE
Speedway Transportation, Inc., Holdrege, NE
Werner Enterprises, Inc., Omaha, NE
Nevada
Carey Transport, Fallon, NV
New Jersey
JLT Corp., Whitehouse Station, NJ
Meric Trucking & Leasing Corp., Cliffside Park, NJ
(New Jersey cont.)
Mural Transport, Inc., Kendall Park, NJ
National Freight, Inc., Vineland, NJ
STS Transportation, Inc., Somerville, NJ
New Mexico
Roadrunner Trucking, Inc., Albuquerque, NM
Westway Express, Albuquerque, NM
New York
Celadon Trucking, New York, NY
Covered Wagon Train, Inc., Hornell, NY
DeMarco Trucking, Ripley, NY
K. J. Transportation, Inc., Farmington, NY
Price Trucking Corp., Buffalo, NY
North Carolina
Cardinal Freight Carriers, Concord, NC
C.S. Henry Transfer, Inc., Rocky Mount, NC
Epes Transport System, Inc., Greensboro, NC
Green Arrow Motor Express, Rocky Mount, NC
QST Express, Inc., Kings Mountain, NC
North Dakota
Can-Am Express, Inc., Fargo, ND
Ohio
Arctic Express, Inc., Hilliard, OH
Craig Transportation Co., Perrysburg, OH
Dutch Maid Produce, Willard, OH
Five Star Trucking, Willoughby, OH
Freightway Corporation, Toledo, OH
Garner Trucking, Inc., Findlay, OH
Gordon Johnson Trucking Co., Fredericktown, OH
Jet Express, Dayton, OH
K&P Trucking Co., Willard, OH
P.D. Express, Inc., Plain City, OH
Peak Transportation, Inc., Perrysburg, OH
(Ohio cont.)
Shenandoah Motor Express, Inc., Versailles, OH
United Carriers Corporation, Newark, OH
Victory Express, Medway, OH
Walker Trucking Co., Columbus, OH
Oklahoma
Commercial Insurance Services, Oklahoma City, OK
Glass Trucking Company, Inc., Newkirk, OK
Innovative Computing Corp., Oklahoma City, OK
John Christner Trucking, Inc., Sapulpa, OK
Melton Truck Lines, Inc., Tulsa, OK
Oregon
Market Transport, Ltd, Portland, OR
May Trucking Co., Salem, OR
Pear Tree, Medford, OR
Vail Northwest, Inc., Eugene, OR
Pennsylvania
Butler Trucking Co., Woodland, PA
Goodway Transport, Inc., York, PA
H. F. Campbell & Son, Inc., Millerstown, PA
Lebarnold, Inc., Camp Hill, PA
Mill Trucking Co. Inc., Philadelphia, PA
Raider Truck Lines, Inc., Vandergrift, PA
Shaffer Trucking, Inc., New Kingstown, PA
Venezia Hauling, Inc., Limerick, PA
West Contract Services, Boyertown, PA
Rhode Island
C-Line, Inc., Warwick, RI
South Carolina
G&P Trucking, Gaston, SC
South Dakota
Midwest Coast Transport, Sioux Falls, SD
Tennessee
417 Travel Center, Dandridge, TN
Cumberland Freight Line, Inc., Smyrna, TN
Digby Truck Line, LaVergne, TN
M. S. Carriers, Inc., Memphis, TN
Newman & Pemberton Corp., Knoxville, TN
Pemberton Truck Lines, Inc., Knoxville, TN
Proline Carriers, Inc., Nashville, TN
System 81 Express, Inc., Knoxville, TN
Tennessee Truck Lines, Inc., Dandridge, TN
Trans Carriers, Inc., Memphis, TN
Texas
Alan Ritchey, Inc., Valley View, TX
Baldwin Distribution Services, Ltd., Amarillo, TX
FFE Transportation Services, Inc., Dallas, TX
Merit Distribution Services, Inc., Temple, TX
Morgan Portable Building Transport Corp., Dallas, TX
Northeast Trucking, Inc., Edinburg, TX
Parkway Distributors, Inc., San Antonio, TX
Peterbilt Motors Company, Denton, TX
Refrigerated Transport of Texas, Inc., Dallas, TX
S-Line, Inc., Dallas, TX
Utah
Andrus Transportation Services, Inc., St. George, UT
C. H. Dredge & Co., Inc., Layton, UT
C.R. England & Sons, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT
Dick Simon Trucking, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT
Pride Transport, Salt Lake City, UT
Vermont
Michael Zaluzny, Vernon, VT
Virginia
Harris Trucking Co., Inc., Lynchburg, VA
Howell's Motor Freight, Inc., Roanoke, VA
Intertrans Carrier Co., Louisa, VA
North & South Van Lines, Inc., Harrisonburg, VA
(Virginia cont.)
Shorewood Transport Inc., Roanoke, VA
Warrior Xpress, Charles City, VA
William Edwards, Inc., Verona, VA
Washington
Inco Express, Inc., Seattle, WA
Puget Sound Truck Lines, Seattle, WA
West Virginia
Burns Motor Freight, Marlinton, WV
General Delivery, Inc., Fairmont, WV
Virginian Power Transport Co., Poca, WV
Wisconsin
Barry Trucking, Inc., Milwaukee, WI
Diamond Transportation System, Inc., Racine, WI
Fox Mid-West Transports, Green Bay, WI
Hanke Trucking, Slinger, WI
Jefferson Transport Service, Jefferson, WI
Kreilkamp Trucking, Inc., Allenton, WI
Laser Services, Ltd., Appleton, WI
Millis Transfer, Inc., Black River Falls, WI
Pryor Trucking, Inc., Silver Lake, WI
Raemarc, Inc., Racine, WI
Roehl Transport Inc., Marshfield, WI
Schneider National, Inc., Green Bay, WI
Tran Star Services, Inc., Waupoca, WI
Canada
Arnold Brothers Transport, Winnipeg, MB
Choice Reefer System, Ltd., Stirling, ON
J & F Trucking Corporation, Ajax, ON
kstateby mad
EMPLOYMENT & WAGES:
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
What
7.8 million employed.
2.7 million truck drivers employed.
$226.8 billion paid in annual wages.
REVENUE:
You
$278 billion gross freight revenues representing 77%
of nation's freight bill.
$44 billion dollars gross freight revenues for the
truckload industry.
Should
TAXES:
$19.6 billion paid in federal and state highway-user
taxes representing 37% of total highway-user taxes
paid by all motor vehicles.
Know
NUMBER OF TRUCKS:
14.7 million commercial trucks registered.
8% of all vehicles registered.
13.1 million single-unit trucks.
About the
1.6 million combination units.
3.6 million commercial trailers registered.
NUMBER OF COMPANIES:
54% operate six or fewer trucks.
Trucking
47,890 motor carriers authorized by the Interstate
Commerce Commission to haul goods for-hire
interstate. Some 45,000 are truckload carriers.
TRUCKING ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
Industry:
Productivity index for intercity trucking up 41.2%.
Medium and heavy truck miles driven up 38%.
Fatal accident rate for medium and heavy trucks
down 34%.
Number of fatal accidents involving medium and
heavy trucks down 10%.
Total fatalities involving medium and heavy trucks
down 11%.
Sources: American Trucking Associations, Inc
U.S. Department of Transportation
(All figures reflect 1991 data unless otherwise noted)
Published by the
Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference
recycled paper
Interstate Truckload
Carriers Conference
WHO WE ARE!
MEMBERSHIP
The Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference (ITCC)
ITCC currently has over 800 members and our
is the only national trade association representing
membership is growing. Our members consist of
the common and contract truckload segment of the
Carriers, those who possess state or federal
motor carrier industry. The Conference represents
authority to operate as a common or contract
approximately 600 dry van,
carrier; Suppliers, those who
refrigerated, flatbed, and dump-
manufacture, produce or
trailer truckload carriers
distribute trucking industry
domiciled in the 48 contiguous
products; and Associates, those
states and serving those states
who are shippers, brokers or
Alaska, Mexico, and the
FACT
lawyers closely involved with
Canadian provinces. The
services to member carriers.
Conference's members operate
more than 140,000 tractors and
280,000 trailers, and have
combined annual revenues
exceeding $14 billion.
SHEET
ACTIVITIES
The ITCC has many outstanding
The Conference is affiliated with
programs and services. Through
the American Trucking
our active Safety Council, we
Associations, Inc.
keep ITCC carrier members on
the cutting edge of safety trends
and issues. We also host several
educational seminars on topics
HISTORY
ranging from quality to truck-driver training. In
Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference (ITCC) was
addition, we sponsor a college scholarship fund,
created in 1983 by the merger of the Common
and an annual fundraising effort that grants wishes
Carrier Conference-Irregular Route (founded 1941)
to critically-ill children.
and the Contract Carrier Conference (founded 1938).
MISSION
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
The purpose of the Conference is to provide
leadership that will increase members' productivity,
ITCC
profitability and ability to provide superior service;
to advocate on behalf of its members and to
DELIVERING AMERICA FREIGHT
enhance the truckload industry's ability to provide
safe, high quality, reliable interstate truckload
transportation services to the shipping public.
FOR MORE FACTS CALL
703-838-1950
ITCC
2200 Mill Road
Alexandria, VA 22314
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
511 E. John Carpenter Frwy.. Suite 700
Irving, Texas 75062-8187
Telephone (214) 744-MADD
FAX (214) 869-2206/2207
NATIONAL OFFICE
DRUNK DRIVING IN AMERICA
CRASH vs. ACCIDENT - Those injured and killed in drunk driving
collisions are not "accident" victims. The crash caused by an
impaired driver is a violent crime. Drunk driving involves two
choices: to drink AND to drive. The thousands of deaths and
injuries caused each year by impaired driving can be prevented
... they are not "accidental."
Statistics for 1992
*
An estimated 17,699 persons died in alcohol-related
traffic crashes. These deaths constituted 45.1% of the
39,235 total traffic fatalities.
Approximately 1.2 million people suffered injuries in
crashes where police or medical personnel reported alcohol
was present.
More than 43% of all 16 - 20 year old deaths result from
motor vehicle crashes. In 1992, an estimated 2,314 persons
aged 16 - 20 died in alcohol-related crashes.
Based on the current status of drunk driving in the U.S.,
two in five Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related
crash at some time in their lives.
Direct costs of alcohol-related traffic crashes are
estimated to be $46 billion yearly (NHTSA). An additional
$102 billion is lost in quality of life due to these
crashes (Miller & Blincoe, 1993).
More than half of the persons jailed for DWI in 1989 had
previous 1992) DWI convictions. (Bureau of Justice Statistics,
The probability of a crash begins to increase
significantly at .05 BAC and climbs rapidly after about .08
BAC. (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 1992)
More than half of the nation's junior and senior high
school students drink alcoholic beverages, and many "binge"
drink 1991) to relieve stress and boredom. (U.S. Surgeon General,
Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, unless otherwise noted.
MADD
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
"TIE ONE ON
FOR SAFETY"
Tie this red ribbon to a
visible location on your
vehicle as a reminder to
drive sober this holiday
season and throughout
the year.
JULY
What You Should
Know About
"Safety is Our Driving Concern"
Truck Safety
For more information on safety contact:
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
DELIVERING AMERICA FREIGHT
Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference
2200 Mill Road, Alexandria, VA 22314
703-838-1950 Fax: 703-836-6610
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
DELIVERING AMERICA'S FREIGHT
The Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference
D
id you know that the trucking industry has made
great progress during the past decade in improving
safety. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), the number of fatal accidents
involving trucks declined by 11 percent nationwide
between 1980 and 1990-an outstanding improvement
when you consider that the number of vehicle miles
travelled increased by 36 percent to 283 billion miles
logged by commercial trucks.
The U.S. Department of Transportation also reports a
ten-year low in 1991 for highway deaths involving
tractor-trailers. Of course, any death on the highway is
a tragedy and the trucking industry is committed to
improving highway safety each and every year.
B
ut what specifically has
the trucking industry
done to improve safety? First, it
supported an aggressive program of truck
inspections designed to ensure and improve
safe operations of motor carriers. This program is
supported by state and federal government and has
resulted in a 21 percent increase in the number of
safety inspections performed between 1989 and 1991.
Second, the industry strongly favored mandatory
random drug testing and the development of a
nationwide Commercial Driver's License. And the
industry continues to do more.
The Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference (ITCC)
supports a very active Safety Council open to all motor
carrier member safety personnel. The Safety Council
sponsors an Annual Fleet Safety Contest, established to
recognize the best safety program in the truckload
industry. The Council's Annual Meeting offers
participants a great opportunity to make highways safer,
exchange information and attend an exhibition
showcasing products and services of value to truckload
motor carrier safety personnel.
MADD and ITCC Highway
Safety Awareness Tour
I
Second Annual MADD and ITCC
Highway Safety Awareness Tour -
Friday, December 10
1:30 p.m. in
NV
a 3,200 mile journey to 11 major cities.
Washington, DC
11
2
DC
Friday, December 10
CA
Tuesday, November 30
6
VA
10
9:30 a.m. in
10:00 a.m. in
Monday, December 6
8
Wednesday, December 8
Richmond, VA
Las Vegas, NV
10:00 a.m. in
10:00 a.m. in
Oklahoma City, OK
Nashville, TN
9
NC
OK
Thursday, December 9
AZ
AR
TN
10:00 a.m. in
Raleigh, NC
NM
1
7
Monday, November 29
5
Friday, December 3
Tuesday, December 7
10:00 a.m. in
10:00 a.m. in
10:00 a.m. in
San Diego, CA
Amarillo, TX
Little Rock, AR
3
Wednesday, December 1
TX
10:00 a.m. in
4
Phoenix, AZ
Thursday, December 2
10:00 a.m. in
El Paso, TX
INTERSTATE
TRUCKLOAD CARRIERS CONFERENCE
MADD
ITCC
DELIVERING AMERICA FREIGHT
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
recycled paper
INTERSTATE TRUCKLOAD
CARRIERS CONFERENCE
NEWS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 20, 1993
Contact: Bill Weger
(703) 838-1950
Second Annual MADD/ITCC Highway Safety Awareness Tour
To Kickoff in San Diego
ALEXANDRIA, VA--Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and the Interstate
Truckload Carriers Conference (ITCC) are teaming up again this year for the Second Annual
MADD/ITCC Highway Safety Awareness Tour, a nationwide truck tour to educate motorists
about safe and sober driving. This year's 3,200-mile tour will kick off November 29 at Jack
Murphy Stadium in San Diego, CA, and end December 10 near Washington, D.C.
The focus of the highway-safety tour this year will be the role the trucking industry can
play to reduce the number of alcohol-related crashes, which often tragically result in senseless
death and injury. MADD and ITCC are asking truck drivers and motorists to take a proactive role
by reporting suspected drunk drivers on CB Channel 9 or cellular phones.
To promote this year's anti-drunk driving message even more, National Basketball
Association (NBA) All-Pro Karl Malone of the Utah Jazz will be featured on a poster sponsored
by Eaton Corporation, Kalamazoo, MI, that will be distributed by ITCC to high school students
nationwide. In addition to his basketball career, Malone also owns a trucking company, Malone
Enterprises, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT.
-- more --
Interstate Truckload Carriers Conference
2200 Mill Road
Alexandria, Va. 22314
(703) 838-1950
-2-
A major highlight of the tractor-trailer tour will be cross-country press conferences
conducted by MADD Immediate Past Chairman Jim Morris, who will travel by ITCC company
trucks, and ITCC Executive Director J. Terry Turner. ITCC President John M. Smith, president,
CRST International, Inc., Cedar Rapids, IA, will speak at the press conferences in Richmond and
Washington D.C.. These press conferences, which will promote highway safety, will be
conducted in 11 cities from November 29-December 10, 1993. The following press route, with
supporting companies and chief executive officers, are listed below:
Date
Location
Press Conference
Monday, November 29
Jack Murphy Stadium
10:00 a.m.
San Diego, CA
Tuesday, November 30
The Debbie Reynolds
10:00 a.m.
Hotel
Las Vegas, NV
Wednesday, December 1
Thunderbird High School
10:00 a.m.
Phoenix, AZ
Thursday, December 2
High School To Be
10:00 a.m.
Determined
El Paso, TX
Friday, December 3
Palo Duro High School
10:00 a.m.
Amarillo, TX
Monday, December 6
Del City High School
10:00 a.m.
Oklahoma City, OK
Tuesday, December 7
North Little Rock H.S.
10:00 a.m.
Little Rock, AR
Wednesday, December 8
High School To Be
10:00 a.m.
Determined
Nashville, TN
-more-
-3-
Thursday, December 9
NC State Fair Grounds
10:00 a.m.
Raleigh, NC
Friday, December 10
Hermitage High School
9:30 a.m.
Richmond, VA
Friday, December 10
Madison High School
1:30 p.m.
Near Washington D.C.
The following ITCC member companies and their respective chief executive officers will
be speaking at the press conferences and providing the transportation and support for the safety
awareness tour:
Freymiller Trucking, Bakersfield, CA, Don Freymiller, chairman
C.H. Dredge & Co., Inc., Layton, UT, Douglas Dredge, president
Swift Transportation, Phoenix, AZ, Jerry Moyes, president
Alan Ritchey, Inc., Valley View, TX, Don Hudspeth, president
Refrigerated Transport of Texas, Inc., Dallas, TX, K.L. Breeden, president
John Christner Trucking, Inc., Sapula, OK, John Christner,president
Best Way Express, Vincennes, IN, Mac McCormick, president
Umthum Trucking Co., Eagle Grove, IA, Virgil Umthun, president
QST Express, Inc., Newberry, SC, John Halverson, president
CRST, Inc., Cedar Rapids, IA, John Smith, president
"We are taking to the highways again this year in this exciting nationwide effort to spread
the word about the dangers of drinking and driving and the positive role trucking plays in
promoting highway safety," said ITCC President Smith. "Our friends at MADD have a great
message and we support it completely."
Through the generosity of the ITCC Auxiliary, several celebrities are scheduled to speak
at various press conferences, including movie star Debbie Reynolds, Washington Redskin Darrell
Green and Stump Mitchell, formerly of the Phoenix Cardinals.
-- more --
-4-
The Auxiliary is also donating $1,000 to each high school where the press events are held.
The funds will go toward sponsorship of a non-alcohol prom or graduation event.
Another new addition to this year's tour will be a tractor-trailer that will be decorated
with a special message: "Drunk Driving Destroys Dreams--Drive Smart, Drive Sober."
John Ferguson, president, Unique Way, Sonora, KY, will be driving the tractor-trailer.
Ferguson is known for his efforts to educate the public about trucking. The tractor for the tour
has been furnished by Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation, Greensboro, NC. The trailer has
been donated by Great Dane Trailers, Inc., Savannah, GA. Tires for trailer are being supplied
by Michelin Tire Corp., Greenville, SC. The graphics for the trailer will be provided by 3-M
Graphics, Hinsdale, IL. Hotel accommodations are being provided by
Marriott Hotels & Resorts, Bethesda, MD.
In addition, the majority of the diesel fuel will be provided by AMBEST, Inc., Franklin,
TN, and a portion of fuel is being supplied by Pilot Oil Corp., Knoxville, TN. Rand McNally -
TDM, Skokie, IL, has provided the travel route across the United States. Telecommunications
for the nationwide event are being donated by Motorola Communications & Electronics,
Dallas, TX. ITCC is the only national trade association solely representing the common and
contract truckload segment of the motor carrier industry. The Conference represents
approximately 600 dry van, refrigerated, flatbed, and dump-trailer truckload carriers domiciled
in the 48 states and serving those states and the state of Alaska, Mexico, and the Canadian
provinces. The Conference's members operate more than 140,000 tractors and 280,000 trailers,
and have combined annual revenues exceeding $14 billion. The Conference is affiliated with the
American Trucking Associations.
--30--
John Ferguson
America's
Truck Drivin' Storyteller
November 7, 1993
Ann Bartley
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania NW
Washington DC 20500
Dear Ms. Bartley,
I attended the Health Care Rally at the White House on
September 23, 1993. On the return flight I had an
opportunity to speak with Linda Tarr-Whelan of the Center for
Policy Alternatives. I shared with her my desire to contact
the First Lady about this Highway Safety Awareness Tour. She
suggested that I contact you and request that you forward the
information to Mrs. Clinton.
I appreciate your time and effort.
John Sincerely, Ferguson
John C. Ferguson
P.O. Box 171, Sonora, Kentucky 42776
John Ferguson
America's
Truck Drivin' Storyteller
November 7, 1993
Office of the First Lady
1600 Pennsylvania NW
Washington DC
First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton
Dear Mrs. Clinton,
I was one of the small business truckers invited to the
Health Care Rally on September 23, 1993. It was good to
speak with you. I wanted to mention the upcoming Highway
Safety Awareness Tour, but felt the time was inappropriate.
However, in line with the President's concern about
personal responsibility as it relates to the burden of health
care, sober driving can have an immediate impact. The theme
of our tour is:
DRUNK DRIVING DESTORYS DREAMS.
DRIVE SMART. DRIVE SOBER.
This endeavor is jointly sponsored by MADD (Mothers
Against Drunk Driving) and the ITCC (Interstate Truckload
Carriers Conference). I will lead this year's tour from San
Diego to Washington DC. There will be press conferences in
eleven major cities along the route.
I would appreciate the support of the White House--
anything from a declaration to an appearance at one of our
media conferences or riding along for a few miles. It would
be an excellent opportunity to promote highway safety,
personal choice responsibility and the Health Care Plan.
You may contact me at 502-369-7350 or Bill Weger (ITCC)
at 703-838-1950.
Sincerely,
John Ferguson
John C. Ferguson
P.O. Box 171, Sonora, Kentucky 42776
DEC-16-93 THU 10:51
CRAVER. MATHEWS, SMITH
FAX NO. 7032370622
P.01
Craver, Mathews, Smith & Company, Inc.
300 North Washington Street
Falls Church
Virginia 22046
Telephone: (703) 237-0600
Fax Machine: (703) 237-0622
file
Violance
FAX
folder
Date:
Fax number:
To:
Ann Bartley
Organization:
From:
Jaches Blumenthal
Total number of pages including this cover sheet:
2
Notes / Comments:
The Information contained in this facsimile message is intended only for the use of the individuals to whom it is addrossed
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is prohibited by law. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
telephone at (703) 237-0600. Thank you.
DEC-16-93 THU 10:52
CRAVER. MATHEWS. SMITH
FAX NO. 7032370622
P.02
CRAVER, MATHEWS, SMITH & COMPANY, INC.
300 North Washington Street Suite 200 Falls Church, Virginia 22046 703/237-0600
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ann Bartley
FROM: Jackie Blumenthal
DATE: December 16, 1993
SUBJECT: Post-Brady Gun Control Memo
The memo Sidney told you about was a client-specific project I did
for Handgun Control to show them how to portray the full range of
their activities as a comprehensive approach to qun violence and to
encourage them to release the Brady Plan for Public Safety.
Alhtough they did neither of these things in their recent press
release, I don't think you'd find much of use to you in the 15-page
document T prepared.
As you probably know, Handgun Control and the Center to Prevent
Handgun Violence together comprise a remarkable strategic approach
to the gun violence problem. I don't think theylenough with it,
however, either in terms of marketing or advocacy. There's a real
vacuum out there for solutions -- or even attempts at solutions --
that go beyond enacting new laws that need to be implemented and
enforced before they work to control guns.
I have no idea where you all are in your thinking about what
approach you want to take to the violence issue. But, for what
it's worth, here's -- briefly -- what I think you should do:
travel around the country putting the spotlight on specific
community strategies that have been developed to deal with specific
local crime/violence problems. Pick entrepreneurial approaches
that are replicatable and that demonstrate how people can conquer
fear by taking control over their own lives.
Because, in the end, there's never going to be enough money to
really deal with crime and every government approach will be
criticized for not being enough. But if you can encourage
have
community interaction and involvement and rebuild the ethic of
you
people helping each other, whatever other strategies, (cops on the
beat, jobs for toonagers), no matter how limited will be reinforced
by building stronger communities. I'm sure this would be a great
political approach to tackling the crime problem from a different
angle than the White House.
ann- I had to rush off. I'd be glad to put flesh on
this idea is you're interested. Jadia
Recycled Paper
MAUREEN GAFFNEY
186 SACHEMS HEAD ROAD
GUILFORD CT 06437
203/453-0732
451 WEST BROADWAY
NEW YORK CITY NY 10012
212/777-0115
Guilford, Connecticut
November 15, 1993
Ms. Anne Bartley
OFFICE OF THE FIRST LADY
Old Executive Building
Washington DC 20501
Dear Anne,
I was sorry to miss the White House arts ceremony last
month; Sam and our friend Maria had a wonderful time. Un-
fortunately, the ceremony conflicted with my class schedule.
In the past week or so, however, motivated by a sense
that it may be timely, I took off from school work to
prepare an Op-Ed submission to the New York Times. And I am
enclosing a copy of my paper because both Colin Greer and
Sam suggested I send it to you in the hopes that you might
encourage the First Lady to read it. I think this is a
major health issue: TV not only impairs our physical health
(through violence, poor diet, etc.) it is also detrimental
to good mental and ethical health.
Many thanks for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Traveea
Maureen Gaffney (Wrener)
FAX# 203/ 458-2224
MAUREEN GAFFNEY
186 SACHEMS HEAD ROAD
GUILFORD CT 06437
203/453-0732
451 WEST BROADWAY
NEW YORK CITY NY 10012
212/777-0115
FAMILIES ARE VICTIMS IN CORPORATE ABUSE OF TV
In a Senate hearing last month, Attorney General Reno warned
producers that if they don't reduce the level of violence on TV,
the government might intervene. While simultaneously condemning
the violence and crying out against censorship, most commentators
proposed a simplistic course of action: if they don't like what's
on TV, viewers should turn off their sets.
This response frames the problem of TV violence as a per-
sonal issue, a matter of taste. But it is actually a public
issue and turning off the set would be about as effective as in-
fluencing politics by not voting. To "just say no but keep the
status quo" places us at the mercy of the interlocking broadcast-
ing and advertising industries, a system which in quest of prof-
its has shown a flagrant disregard for the public good.
Commercial television is, under law, a regulated industry.
As such, it does not enjoy unrestricted freedom of speech and the
government has an obligation to monitor and control its perfor-
mance to insure that broadcasters act "in the public interest."
But President Reagan's deregulation efforts and the absence of
normal market controls have made broadcast TV virtually autono-
mous. Thus TV violence raises the issue of regulation, not
censorship.
While TV programs come into almost every home in America,
consumers have no real say about them. An illusion of choice is
carefully orchestrated by ratings companies and market research-
ers employed by the industry. Networks exist, as George Will of
ABC News concedes, "to assemble audiences to sell things to."
Programs are just packaging for advertisements and TV violence
is a marketing scheme gone berserk.
There is a growing perception that the desensitizing effects
of physical violence on TV are a public health menace. But ver-
bal aggressiveness and ridicule (which dominates many sit-coms)
also foster violence. And what is healthy about TV's rampant
sensationalism, its increasing prurience, or even its underlying
materialist ethos (which supplants former concepts of self-worth
with the notion of "buying power")?
Most troubling is TV's detrimental effect on children and
families. The dissolution of the American family is frequently
cited as a factor in the rise of violence, and our way of sup-
porting family values is to give commercial television virtually
unrestricted access into people's lives. Yet in its devotion to
a standard of maximum profit, TV subverts both the values and the
authority of many parents in their own homes.
Because the situation is worsening, and because piecemeal
solutions won't work, the time has come for a systemic change.
To this end I propose five actions which, together, will give
people more control over this troublesome medium.
First, revitalize the Federal Communications Commission so
that industry regulation becomes substantive.
Second, re-envision and reform TV's role in our lives. We
must examine how we allowed TV to undermine and exploit our very
culture. And we should abandon the illusion that network pro-
grams come to us for free: TV ads not only inflate the cost of
advertized products, we are beginning to understand that junk
food ads and violent programs exact a heavy social price.
Third, educate the public about the uses and abuses of tele-
vision. We need to implement media studies units in our schools,
beginning at the primary level because that is when children are
most vulnerable to TV. And we need an ongoing consumer awareness
campaign on television to educate adults about the value of
restricting their own TV intake.
Fourth, give individuals tangible control over television.
As one of their rights in this technological age, citizens should
be able to block certain programs or entire channels from invad-
ing their privacy. Parents ought to be able to limit their chil-
dren's access to programs they deem unsuitable, as they do with
inappropriate periodicals, by prohibiting them from their homes.
Thus, we need legislation requiring that all future TV sets sold
in this country include a user-controlled blocking device
(similar to a VCR programmer).
Fifth, establish clear industry guidelines to regulate shows
before they air. In order to "sell an audience" to advertisers,
broadcasters prefer uncritical, even addicted viewers, so there
is a notable shortage of detailed, pre-broadcast information from
producers and/or reviewers about a given program's content. This
lack of disclosure means that consumers can seldom make informed
choices about what to watch. As it does under comparable circum-
stances with the food and drug industries, the government must
use preventive measures to protect consumers.
There is much at stake. If we fail to guard the rights of
people over corporations, WE will undermine the Constitutional
guarantees of individuals. And if we allow the media and the
government to establish a religion of the marketplace by default,
we will have sold our children's birthright for a bar of soap.
Should that happen -- perhaps it already has -- violence will be
just the most obvious of our worries.
Maureen Gaffney
Founder and former Director
MEDIA CENTER FOR CHILDREN
Guilford, Connecticut
November 1993
MAUREEN GAFFNEY
186 SACHEMS HEAD ROAD
GUILFORD CT 06437
203/453-0732
451 WEST BROADWAY
NEW YORK CITY NY 10012
212/777-0115
FAMILIES ARE VICTIMS IN CORPORATE ABUSE OF TV
In a Senate hearing last month, Attorney General Reno warned
producers that if they don't reduce the level of violence on TV,
the government might intervene. While simultaneously condemning
the violence and crying out against censorship, most commentators
proposed a simplistic course of action: if they don't like what's
on TV, viewers should turn off their sets.
This response frames the problem of TV violence as a per-
sonal issue, a matter of taste. But it is actually a public
issue and turning off the set would be about as effective as in-
fluencing politics by not voting. To "just say no but keep the
status quo" places us at the mercy of the interlocking broadcast-
ing and advertising industries, a system which in quest of prof-
its has shown a flagrant disregard for the public good.
Commercial television is, under law, a regulated industry.
As such, it does not enjoy unrestricted freedom of speech and the
government has an obligation to monitor and control its perfor-
mance to insure that broadcasters act "in the public interest."
But President Reagan's deregulation efforts and the absence of
normal market controls have made broadcast TV virtually autono-
mous. Thus TV violence raises the issue of regulation, not
censorship.
While TV programs come into almost every home in America,
consumers have no real say about them. An illusion of choice is
carefully orchestrated by ratings companies and market research-
ers employed by the industry. Networks exist, as George Will of
ABC News concedes, "to assemble audiences to sell things to."
Programs are just packaging for advertisements and TV violence
is a marketing scheme gone berserk.
There is a growing perception that the desensitizing effects
of physical violence on TV are a public health menace. But ver-
bal aggressiveness and ridicule (which dominates many sit-coms)
also foster violence. And what is healthy about TV's rampant
sensationalism, its increasing prurience, or even its underlying
materialist ethos (which supplants former concepts of self-worth
with the notion of "buying power")?
Most troubling is TV's detrimental effect on children and
families. The dissolution of the American family is frequently
cited as a factor in the rise of violence, and our way of sup-
porting family values is to give commercial television virtually
unrestricted access into people's lives. Yet in its devotion to
a standard of maximum profit, TV subverts both the values and the
authority of many parents in their own homes.
Because the situation is worsening, and because piecemeal
solutions won't work, the time has come for a systemic change.
To this end I propose five actions which, together, will give
people more control over this troublesome medium.
First, revitalize the Federal Communications Commission so
that industry regulation becomes substantive.
Second, re-envision and reform TV's role in our lives. We
must examine how we allowed TV to undermine and exploit our very
culture. And we should abandon the illusion that network pro-
grams come to us for free: TV ads not only inflate the cost of
advertized products, we are beginning to understand that junk
food ads and violent programs exact a heavy social price.
Third, educate the public about the uses and abuses of tele-
vision. We need to implement media studies units in our schools,
beginning at the primary level because that is when children are
most vulnerable to TV. And we need an ongoing consumer awareness
campaign on television to educate adults about the value of
restricting their own TV intake.
Fourth, give individuals tangible control over television.
As one of their rights in this technological age, citizens should
be able to block certain programs or entire channels from invad-
ing their privacy. Parents ought to be able to limit their chil-
dren's access to programs they deem unsuitable, as they do with
inappropriate periodicals, by prohibiting them from their homes.
Thus, we need legislation requiring that all future TV sets sold
in this country include a user-controlled blocking device
(similar to a VCR programmer).
Fifth, establish clear industry guidelines to regulate shows
before they air. In order to "sell an audience" to advertisers,
broadcasters prefer uncritical, even addicted viewers, so there
is a notable shortage of detailed, pre-broadcast information from
producers and/or reviewers about a given program's content. This
lack of disclosure means that consumers can seldom make informed
choices about what to watch. As it does under comparable circum-
stances with the food and drug industries, the government must
use preventive measures to protect consumers.
There is much at stake. If we fail to guard the rights of
people over corporations, we will undermine the Constitutional
guarantees of individuals. And if we allow the media and the
government to establish a religion of the marketplace by default,
we will have sold our children's birthright for a bar of soap.
Should that happen perhaps it already has -- violence will be
just the most obvious of our worries.
Maureen Gaffney
Founder and former Director
MEDIA CENTER FOR CHILDREN
Guilford, Connecticut
November 1993
MAUREEN GAFFNEY
186 SACHEMS HEAD ROAD
GUILFORD CT 06437
203/453-0732
451 WEST BROADWAY
NEW YORK CITY NY 10012
212/777-0115
FAMILIES ARE VICTIMS IN CORPORATE ABUSE OF TV
In a Senate hearing last month, Attorney General Reno warned
producers that if they don't reduce the level of violence on TV,
the government might intervene. While simultaneously condemning
the violence and crying out against censorship, most commentators
proposed a simplistic course of action: if they don't like what's
on TV, viewers should turn off their sets.
This response frames the problem of TV violence as a per-
sonal issue, a matter of taste. But it is actually a public
issue and turning off the set would be about as effective as in-
fluencing politics by not voting. To "just say no but keep the
status quo" places us at the mercy of the interlocking broadcast-
ing and advertising industries, a system which in quest of prof-
its has shown a flagrant disregard for the public good.
Commercial television is, under law, a regulated industry.
As such, it does not enjoy unrestricted freedom of speech and the
government has an obligation to monitor and control its perfor-
mance to insure that broadcasters act "in the public interest."
But President Reagan's deregulation efforts and the absence of
normal market controls have made broadcast TV virtually autono-
mous. Thus TV violence raises the issue of regulation, not
censorship.
While TV programs come into almost every home in America,
consumers have no real say about them. An illusion of choice is
carefully orchestrated by ratings companies and market research-
ers employed by the industry. Networks exist, as George Will of
ABC News concedes, "to assemble audiences to sell things to."
Programs are just packaging for advertisements and TV violence
is a marketing scheme gone berserk.
There is a growing perception that the desensitizing effects
of physical violence on TV are a public health menace. But ver-
bal aggressiveness and ridicule (which dominates many sit-coms)
also foster violence. And what is healthy about TV's rampant
sensationalism, its increasing prurience, or even its underlying
materialist ethos (which supplants former concepts of self-worth
with the notion of "buying power")?
Most troubling is TV's detrimental effect on children and
families. The dissolution of the American family is frequently
cited as a factor in the rise of violence, and our way of sup-
porting family values is to give commercial television virtually
unrestricted access into people's lives. Yet in its devotion to
a standard of maximum profit, TV subverts both the values and the
authority of many parents in their own homes.
Because the situation is worsening, and because piecemeal
solutions won't work, the time has come for a systemic change.
To this end I propose five actions which, together, will give
people more control over this troublesome medium.
First, revitalize the Federal Communications Commission so
that industry regulation becomes substantive.
Second, re-envision and reform TV's role in our lives. We
must examine how we allowed TV to undermine and exploit our very
culture. And we should abandon the illusion that network pro-
grams come to us for free: TV ads not only inflate the cost of
advertized products, we are beginning to understand that junk
food ads and violent programs exact a heavy social price.
Third, educate the public about the uses and abuses of tele-
vision. We need to implement media studies units in our schools,
beginning at the primary level because that is when children are
most vulnerable to TV. And we need an ongoing consumer awareness
campaign on television to educate adults about the value of
restricting their own TV intake.
Fourth, give individuals tangible control over television.
As one of their rights in this technological age, citizens should
be able to block certain programs or entire channels from invad-
ing their privacy. Parents ought to be able to limit their chil-
dren's access to programs they deem unsuitable, as they do with
inappropriate periodicals, by prohibiting them from their homes.
Thus, we need legislation requiring that all future TV sets sold
in this country include a user-controlled blocking device
(similar to a VCR programmer).
Fifth, establish clear industry guidelines to regulate shows
before they air. In order to "sell an audience" to advertisers,
broadcasters prefer uncritical, even addicted viewers, so there
is a notable shortage of detailed, pre-broadcast information from
producers and/or reviewers about a given program's content. This
lack of disclosure means that consumers can seldom make informed
choices about what to watch. As it does under comparable circum-
stances with the food and drug industries, the government must
use preventive measures to protect consumers.
There is much at stake. If we fail to guard the rights of
people over corporations, we will undermine the Constitutional
guarantees of individuals. And if we allow the media and the
government to establish a religion of the marketplace by default,
we will have sold our children's birthright for a bar of soap.
Should that happen perhaps it already has -- violence will be
just the most obvious of our worries.
Maureen Gaffney
Founder and former Director
MEDIA CENTER FOR CHILDREN
Guilford, Connecticut
November 1993
Remothsing
N.C. on visona
t Crime
-
#
get capy 173
[or fri
2 weels 2 weehings ]
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Chapel Hill, North Carolina)
For Immediate Release
October 12, 1993
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
8:24 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you.
Thank you very much, President Spangler, President Friday,
Chancellor Hardin, my good friend, Governor Hunt, and other
distinguished platform guests, ladies and gentlemen.
I must say I have thought for a long time about what
it might feel to be in a vast crowd of North Carolinians and have
them do something besides root against one of my athletic teams
from Arkansas. (Laughter.)
I began to think of this moment in August when I was
on vacation, and I spent an evening with a person who used to be
one of your great sons, James Taylor. (Applause.) And 1 asked
his to sing Carolina in My Mind, so that I could begin to think
about what this day might mean to all of us.
Five other presidents have come to this great
university to speak. None has every had the opportunity to speak
to a crowd like this, on this occasion of your 200th birthday as
a university.
I'd like to begin by thanking the students whom I
have met, and especially those who gave me this beautiful leather
bound book of essays -- three of them -- about the theme for this
bicentennial celebration that the students chose -- community.
For it 1s in many ways what ought to be America's theme today,
how we can be more together than we are apart.
This university has produced enough excellence to
fill a library or lead a nation. And novelists like Thomas Wolfe
and Walker Percy. In great defenders of the Constitution like
Senator Sam Ervin and Julius Chambers, now one of your
Chancellcrs. And Katherine Everett, a pioneer among women
lawyers. And Francis Collins, a scientist who discovered the
gene for cystic fibrosis. And journalists like Charles Kuralt
and Tom Wicker and Deborah Potter and my Pulitzer Prize-winning
friend, Taylor Branch. And leading business men and women like
the head of the Small Business Administration in our
administration, Erskine Bowles, who's here with me tonight and
who, T dare say, is the ablest person ever to hold his position
-- probably because of the education he got here at the
University of North Carolina. (Applause.) These are just a few
of the many thousands of lives who have beer brightened by what
Mr. Kuralt 80 warmly referred to as the light and liberty this
great university offers.
There are few certainties in this life, but I've
also learned that when March madness rolls around, I'll be hoping
my Razorbacks are there, but I know that Dean Smith's Tar Heels
will always be there. (Applause.)
As one who grew up in the 30uth, I have long admired
this university for understanding that our best traditions call
on us to offer that light and liberty to all. Chapel Hill has
always been filled with a progressive spirit. Long before
history caught up with him, as Mr. Kuralt Just said. your
MORE
2 "
legendary president, Frank Porter Graham, spoke this simple bt.t
powerful truth: "In the South, two great races have
fundamentally a common destiny in building a nobler civilization,
and if we go up, we go up together. What a better life we might
have had if more had listened to that at a single time.
(Applause.)
Your great state has also understood that educ tion
goes hand-in-hand with the expansion of democracy and the
advancement of our own economy. Under the leadership of men like
Luther Hodges and Terry Sanford and Bill Friday, this university
joined with your other state's great universities, the tate
government and the corporate community to begin buildin an
advanced research center to attract new businesses and jobs. Now
the Research Triangle has more than 60 companies, more than
34,000 employees, it is the envy of the entire nation of what we
can do if we strive to make change our friend.
Tonight we celebrate the day this university began
-- the laying of a cornerstone that marks a milestone in the
entire American journey, because on this day, near this place,
200 years ago, the cornerstone was laid for the first building in
the first university in a nation that had only recently been
born.
It was, to be sure, a time of hopeful and historic
change, when the future was clear to those who had the vision to
see it and the courage to seize it. It was a time of horos such
as William R. Davie, a fighter in the Revolution, a frai er of the
Constitution, a Princeton graduate who wanted a state university
here to make education accessible to more than a privil. ged few.
On October 12th in 1793, when General Davi laid the
foundation for this university, he laid a foundation for two
centuries of progress in American education.
Historians tell us now that there was then a Joyous
ceremony -- that "the maple leaves flamed red in the eager air."
Great joy there was, but remember now, it was in the face of
great uncertainty. The ruins of the Revolutionary war had yet to
heal. The debts had yet to be repaid. And a new democracy
seemed still untested and unstable. Yet, in spite of all these
problems, the Americans of that time had the courage to build
what had never before existed - a great new republic and a
public university.
In spite of the obstacles, they decided to bet on
the future, not cling to the past. That is the test for us
today, my fellow Americans. Alexis de Tocqueville carried this
uniquely American optimism, this faith in education, this
commitment to change when he wrote in his wondrous Democracy in
America: "The Americans have all a lively faith in the
perfectibility of man, they judge that the diffusion of knowledge
must necessarily be advantageous, and the consequences of
ignorance fatal; they all consider society as a body 11 a state
of improvement, humanity as a changing scene, in which nothing is
or ought to be permanent; and they admit that what appears to
them today to be good, may be superseded by something better
tomorrow.'
For two centuries now, we've held fast to that faith
in the future. For two centuries we've kept the courage to
change. And for two centuries we've believed with Frank Porter
Graham, that we must go up together. Our founders pledged their
lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor to a common cause. we
fought a vast and bloody civil war to preserve that common cause.
Every battle to expand civil rights has been to deepen and
strengthen that common cause -- our ability to go up together.
NOW, after 200 years, and after 200 years of this
university, we find ourselves a people of more than 150 different
racial and ethnic groups confronting a challenge in this new era
MORE
'
which tests our belief in the future, tests our courage to
change, and tests our commitment to community -- to going up
together.
Tonight we can best honor this great university's
historic builders and believers, a dozen generations after our
nation and this university began by meeting those tests.
The Cold War is over. The threat of nuclear
annihilation is receding. Democracy and free markets are on the
march. Mandela and de Klerk, Rabin and Arafat have given people
hope that peace can come out of any conflict. (Applause.)
A global economy is taking shape in which
information and investment move across national borders at
stunning speed. And competition for jobs and incomes is intense.
Expanding trade is critical to every nation's growth, and our
greatest asset is no longer natural resources or material
structures -- it is the strength, the skills, the mind and the
spirit of our people.
This is a world America has done a very great deal
to make. Through two world wars, the Civil War, the Cold War,
the establishment of global economic and trading missions,
through the attempts to build a United Nations and other
instruments of peace and harmony, of progress and democracy. It
is full of hope. But as we all know, it is not without its
heartbreak.
There is less danger of a nuclear war between two
nations, but more danger of the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction in the hands of people irresponsibly prepared to use
them. The oppression of Communist control has disappeared, but
that disappearance has opened ugly ethnic and religious
divisions. The United Nations can do more good than ever before,
but clearly there are limits to what outside forces can do t.o
solve severe internal problems in some nations. We cannot
withdrawal from this world we have done so much to make, and we
must face its difficulties and challenges. Through great trials
we have stood with President Yeltsin for democracy, peace and
economic reform in Russia. In so doing we have helped the
Russians, but we've made ourselves safer and better, too.
(Applause.)
We have sponsored and supported the peace process in
the Middle East, for which you just clapped. And so doing, of
course we have contributed to a better life for the Arabs and the
Jews, but we have enhanced our own security as well.
We have helped to save nearly one million Somalis
from death, starvation, anarchy, and strengthened our argument
that the world's poor and deprived need not turn to terrorism and
violence for regress. In so doing we have advanced our
interests, but some of our finest young soldiers have perished.
Tonight before going on, I want to express here in
North Carolina, my profound gratitude and deep personal sympathy
to the families of the six servicemen from Fort Braga who were
killed in Somalia: Sergeant Daniel Busch, First Class Earl
Fillmore, Master Sergeant Gary Gordon, Master Sergeant Timothy
Martin, Sergeant First Class Matthew Rierson and Sergeant First
Class Randall schugan (phonetic). May God bless their souls and
their families, and may we all thank them. (Applause.)
Our nation is grateful to them, so are most of the
people of somalia. I have ordered strong new steps to protect
our troops, to ensure the return of our missing or captive
Americans, to complete our mission in that nation in no more than
six months, to finish that job quickly, but to finish that job
right. (Applause.)
MORE
- 4 -
Just as we know we cannot withdraw from the world,
we know here at this great university, that we cannot lead the
world unless we are first strong at home. After all, in the
beginning it was our values, our ideals, our strength, our
willingness to work, to make the most of what was here on this
continent that made us the envy of the world.
And here at home, this new economy of ours offers
much hope and opportunity, yet every positive development seems
to bring with it some jarring dislocation. The global economy
not only rewards the educated, it punishes the those without
education.
Between 1972 and 1992, while the work year got
longer for most Americans, our wages stagnated. The 75 percent
our people who don't have college degrees felt it profoundly.
Those who began, but didn't finish college, saw their wages fall
by 9 percent just since 1979. For those who didn't go on to
college, wages fell 17 percent. For those who left high school,
wages dropped 20 percent. We got a lot of new jobs out of
international trade, but we know we also lose some every year to
competition from countries with lower wages or higher quality, or
sometimes unfair practices.
We know that our health care is the finest in the
world, but millions of us are just a pink slip away from losing
their savings. health insurance, or one illness away from losing a life
Most of our people are law-abiding citizens who love
their families more than their own lives. But America leads the
world in violent crime, has the highest percentage of its people
behind bars, has 90,000 murders in the last four years and more
and more of our children are born into and grow up in family
situations so difficult that it is hard even to make the
lives. arguments that the rest of us have taken for granted all of our
More and more of our children are growing up in a
world in which the future is not what happens when they graduate
from the University of North Carolina, but what happens 15
minutes from now. We cannot long survive in a nation with young
people for whom the people has no allure and on whom the future
has no claim. All of us who come here in gratitude to this great
university, and others like it, are here because we believe in
tomorrow. And that must be our urgent task to restore that
tomorrow for our young people. (Applause.)
What is the point of all this for today' It is
simply this. We are living in a time of professed change. No one
can fully see the shape of the change, or imagine with great
precision the enc. of it. But we know a lot about what works and
what doesn't. And we know that if we do not embrace this change
and make it our friend, if we do not follow what de Tocqueville
said we were about 150 years ago, if we do not follow the
traditions on which this university was founded, then change will
become our enemy. And yet all around our great country today I
see from people resisting change. I see them turning inward and away
change. And I ask myself why.
At a time when we know it's a matter of fact that
every rich country in the world gains many new jobs through
expanding trade, I see people saying, "Well even though my
industry will get more jobs, we shouldn't have a new trade
arrangement with Canada and Mexico which could one day engulf all
of Latin America." And when I listen -- when I listen to the
hear the grievances of the 1980s. The grievances of times when
arguments, I hear instead of arguments against this agreement, I
workers were fired without thought, when investments were not
made, when people were abused. Instead of a reasoning argument
yesterday. about what will build America tomorrow, I hear a longing for
MORE
- 5
But I tell you my friends, as certainly as it was
true 200 years ago today, yesterday is yesterday. If we try to
recapture it, we will only lose tomorrow. (Applause.)
But I think we can say we khow some things about why
we are resisting these changes, and what we might do to make
ourselves more like the founders of this great university, more
like the founders of our great nation, more like most of the
students here on any given day at this university. When do
people most resist change? When they are most insecure. Think
of any child you ever raised. Think of any personal experier ce
you ever had. Why is it that great universities provide
wonderful libraries and beautiful lawns and space and time tc
study and to learn and to grow? so people can feel personally at
peace and secure. It is that which enables us to learn and to
grow and to change. And I say to you tonight, my fellow
Americans, the mission of this university, the mission of eve y
university, must be to be in the vanguard of helping the American
people to recover enough personal security to be able to lead the
changes that we are so urgently called on to make. (Applause.)
What does that mean? What does that mean? would
argue among all things, it means at least three: First, e must
make Americans more secure in their families and at work. In a
world transformed by trade and technology it is no longer
ossible for a young person to go to work and keep a job until
retirement, or even often to stay with the same company. The
economy is creating and losing mi lions of jobs constantly. Most
people now who are laid off from heir jobs never get the same
old job back. Young people begin ing their careers, on average,
will change work seven times in 8 lifetime. The best jobs those
young people here in the audience may ever have may be jobs yet
to be created in companies yet to be founded based on
technologies yet to be discovered.
Economic security, therefore, can no longer be and
in a particular job. It must be rooted in a continuing apac ty
to learn new things. That means we must have a system of lif
long learning beginning with higher standards in our scho ls.
Almost two decades ago, your Governor, Jim Hunt, began at
education reform program that included higher standards th se
schools. Those efforts inspired other governors around he
country, including the then Governor of South Caroli 1a, IOW ir
Education Secretary Dick Riley, and me. And I thank him for
that. (Applause.)
Now, we are trying to adopt a whole new approach in
our national effort to raise standards in education. We bel eve
the right standard for America isn't whether we are better tl an
we were, but whether we're the best in the world. This cannot be
a Democratic or a Republican concern -- it must be an American
imperative. We know we have to e pect more of our students and
our schools, we have to regulate heir details less, but hold
them to higher standards and measure whether our kids are really
learning enough to compete and win in the global economy.
Then we have to insure that every run person in
this country has the opportunity to get a colle education --
every last one who wants it. (Applause.) We have already this
year reorganized the student loan programs to lower interest
rates and ease the repayment terms and open the loors of college
education to thousands of young people by given them a hance to
be in the National Service Program, to rebuili their communities
from the grass roots up, and earn a part of 10512 college
education. (Applause.)
For the three-quarters of our yours people who to
not set four-year college degrees, we must merge the move of
learning and the world of work to offer young people 01:95:00m
training and on-the-job training. And for those who Jose their
jobs, the unemployment system is no longer good enough. We must
MORE
OCT-12-1993 22:07
CHAFEL HILL PRESS OFFICE
919 P.001
- 6 -
create a continuous reemployment system GO that people are always
learning -- even into their 50s and 60s and 70s, as long as they
are willing to be productive citizens and to keep going and
growing. (Applause.)
Another big part of job security that is often
missed is that most workers are now parents, or at least most
parents are now workers. And we can no longer force people to
chose between being a good parent and a good worker. (Applause.)
They must be able to be both. That is why people who work hard
for marginal wages should not be taxed into poverty, but lifted
out of it by the tax system, and it is what this government has
done. For the first time ever we can say now, if you work 40
hours a week and you have children in your home, you can be
lifted out of poverty.
And that is why we have said you ought not to lose
your job if you have a sick child or a sick parent. You ought to
be able to take a little time off without losing your job because
it is important to the fabric of America to stick up for the
American family. (Applause.)
A couple of Sundays ago when I came into the White
House from my early morning run, I saw a father, a mother and
three daughters there taking a tour on Sunday morning, an unusual
time. And I went over and said hello to them and learned that
the family was there with the Make a Wish Foundation, because one
of the daughters was desperately ill and she wanted to see the
President and see the White House. I talked to that family for a
while and then I came down and had my picture taken with them.
And as I was walking away the father said, "Mr. President, don't
you ever think it doesn't matter what goes on up here. If it
hadn't been for the family leave law coming in this year, I would
have had to chose between spending this time with my precious
daughter who may not make 1t, or working to support my family so
that the rest of us could go on. No parent should ever make that
choice, and I don't have to now."
That is what I mean by providing the American people
the personal security they need to proceed to change in this
world. (Applause.)
The second element after education and training of
our personal security must be health care. This is the only
advanced nation in which people can lose their health care, where
we don't have health care that is always there and that can never
be taken away. Even though we spend 40 percent more than any
place else in the world what does that mean? Lost productivity
in small businesses, people really insecure about changing jobs
because they've had someone in their family sick and they know if
they change jobs that pre-existing condition will keep them from
getting new health insurance. So people walk around like this,
millions of us all the time, 37.4 million Americans without any
health insurance, but many millions more knowing they could lose
it like that.
How can you be secure enough to change, to take on
new challenges, to start new businesses, to take new risks, if
you think that you may have to let your family go without basic
health care. My fellow Americans, it does not happen in any
other advanced nation, and it is time for us to say as a people
it will no longer happen here. No more. (Applause.)
And this last point I would make to you -- if we are
to be personally secure enough to make the changes and meet the
tests of this time, we must protect our people better against the
ravages of violence. Our people have the right to feel safe
where they live -- (applause) -- where they go to school and
where they work.
My fellow Americans, I was in California the other
night and I talked to people all across the state in a hooked up
town hall meeting. And this young African American boy, a junior
high school student, said, "Mr. President, my brother and I, we
OCT-12-1993 22:00
CHAPEL HILL PRESS OFFICE
919
3725
P.002
-
don't want to be in gangs, we don't want to have guns, we don't
want to cause any trouble. We want to learn, we want a future.
And we thought our school was too unsafe, so we decided to go to
another school and enroll in it because it was safer. And on the
day we showed up to register for school, my brother was standing
right in front of me and he was shot," because he got in a
crossfire of one of these mindless, arbitrary, endless shootings
that occur among children on our streets and in our schools
today. We have to stop this. We cannot let those children be
robbed of their future. (Applause.)
I know this state grieved recently when your native
son Michael Jordan's father was killed. And I know we all wish
him well as Michael embarks on a new journey in his life. But
let us not forget that 22 other men and women were killed in that
same county in your state this year. Ten foreign toursists were
killed in Florida this year, and the state grieved over it. But
in our nation's capital, in one week this summer, more than twice
that many people were killed. They were not famous, but they
were the President's neighbors.
It is heartbreaking. what can we do about it? We
can put more police on our street. Not to catch criminals just
alone, but also to prevent crime. It works. Thirty years ago
there were three police for every violent crime. Today there are
three crimes for every police officer. We have to give these
people the help they need. And when they work the same
neighborhoods and walk the same streets and talk to the same
kids, they help to prevent crime.
We also -- and I say this in North Carolina, coming
from a state where in my home state, half the people have a
hunting license or a fishing license or both and we have to shut
down factories and schools and towns on the opening day of deer
season because nobody shows up anyway. But we still ought to
pass the Brady bill so we don't sell guns to people with a
criminal or a mental health history. (Applause.)
And we should not allow in city after city after
city our police officers to go to work everyday knowing they will
walk the mean streets of our cities with people who are better
armed than they are. Because this is the only country in the
world where teenagers can have assault weapons designed only to
kill other people, and use them with abandon on the streets of
our cities. We can do better than that.
DO you know, my fellow Americans, that I learned
just last week that someone shot today with a bullet is three
times more likely to perish because they are likely to have three
times as many bullets in them as they did just 15 years ago. It
is time for us to stop talking about law and order and thinking
about how we can organize ourselves to protect our culture, to
protect our heritage, to keep our rights as sportsmen and women,
but to protect our kids lives and their future. The time has
come to face this problem. (Applause.)
what has all that got to do with this? Because this:
is what the founders did. They faced the problems of their time
and gave the rest of us a chance to live in the most successful
democracy ever known. The idea of the public university, born
here in North Carolina, played a major role in revolutionizing
opportunity for millions and millions and millions of Americans
who never even came into this state, but got that opportunity in
other states because of the example set here.
This is the challenge of our time and we must meet
it so that we can change. Economic security, health care
security, personal security none of us can be secure until we
are prepared to take personal responsibility for making these
changes, and of building a new sense of community, each in our
own way. Our jobs won't be responsible unless we are willing to
learn new skills for a lifetime; and until we all treat each
other like indispensable partners, not disposable parts.
OCT-12-1993 22:00
CHAPEL HILL PRESS OFFICE
919 3725 P.003
Our health care won't be secure even if we pass our
health care bill until All of us practice more preventive care.
Our families won't be secure wntil fathers and mothers begin to
realize that they have to put their children first. Our
communities won't be secure until people who disagree on
everything else stop shouting at each other long enough to
realize that we have to save the kids who are in trouble the same
way we lost them, one child at a time. And it imposes a
responsibility on each and every one of us. (Applause.)
But I tell you, my fellow Americans, I honestly
believe that as you start the third century of this University's
life we could be looking at the most exciting time America has
ever known, if we have the security and the courage to change.
We want to revitalize the American spirit of
enterpr: and adventure. We want to give our people new
confidence to dream those great dreams again, to take those great
risks, to achieve those great things.
The security I seek for America is like a rope for a
rock climber, to lift those who will take responsibility for
their own lives to greater and greater pinnacles. The security I
seek is not government doing more for people but Americans doing
more for ourselves and for our families, for our communities and
for our country. It is not the absence of risk, it is the
presence of opportunity. It is not a world without change but a
world in which change is our friend and not our enemy.
We honor today the men and women who had the courage
to create a new university in a new nation. We must, like them,
be builders and believers, the architects of a new security to
empower and embolden America and the University of North Carolina
on the eve of a new century.
The only difference between America two centuries
ago and America today is the difference between dawn and high
noon of a very beautiful day.
In the words of your great alumnus, Thomas Wolfe,
the true discovery of America is still before us. The true
fulfillment of our spirit of our people, of our mighty and
immortal land is yet to come. Let us believe in those words and
let us act on them, so that 200 years from now our children, 12
generations removed, will still celebrate this glorious day.
Thank you, and God speed. (Applause.)
END
8:58 P.M. EDT
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD
CONNECTICUT
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
December 3, 1993
Ms. Anne Bartley
Assistant to the Deputy Chief of Staff
Office of the First Lady
Old Executive Office Building
17th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, Ame D.C. 20500
Dear Ms Bartley:
I am writing to thank you for attending the dinner
discussion on youth violence at the Edelmans' house and your
subsequent help in seeing the Ounce of Prevention initiative
adopted in the Senate Crime Bill. The discussion helped everyone
realize how grave and complex the problem of youth violence is in
this country. Our dinner also demonstrated that we can do
something to save the youth of America from hopelessness.
Although we have a long and difficult road ahead, we have
made some important first steps. If adopted by the conferees,
the Ounce of Prevention program and council would allow
communities to develop broad-based programs for youth to curb the
growing tide of violence among our nation's young people.
Through your support and hard work, I was able to successfully
offer our Ounce of Prevention amendment to the Crime Bill. I
believe this amendment would fill a gap in the crime legislation
by helping prevent children from growing up to become criminals
in the first place. I would appreciate any assistance you might
be able to provide to ensure the adoption of this amendment by
the Senate and House conferees.
I applaud the leadership the Office of the First Lady has
shown in advocating prevention strategies to help children. The
Ounce of Prevention amendment would help send the message that
such an approach is an important and vital tool against youth
crime.
I wish you and your family a happy holiday season and I look
forward to continuing our work together in 1994.
Sincerely,
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD
United States Senator
STUDY 930018
A SURVEY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
ON GUNS AS A
CHILDREN'S HEALTH ISSUE
Prepared for
The Harvard School of Public Health
Under a Grant from
The Joyce Foundation
June 1993
Conducted by
LH Research, Inc.*
Study Director:
Louis Harris
Not Associated with Louis Harris and Associates, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
A WORD ABOUT THIS STUDY
i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
iv
ANALYSIS
1
A WORD ABOUT THIS STUDY
In many ways, this is a ground-breaking study in a field which has long been both
puzzling and perplexing to students of America public opinion and to those in politics who must
weigh public attitudes against the art of the possible. For close to two decades now, repeated
polling of the American people has yielded majorities of 3 to 1 or better in favor of strict regulation
of the ownership and use of guns. At the same time, the strength of the pro-gun lobby in
Washington has been so great as to prevent any and all efforts to regulate the possession of
guns.
For at least a decade now, close to half the households in the country have come
to own a gun - a handgun, a shot gun, a rifle, or an assault rifle. Ownership has become so
pervasive that the mere fact of possession has become a problem in-and-of itself. The presence
of guns, especially handguns in homes, has begun to be recognized as a danger to the families
who live in those homes.
Since 1983, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has refocused the
danger of guns as not just being a problem of criminal activity but one that relates to the family:
the presence of guns in the home and the growth of injuries and deaths due to gun-related
violence at home. Basically, the CDC looked at gun injuries as a public health problem. It turned
up such evidence as that "firearm attacks on family members and intimate acquaintances are at
least 12 times more likely to result in death than are assaults using other weapons."1
Shortly after the CDC focused on this issue, the American Academy of Pediatrics
began to examine the possession of guns in society as a children's health issue. It cited CDC
data that "the number of firearms-related deaths among children from 1 to 19 years of age rose
25% from 1985-1988." And, "In 1988, firearm death rates were comparable in number to the sum
1
"Violence Epidemiologist Test the Hazards of Gun Ownership" Science, 9 Oct. 1992 by Gary
Taubes
of all death rates from natural causes for white males aged 15 to 19, and two-and-a-half times
the death rate from natural causes for black males 15 to 19 years old."²
Dr. Katherine Kaufer Christoffel, in the July 1992 Pediatric Annals, wrote that "Just
as children share in the strengths and weaknesses of the families they live in, so do they share
in the strengths and weaknesses of the societies in which their families live. One of the
weaknesses of contemporary U.S. society is its preoccupation with violence in general, and
firearms in particular. For U.S. children, the consequence of this is a level of firearm mortality and
morbidity that is far higher than anywhere else in the world."3
As a result of this research the American Academy of Pediatrics adopted as "a
guiding goal -- the removal of handguns from private homes, to protect both the children who may
live in or visit those homes and the children's adults."⁴ From the Academy's point of view guns
became a central children's health issue.
The central purpose of this poll of a cross-section of 1250 adults nationwide is to
determine just how much the American people perceive guns to be a health hazard to children.
To get at this, it has been necessary to find out how oriented people are to children's problems
and issues generally, and, then, specifically, to the issue of guns and violence as they affect
young people. The study also tests a number of specific options, ranging from passage of the
Brady Bill to an outright ban on the sale of all handguns in the country.
Following this study, the Joyce Foundation has commissioned yet another study:
a survey of a cross-section of 2500 students in the sixth through twelfth grades. It will report on
2
"Pediatric Firearm Injuries: Time to Target a Growing Population" Pediatric Annals July 1992, by
Katherine Kaufer Christoffel
3
Op. Cit.
4
Op. Cit.
-ii-
the effect violence and guns have on the attitudes and behavior of young people about their home
and school life.
In the preparation of this report, the counsel of the following has been
indispensable to the execution of both studies: Deborah Leff, President of the Joyce Foundation,
Dr. Katherine Kaufer Christoffel of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and Dr. Jay Winsten of
the Harvard University School of Public Health.
Gratitude should also be extended to Westinghouse Broadcasting, which
commissioned a study of American attitudes toward children, which Mr. Harris conducted in his
former firm, Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., and some of whose questions have been updated
in this survey.
In the end, the study is the professional responsibility of Louis Harris.
-iii-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Impact of Society's Problems Upon Young People
The American people are deeply beset by what they feel is the sharply increasing
impact of violence in society upon the lives of children.
Sizable majorities of adults feel there has been an increase in seven major
problems facing children:
- 93% feel there has been an increase in "teenagers being killed by guns,"
compared to when they were growing up.
-- 92% see a rise in "children shooting other children."
-- 84% believe there has also been an increase in "drug and alcohol abuse" among
children.
-- 76% are disturbed by the increase in "suicide among young people."
-- 76% believe there has been an increase in the "sexual assault of children."
-- 74% see a rise in "injury or death among young people from drunk driving."
-- 56% believe there has been an increase in "physical abuse of children by their
parents."
Parents themselves hold basically the same view as the rest of the adult public
about young people having to face a rising tide of problems that involve violence to themselves.
The price paid by children, most believe, is that many of the supports that were
present in American society for the young are notably lacking:
-- Only 25% feel that "most children in America live in safe neighborhoods," down
from 36% who felt that way back in 1986.
-- Only 29% feel that "most children are safe from violence in the schools."
-- No more than 30% believe that "most children live in homes safe from violence."
-iv-
-- Only 39% feel that "most children are physically safe going to and from school."
Compared with 1986, when a 68-31% majority of adults felt that "children today are
better off compared to when they were growing up," now only 46% feel they are "better off," but
an equal 46% feel they are "worse off." Clearly, the American people are seriously worried about
the lot of young people today. Indeed, 84% feel that "problems affecting children have grown
worse," up 10 points in the past seven years. A root cause, in the judgment of 81%, is that "the
availability of guns and the increase in the number of guns that are bought and sold have
contributed to the violence." Fully 91% of all adults and 92% of parents feel that there is "more
violence in the schools than when they were growing up."
A Major Cause of the Deterioration of the Lot of Children: Guns
By 77-19%, a sizable majority of the public is convinced that "young people's safety
is endangered by there being so many guns around these days." A high 79% feel that "the
problem of guns is serious in the country," 57% feel it is "serious" on the streets at night where
they live, 54% that it is "serious" on the streets where young people have to go to school, and
42% say it is "serious" in the schools where they live.
A substantial 78% say that concerns over their physical safety have seriously
altered the lives of children. Among parents, 62% say that "the widespread availability of guns
and the resulting violence have made their children more concerned about their safety in school."
Almost as many parents, 61%, also say guns and violence have made their children "more
concerned about their safety going to and from school." An equal 60% of parents say their
children have learned to "act tougher to protect their own safety." 47% say "the worry over the
daily threat to their physical safety" is something their children now carry with themselves on an
ongoing basis. As a result, 33% say their children are "less eager to go to school every day,"
28% say their children are "less inclined to play outside," and 33% say "it is more difficult for their
-V-
children to pay attention to learning in schools."
One in five parents say they know a child who was "so worried that he or she got
a gun for their own self-protection," one in seven say they know "a child who has asked for a gun
for his or her own protection," one in six know a child "who was found playing with a gun that was
loaded," about one in six also know "a child who accidently shot himself or herself with a gun,"
one in five know "a child who was wounded or killed by another child with a gun," and one in
seven parents know "a child who was wounded or killed by an adult with a gun."
While this personal and tragic shadow of death from guns overhangs the
consciousness of parents and most adults in the country, the depth of feeling is further spurred
by a growing realization of the impact of guns on children across the country. Over 8 in 10 adults
report that facts such as these make them feel the problem of guns and young people is a matter
of urgency to them: "among teenagers 15 to 19 years old, one in four deaths come from a
gunshot injury;" "the total cost of doctors treating gunshot wounds in the U.S. is over $14 billion
a year," "in 1988, one in every six pediatricians treated a young person who was the victim of a
gunshot wound;" "gunshot wounds in children aged 16 and under doubled in major urban areas
between 1987 and 1990;" and "since 1985, the rate of dying from a gunshot injury has increased
77% for teenagers 15 to 19 years of age."
Observation: It is evident that people in the United States see a vast
increase in the pall of violence that has visited this nation compared to
when they were growing up, and that the lives of children have been
altered and deeply affected by it in their homes, on the way to and from
school, and in the schools themselves. Three in every four make a direct
link between the proliferation of guns and the spread of violence in society
and the threat of violence they report many of their children face every day
of their lives.
The American people have come to believe that the widespread pos-
session of guns has created a pall of violence across the land that has
engulfed the lives of children. Gun-related casualties among children, they
believe, have become a major health hazard for the young.
Thus, concludes the public, guns are now perceived as a major health
problem for children.
-vi-
Manifestations of the Impact of Guns on Children
Significant minorities of adults have been personally affected or know someone who has
been affected by the impact of guns on children:
-- 18% of all adults, 20% of all parents, and 30% of blacks report having had or knowing
someone who had "a child who was wounded or killed by another child who had a gun."
- 15% of all adults, 22% of Latinos, 19% of all parents, and 33% among blacks report
knowing "a child who was so worried that he or she got a gun for self-protection."
-- 14% of all adults, 16% of all parents, and 20% of blacks report knowing "a child who
was found playing with a gun that was loaded."
-- 13% of all adults, 14% of all parents, and 23% of blacks report knowing "a child who
was wounded or killed by an adult with a gun."
-- 12% of all adults, 13% of Latinos, 15% of all parents, and 17% of blacks know "a child
who accidentally shot himself or herself with a gun."
-- 12% of all adults, 14% of all parents, 22% of all Latinos, and 25% of all blacks report
knowing "a child who asked for a gun for his or her protection."
A substantial 39% of all parents say they would tell their children "if someone attacked
them, they should defend themselves, even if this means using a weapon." A much higher
majority of 62% of those saying they are members of the National Rifle Association would give
this advice to their children. Since 1987, the number reporting they are members of the NRA has
declined from 14% to 8%.
When asked directly, a 96% majority of adults and parents reject the view that "if children
were in a physical fight, they would be safer if they had a gun."
-vii-
Remedies the American Public Now Would Opt for
Nine major proposals for containing the availability, ownership, and use of
handguns were put before the cross-section of adults nationwide. All but one received majority
support, while the last came out as a stand-off. Nearly all key groups in the population favor 8
of the 9 proposals. Most are supported by margins of more than two to one. It seems evident
from these results that the American people now urgently want handguns contained or even
banished.
Here are the results:
-- A nearly unanimous 89% to 9% majority now favors "passage of the Brady Bill,
which would require a seven-day waiting period for all handgun purchases, so that authorities can
check on who is buying a handgun." Even among NRA members, a 68% to 32% majority favors
the Brady Bill.
-- By 82% to 15%, a majority would favor "a federal law requiring that all handguns
people own be registered by federal authorities."
-- By 72% to 26%, a majority would support "making it illegal to carry a handgun
outside the home without having a special permit."
-- By 70% to 26%, a majority favors "a federal law prohibiting the carrying of
handguns across state lines, unless a person has court permission to do so."
-- By 67-28%, a majority also favors "limiting the purchase of guns by any one
person to one a month."
-- By 63-31%, a majority supports "a federal law banning the sale of all automatic
and semi-automatic guns."
-- By 62-34%, a majority supports "a special tax on guns, such as on cigarettes."
-- By 52-43%, a majority favors "a federal law banning the ownership of all
-viii-
handguns, except those given permission by a court of law."
- By 47-45%, a plurality oppose "a federal ban on all handguns, except those
given permission by a court of law, and a buy-back of all handguns from present owners at a
price of $200 for each handgun a person turns in."
Observation: With the sole exception of a $200 buy-back of existing
handguns by the federal govemment, all of the eight remaining proposals
met with clear majority support. The Brady Bill, which has had trouble
becoming law in previous administrations, now is supported by the
President and, if legislative intent is to reflect public opinion at all, then it
should now pass Congress. Nearly all groups favor eight out of the nine
proposals. The most far-reaching proposal, of course, is that which calls for
a ban on the sale of all handguns, except those authorized by court order.
A clear majority of 52-43% favors such action. Indeed, this study indicates
a mandate for control of handguns well beyond that seriously put forth in
Washington up to now.
The Political Balance on Gun Control Has Shifted
When the people who favor or oppose banning the sale of all handguns, except
for those with permission to have one by court order, are then asked if a candidate for major
office were to take a stand which was contrary to their view about gun control, would they then
be "certain to vote against that candidate," 21% of the American people say they would change
their vote just on this issue alone. On most comparable issues, between 10% and 15% report
having their vote influenced by an issue. The number affected by the gun issue ranks among the
most sizable today.
Nineteen percent of those opposed to banning the sale of handguns say they
would vote against a candidate who favored such a ban. However, a larger 25% of those who
favor such a ban say they would vote against a candidate who opposed the ban. This is unusual,
since over the years whenever a comparable measure has been taken, the anti-gun control
proponents have always been far more vehement in threatening political retribution to those who
oppose NRA positions. Now this pattern seems to have been reversed.
-ix-
Thus, out of the total 21% of potential voters who are affected by this issue in their
vote, 13% of the entire public (62% of all those who say their vote could change by the gun
control issue) would come down against an opponent of gun control, while 8% of the entire public
(38% of all those whose vote could be affected by the issue) would cast their ballots against a
pro-gun control candidate. This swing of five full percentage points could make a substantial
difference of a net of 10 points in the outcome of a presidential or major Congressional contest.
There are differences by key groups, with men more likely to take the anti-gun
control position, but women are 3 to 1 on the side of the pro-gun control vote. Whites tend to be
evenly divided in terms of the political impact of the issue, but blacks and Latinos, two groups
deeply affected by violence and gunshot wounds among their young, come down 12 to 1 on the
side of the pro-gun control side. Those with higher level of education are more pro-gun control,
as are political moderates and liberals, and parents are 2 to 1 on the side of the pro-gun control
group. On the other side, members of the NRA are virtually unanimous in support of the anti-gun
control side, as are Republicans, gun owners, and high income people. However, conservatives
come down 14% to 10% on the pro-gun control side.
Women emerge from this study as perhaps a major force for passage of tough
measures controlling and even outlawing handguns. There is every indication that they intend
to translate into votes their concern that guns have been an important contributor to the aura of
violence which now surrounds the life of children in America. Among those who say they
certainly would vote against a candidate with whom they disagreed on outlawing handguns, men
would give anti-gun control forces a two-point edge in the total vote. But this is more than offset
by women who would give a 10-point edge in the total vote to the pro-gun control side. Thus,
women would turn an even race into a clear eight-point victory for a pro-gun control candidate --
if that were one of the main issues in the election.
-X-
Observation: These results indicate that the political balance has
now shifted on the gun control issue, away from the NRA position
to a pro-gun control stance. Indeed, the result reported here is
based on the 52-43% division in favor of a ban on the sale of
handguns. If it were based on the how people feel about the Brady
Bill which is supported by 9 out of 10 people, then the political
impact of the pro and anti gun control division would be 6 to 1 on
the side of the pro-gun control position. In light of these results, it
is readily understood why in both New Jersey and Virginia, which
formerly were viewed as anti-gun control states, tougher legislation
controlling guns has recently been passed. Now, it seems that the
prospect for legislating an end to the sale of handguns is a viable
proposition.
-xi-
ANALYSIS
Two Concems Converge: Violence and Neglect of Children
As most Americans think back to when they were growing up, one of the most
universal regrets is the pall of violence that has fallen on American life -- indeed, in every part of
the globe.
When asked to compare the situation today to "when they were growing up," 94%
of the public say that there is "more violence in the streets of our cities," 91% "more violence in
the schools," 61% "more violence in the home," and 45% "more violence in the work place."
Then when asked how much "the availability of guns sold and bought have
contributed to the violence," 61% nationwide say "a great deal" and another 20% say "somewhat."
Those groups who feel most strongly about the relationship of guns and violence are women
(90%), blacks (98%), Latinos (90%), and parents of children under 18 years of age (82%).
However, even 41% of all National Rifle Association members say they believe guns have
contributed to the aura of violence in today's environment.
Generally, most of the American people feel that many of the problems they face
have grown worse compared to when they were younger:
-- 94% feel that "crime" has become worse as a problem over the years, up 14
points from the 80% who felt the same back in 1986.
-- 84% believe the "problems affecting children" have "gotten worse" since when
they were growing up, a rise of 10 points from the 74% who felt identically seven years ago.
-- 68% feel that "unemployment" today is worse than when they were young, up
sharply from 43% who felt that way back in 1986.
-- 64% feel that "family life" has deteriorated from what they remember when they
were young, up from 52% who shared that feeling in 1986.
Vitally affected by the wave of violence that has permeated American society are
children:
-- Only 25% of the public believe that "most children live in safe neighborhoods,"
down from 36% who felt that way in 1986. A lower 21% of all parents of young people share this
view.
- No more than 29% of all adults feel that "most children are safe from violence
in the schools," with a lower 24% of parents who feel identically.
- Only 30% of the public is convinced that "most children live in homes safe from
violence," a view shared by a lower 28% of parents.
- No more than 39% of the public nationwide believe that "most children are
physically safe going to and from school," with 38% of the parents of those children who agree.
The consequences of this lack of safety people feel pervades nearly all parts of
the lives of children:
-- 93% believe there has been an increase in "teenagers being killed by guns."
-- 92% say there has been an increase in "children shooting other children."
-- 84% feel there has been an increase in "drug and alcohol
abuse among children and teenagers."
-- 76% say there has been an increase in "suicide among teenagers."
- 76% also say there has been a rise in "sexual assault of children."
-- 74% see an increase among young people of "injury or death from drunk
driving."
- 56% report an increase in "physical abuse of children by parents."
Observation: The numbers who believe there has been an increase in acts
of violence against children range between 56% and 93%. Indeed, the
incidence of violence from guns in the lives of children leads the way, both
in terms of teenagers being killed by guns and children shooting other
-2-
children. Violence results, however, only partly from criminal acts. It also
exists as a condition of life within the home, within the family, within
schools, and on the streets, when people visit violence upon others or
themselves not necessarily with the intention of committing a crime.
From the start, the evidence that guns are seen as a children's issue
begins to mount.
A Broader Perspective About Children
Both in 1986 and again in this current survey, identical cross-sections of the
American people were asked whether children now are better or worse off compared with when
they were growing up:
STATUS OF CHILDREN TODAY COMPARED
TO WHEN PEOPLE WERE GROWING UP
1993
1986
%
%
Better
46
68
Worse
46
22
No real difference
5
9
Not sure
3
1
Clearly, over the past seven years, there has been an appreciable decline of 22%
of the American people who are convinced that the lot of children has grown worse.
This concern is further reflected in that fully 76% of the public is convinced that "we
spend too little effort on problems affecting children," up from a comparable 63% who felt that way
back in 1986. The number who feel that "most children in America get medical treatment when
needed" has declined sharply from 58% to a current 35%. Only 33% of all parents feel that most
children today get proper medical care. Only 42% feel that "most children are basically happy,"
down from 48% seven years ago. Among parents, a still lower 39% feel most kids in America
are "basically happy."
-3-
An Agenda for Children
The American people strongly support a broad agenda of action to help children.
At a time when spending more government money is not popular generally, nonetheless, sizable
majorities want to spend more for children:
-- A majority of 76% wants the government to "spend more on free medical care
for poor children," compared with only 3% who want to spend less and 18% who say "spend the
same amount as now." A larger 84% of parents share this view.
-- A majority of 73% nationwide wants the government to "spend more money on
immunization of children," with a somewhat higher 76% of parents feeling this way.
-- A 68% majority also supports the government "spending more money on job
training for teenagers," a view shared by a higher 74% of all parents.
-- A 66% majority of the American people also wants government "to spend more
money on prenatal care for poor women," with a higher 72% of the parents taking that view.
Observation: At a time when it is widely believed that the American people
are unwilling to see more government spending for the disadvantaged,
these results indicate such claims may well be without basis.
Even higher majorities support specific govemment-sponsored programs designed
to help children of many ages:
-- 91% of all adults and 93% of all parents approve of the government "providing
health coverage for children of families who cannot get health insurance."
-- 80% of all adults and 84% of all parents support the government "providing day
care services for children of working mothers, including those on welfare."
-- 68% of the entire adult public and 73% of all parents support the government
"providing birth control services for teenagers."
Observation: This is a powerful and broad mandate for the agenda on
-4-
children to take a high priority in American life.
Despite these sizable majorities who want to see specific help given to children,
the public feels relatively little has been done. The people point a finger of blame squarely at a
whole roster of institutions which come up with relatively low marks on what they have done for
children. Over the past seven years, every institution tested has shown a decline in public
confidence in what it has done for children. Government is the recipient of some of the most
negative ratings:
RATING HOW KEY INSTITUTIONS AND GROUPS
HAVE DONE IN MEETING RESPONSIBILITIES
TO CHILDREN
1993
1986
Posi-
Nega-
Not
Posi-
Nega-
Not
tive
tive
Sure
tive
tive
Sure
%
%
%
%
%
%
Churches
51
40
9
53
42
5
Community Organizations
47
47
6
50
47
3
Schools
39
59
2
43
56
1
Parents
37
59
4
43
55
2
The Healthcare System
28
67
5
X
X
X
The Media
27
68
5
X
X
X
Local Government
25
72
3
34
65
1
Federal Government
20
76
4
28
69
3
Only churches are able to command majority support in terms of their efforts to
meet their responsibilities to children. Community organizations have some reservoir of good will,
but they are not without their critics. Parents have slipped in the confidence levels accorded them
by the public, with parents themselves rating fellow parents 61-36% negative. The healthcare
system is widely criticized, as is the media. Questions about these two institutions were asked
for the first time this year. Bringing up the rear is the federal government, which ranks below
local government, which in turn comes in next to last.
-5-
Observation: These results clearly point up that the American people in
1993 are in a no-nonsense mood about putting children and their problems
high on the list of national priorities. They are upset and angry at what
they feel has been the inattention of major institutions to children's needs.
Easing or eliminating the pall of violence that hangs heavy over young
people certainly ranks toward the top of priorities when it comes to
children's problems.
There is a deep sense of collective national guilt about the way children have been
treated in nearly every way. But there is a special poignancy and urgency about the public's
feelings on children and guns.
Guns and Children's Safety and Peace of Mind
Awareness of Guns As a Threat to Children's Security
By 77-19%, a sizable majority of the American people says it is convinced that
"young people's safety is endangered by there being so many guns around these days." This
feeling runs higher in the East and the South than in other regions, among women more than
men, among blacks and Latinos more than whites, among better educated more than less well
educated people. It should be noted that a 58-35% majority of all those who own a gun share
this view, although a 57-34% majority of NRA members do not.
Observation: By over a 3-1 margin, there is clearly widespread concern in
the nation that the pervasiveness of guns is a danger to young people and
their health.
Levels of Impact of the Issue of Guns and Children's Health
A comparable 79-19% majority feels that the problem of guns is serious "in the
country." This drops to a 59-40% majority who feels this way about guns in their own town or city.
It is only a slightly lower 57-41% majority who feels that guns are a serious problem on the
streets at night in their own town or city. Just below this level, a 54-43% majority feel that guns
are a serious problem on the streets where kids have to go to school. Further down the list, cited
by 42% are those who feel guns are a serious problem in the schools where they live. Another
-6-
36% say that guns are a serious problem in the lives of children they know. And, finally, 30%
report that guns are a serious problem in their own neighborhood.
Among parents, this overall pattem is generally repeated. However, a higher 39%
of all parents say guns are a serious problem in the lives of children they know. The two groups
which demonstrate the greatest apprehension over guns are blacks and Latinos. Sizable
majorities of blacks, ranging from 61% to 85% on the questions asked are worried about guns
as a serious problem at all levels of their existence and consciousness. Majorities of Latinos
share the same worries, except in their own neighborhood, where 40% express concem about
guns. This is still 10 points above the national norm. Clearly, the problem of guns is greatest in
those areas visited by the most poverty.
Observation: While sizable majorities agree that guns are a serious threat
to the health and safety of children, this general concem becomes
somewhat less intense as it narrows down to their own towns and cities
and their own neighborhoods and their own children. Nevertheless,
majorities agree that guns are a serious problem in their own town or city
and certainly on their streets at night. Significantly, just under half feel that
guns are a distinct threat in the schools where they live. And roughly one
in three adults feels guns are a threat to children they know and live
around or with. A higher percentage of parents professes to find the threat
of guns higher than adults generally feel.
The Impact of Guns on Children's Behavior
When asked to assess the impact of the availability of guns and the resulting
violence on "children they know," on three key dimensions majorities of the public nationwide say
the impact has been heavy:
-- A 63-32% majority say that guns "have made children they know more
concerned about their safety getting to and from school." A 61-37% majority of all parents agrees
with this assessment.
-- By 62-33%, a majority of the public across the nation feels that the presence of
-7-
guns has made "children they know more concerned about their safety in school". A 62-36%
majority of parents feels the same.
-- By 58-34%, a majority of the public feels that the threat of guns have made
"children they know more inclined to act tougher to protect their own safety." A higher 60-38%
majority of parents shares this assessment about their own children.
-- Significant minorities feel other effects on children they know: 46% of the public
and 47% of the parents feel guns have made children they know "more worried about the daily
threat to their physical safety"; 33% of the public and an equal 33% of parents say guns have
made children close to them "less eager to go to school every day;" Another 33% of both the
public and parents also report that among children they know, guns have made it "more difficult
for them to pay attention to learning in the schools". And 27% of the public and 28% of parents
say that guns have made children close to them "less inclined to play outside."
In the end, fully 78% of the public and 80% of the parents acknowledge that such
concems as these about children's physical safety have caused children to alter their lives, with
fully 28% reporting that their lives and lifestyles have been "seriously altered."
Observation: The problem of guns is now seen as a concern for children
when they contemplate getting to and from school and when they are in
school. This concern has also caused a majority to observe that children
have been forced to take a tougher posture "to protect their own safety."
Significant minorities also say young people they know or their own
children worry about the physical threat to their safety from guns on a daily
basis, that the problem makes them less eager to go to school, and makes
it more difficult for them to concentrate on their work in school. All in all,
there is a sense of unease and discomfort among the public and parents
about the threat of guns on the lives of young people that they never felt
when they were growing up.
-8-
Guns as a Children's Health Issue Compared to Other Crisis Issues
To put the issue of guns into a broader context, the survey asked the cross-section
how guns as a "problem of endangering children's health and well-being" compared with five other
widely acknowledged problems facing young people today:
-- 68% feel that the dangers from guns are "as serious" or "more serious" than the
use of alcohol to young people.
-- 67% feel that the dangers from guns are "as serious" or "more serious" than
teenage pregnancy.
-- 65% feel that the dangers from guns are "as serious" or "more serious" than the
threat of drugs.
-- 62% feel that the dangers from guns are "as serious" or "more serious" than
AIDS to young people.
-- 59% feel that the dangers from guns are "as serious" or "more serious" than car
crashes.
Among parents, the majorities who feel this way range from 61% to 72%, higher
than the public as a whole.
Observation: By any measure, there is little doubt from these results that
the problem of guns as a children's health issue ranks right up there
alongside of drugs and alcohol, AIDS, teenage pregnancy, and car
crashes. All, of course, represent serious threats to the physical well-being
of young people. Clearly guns as a children's health issue must be added
to this list of hazards for children in modern society.
Reaction to Five Key Facts About Guns and Children
The survey next presented five facts furnished by the American Academy of
Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the cross-section and asked
each person interviewed how accurate each statement was. Then, people were told that all were
-9-
accurate, and we asked whether that knowledge made them feel the problem of guns and young
people was "a matter of urgency to them" or not:
-- 83% feel that the statement that "gunshot wounds to children aged 16 and under
has nearly doubled in major urban areas between 1987 and 1990" is true. A higher 86% say that
these facts make them feel that the problem of guns and young people is "an urgent matter."
-- 76% feel that the statement that "since 1985, the rate of dying from a gunshot
injury has increased 77% for teenagers 15 to 19 years of age" is correct. And 87% of all adults
say that makes them feel more urgently about the issue of guns and young people.
-- 56% feel this statement is accurate: "Among teenagers 15 to 19 years of age,
one in four deaths come from gunshot injury." A substantial 82% of all adults say that makes
them feel more urgency about guns and children.
-- 53% feel this statement is accurate: "The total cost of doctors treating gunshot
wounds in the United States is over $14 billion a year." Some 81% adults say this fact makes
them feel a greater sense of urgency about guns and young people.
-- 53% also believe this statement to be true: "In 1988, one in every six
pediatricians treated a young person who was the victim of a gunshot wound." A sizable 82%
say this fact makes them feel more urgently about the problem of guns and children.
Personal Family Experiences with Gun Injuries and Deaths
In order to get some assessment of the personal impact of the gun issue on
American families, the cross-section of adults was asked a series of highly specific questions
about the impact which guns might have had on them or "someone else you know."
-10-
Here is the incidence of each:
-- 18% of all adults and 20% of all parents report having had or knowing someone
who had "a child who was wounded or killed by another child who had a gun." Among blacks,
30% know such a case, while among Latinos, the number is 16%.
-- 15% of all adults and 19% of all parents report knowing "a child who was so
worried that he or she got a gun for self-protection." Among blacks, a higher 33% reported the
same information, as did 22% of Latinos.
-- 14% of all adults and 16% of all parents report "a child who was found playing
with a gun that was loaded." Among blacks, 20% report such a happening, while a lower 13%
of Latinos know such a case.
-- 13% of all adults and 14% of all parents report knowing "a child who was
wounded or killed by an adult with a gun." Among blacks, 23% report knowing such a child, while
among Latinos, 11% have had a similar experience.
-- 12% of all adults and 15% of all parents report knowing "a child who accidently
shot himself or herself with a gun." Among blacks, 17% know such a child, while among Latinos
13% say they know such a case.
-- 12% of all adults and 14% of parents say they know "a child who asked for a
gun for his or her own protection." Among blacks, 25% report having had this experience, while
among Latinos 22% say they know such a child.
Observation: While only minorities of adults and parents have been directly
affected by a child of theirs or a neighbors who has been wounded or killed
by a gun, or who has asked to possess a gun, or has been found playing
with a loaded gun, or has wounded or killed other children with a gun, or
been wounded or killed by an adult with a gun, the numbers are at the 1
in 8 to 1 in 6 levels nationwide. Among minorities, the penetration of such
tragic and frightening experiences is higher. While at present far less than
majorities have been directly affected by guns, knowledge of the danger of
guns has caused a majority of adults and parents to become apprehensive
about guns as a threat to children's health.
-11-
Parental Advice to Their Children on Personal Threats
Those who are parents were asked what advice they would give their children if
they were confronted with the threat of violence against them:
-- Fully 32% say that "if someone hits their children first, then they would tell their
children to hit back." A more sizable 60% would not give this advice. Among the public as a
whole, 35% would tell young people to hit back. Among blacks, 52% would tell their children to
strike back, among whites 35% would say that, among Latinos only 15% would advise this course
for their children, among those who own a gun a higher 42% would tell them to hit back, as would
44% of NRA members.
-- Among parents, 39% say they would tell their children "if someone attacked
them, they should defend themselves, even if this means using a weapon." A lower 35% of the
total public shares this view. Among blacks, a much lower 24% would advise their children to use
a weapon. A higher 35% of Latinos would tell them to use a weapon, as would 36% of whites,
42% of those who now own guns, and 62% of NRA members. However, pluralities or majorities
of all groups, except those in the NRA would recommend against children acquiring weapons to
defend themselves.
-- By 94% to 2%, a majority of the public, parents, and all groups would not agree
that "if children were in a physical fight, they would be safer if they had a knife."
-- And a comparable 96% to 3% of parents and 96% to 2% of the public would also
not agree that "if children were in a physical fight, they would be safer if they had a handgun."
Observation: A clear majority of both the public and parents of young
children in America would recommend against their offspring reacting
violently to an attack from someone else. However, roughly one in three
would recommend some kind of response, such as hitting the other person
or even using an unspecified weapon. A child using a knife or a gun is
rejected by adults. NRA members are most inclined to have children use
weapons.
-12-
The Perceived Dangers of Possessing Handguns
There is widespread recognition of the fact that possession of handguns can lead
to some unforeseen and even tragic problems:
-- An 88% to 10% majority is concerned that "people often forget to put the safety
latch on guns around the house, and sometimes leave them loaded, which causes many
accidental injuries or even death." This concem is also expressed by 81% of all handgun owners.
-- By 87% to 10%, another sizable majority is concemed that "small guns that
many women obtain because they are easier to use are mistaken by children as toy guns which
they play with and injure themselves with." An 81% to 16% majority of handgun owners agree
with this worry.
-- By 85% to 13%, another big majority expresses concem that "a common cause
of injury or death among family members, especially children, results from their either cleaning
or playing around with a gun." Among handgun owners, a 73-24% majority agrees with this
concern.
-- By 78% to 20%, most Americans are concerned that "when people's homes are
broken into and they own a gun, the intruder might take the gun away from the owner and shoot
him or her." A 61% to 38% majority of handgun owners agrees that this is a worrisome matter.
Observation: It is evident that the possibility of injury or even death that can
result from having handguns around the home is widely understood by the
public. The assumption that possession of handguns is a preventive
approach to one's own home security is tempered by the caveat that
possession of guns can be a hazard to families who own them.
-13-
LEGISLATIVE AND OTHER REMEDIES TO CONTROL
THE PROBLEMS RELATED TO OWNING HANDGUNS
Attitudes Toward Regulation and Even Abolition of Handgun Ownership
In all, in this study nine major propositions for controlling or outlawing handgun
ownership were tested among the cross-section of the adult American public.
The overwhelming preponderance of public opinion favors constraining or outlawing
handgun ownership:
-- An 89% to 9% majority favors "passage of the Brady Bill, which would require
a seven-day waiting period for all handgun purchases, so that the authorities can check on who
is buying a handgun."
-- An 82% to 15% majority also favors "a federal law requiring that all handguns
people own be registered by federal authorities." This is up slightly from a 78-20% majority who
supported such universal registration in 1989.
-- A 72% to 26% majority would favor "making it illegal to carry a handgun outside
the home without having a special permit."
-- By 70% to 26%, a majority also favors "a federal law prohibiting the carrying of
handguns across state lines, unless a person has court permission to do so."
-- By 63% to 31%, a majority favors "a federal law banning the sale of all automatic
and semi-automatic guns."
-- By 62% to 34%, a majority would favor "a special tax on guns, such as on
cigarettes."
-- By 52% to 43%, a majority would also support "a federal law banning the
ownership of all handguns, except those given permission by a court of law."
-- A 47% to 45% plurality opposes "a federal ban on all handguns, except those
given permission by a court of law and a buy-back of all handguns from present owners at a price
-14-
of $200 for each handgun a person tums in." Statistically, of course, this last proposition ends
in a dead heat.
While the numbers supporting the various proposals tested range from 45% to
89%, there are distinct patterns among key groups for support or opposition:
-- Not surprisingly, the strongest opposition is registered by members of the
National Rifle Association, followed by those who are owners of handguns. As the number who
own guns has gone down from 45% to 42%, so, too, has the number who say they are members
of the NRA -- down from 14% to 7% since 1987. NRA members support the Brady Bill by 68%
to 32%, federal registration of all handguns by 59% to 40%, and limiting gun purchases to one
a month by 49% to 47%, but oppose all of the other six proposals tested.
-- Gun owners, however, show a different pattern. They support the Brady Bill, the
federal registration of handguns, the limit on gun purchases to one a month, a federal law
prohibiting the carrying of guns across state lines, and a federal law banning carrying a gun
outside the home without a special permit. Handgun owners have an identical pattern as all gun
owners.
-- Conservatives favor eight out of the nine proposals tested, including a handgun
ban, demurring only on the banning of all handguns coupled with the purchase of handguns for
$200.
-- Republicans favor seven out of nine proposals, but object to any total ban on
handguns.
A substantial number of groups favor all nine proposals:
-- Women favor all of the proposals by an average margin of 10 points higher than
the nation as a whole.
-- Those with a postgraduate degree favor all nine of the proposals by an average
-15-
six points higher than the national average.
-- Blacks and Latinos also favor all nine of the constraints on guns by an average
eight points higher than the nation generally.
-- Also favoring all nine propositions are parents of children under 18, young people
between 18 and 30, the elderly 65 and over, residents in the East, and those with a high school
education or less.
Observation: Among the American people, it is evident that support for
constraining the purchase, ownership, and right to carry handguns is deep
and widespread. The Brady Bill which has had difficulty being enacted into
law is nearly unanimously backed by the public.
It is unusual for a poll to record such uniformly high levels of agreement as
in the endorsement by the American people on those measures to crack
down on handgun ownership. Nearly all groups want to see 8 of the 9
proposals become the law of the land.
The one exception is placing a ban on ownership of all handguns, except
those permitted by court order, when coupled with a buy back of all
handguns from current owners at a price of $200 for each. The public
splits down the middle on this issue, with 47% opposed and 45% in favor.
However, a straight-out ban on the ownership of handguns, except for
those given permission to own them by court order, does meet with favor
by a 52-43% majority.
Obviously, the gap between the relatively narrow and bland Brady Bill,
calling for a seven-day waiting period before a purchase of a handgun can
be completed, favored by 89% of the public and a complete ban of
handgun ownership, favored by 52%, is substantial. However, an outright
ban of handguns has not been widely talked about or advocated up to now.
It is not overdrawing the implications of these results to conclude that if
presidential and congressional support were to shape up behind a total ban
of handguns, except as allowed by court order, then the majority favoring
such a ban seems certain to grow.
Coupling a handgun ban with a buy back of guns clearly is a new idea to
most Americans. When all handgun owners are asked directly what they
would do if the government offered to buy back their guns at $200 each,
only 26% say they would, but a much higher 67% say they would not. The
main reasons cited by those with handguns is that they want their guns so
they can "use them for recreational purposes," "they need them for their
own protection," and they feel they have "a constitutional right to own a
-16-
gun."
However, these results indicate that a wide array of options for constraining
the ownership and use of handguns will meet with high levels of agreement
from the American people themselves and even, in many cases, by a
majority of gun owners. What is more, this is not a passively-held view, but
one that is deeply and urgently felt.
Women: A Major Force for Outlawing Handguns
A major finding in this study is the enormous gap that exists between the attitudes
and behavior of women and men. Men tend to be far more satisfied with the status quo on guns,
while women feel strongly that handguns must be controlled or even outlawed.
Here are some key differences between women and men:
-- A nearly unanimous 86% of all women feel that "children's safety is endangered
by so many guns being around these days." A much lower 66% of men share this view. But the
gender gap on this observation is 20 points.
-- A substantial 43% of all men say they would advise "a child of mine to defend
him or herself if attacked, even if that means using a weapon," compared with a much lower 28%
of women -- a gap of 15 points.
-- While 34% of women report that there is a gun in their household, a much higher
51% of men report such a possession - a gap of 17 points.
-- Compared with a bare majority of women gun owners (52%) who say they "feel
more secure owning a gun," a much higher 66% of all men report feeling more secure in owning
a gun -- a gap of 14 points.
- When asked if there were a law banning handgun ownership, would they be
willing to turn in their handgun for a payment of $200 from the government, 18% of men
gunowners say they would do it, but a much higher 37% of women gunowners believe they would
turn in their guns -- a gap of 19 points.
-17-
-- When asked how they felt about banning the sale of all handguns, 61% of
women and a lower 42% of men favored such a law - a gap of 19 points.
Observation: By any measure, women and men are widely apart from each
other on the threat of guns to society generally and to children in particular.
Women see handguns as a major cause of violence and feel their
widespread presence jeopardizes the safety of children. Contrary to some
claims, women own far fewer guns than men and are far more willing to
turn in their guns, if offered $200 to do SO. Women also conclude by a
margin of two to one that they support legislation which would ban all hand
guns. Certainly women are a leading edge among the American public for
dealing strongly with what they view as the high risk of widespread
ownership of handguns.
The Political Impact of Women on the Gun Control Issue
When those who favor or oppose outlawing handguns are asked if they would vote
against someone whom they might otherwise vote for if that candidate took a position on gun
control opposite their own, women and part company completely. Twenty-two percent of men say
their vote would be affected by the gun issue: 12% would vote against a candidate who opted for
outlawing handguns, while 10% would vote against someone who would refuse to outlaw
handguns. Among women, 20% say their vote would be affected by the gun issue: 15% say they
would vote against a candidate who did not favor outlawing the sale of handguns, while only 5%
would vote against a candidate who opted for the status quo. Thus, among women there would
be a swing in an election of a full 10 points in favor of a candidate who wanted to legislate a ban
on handgun sale and ownership. By contrast, a relatively small 2% swing of men would vote for
a candidate who opposes changes in the laws governing gun ownership. This means that by 53-
46%, a narrow majority of men who oppose a ban on the sale of handguns say they would come
down against any candidate who favors such a crack-down on ownership of handguns. By
contrast, a 76-23% majority of women would vote against a candidate who refused to outlaw
handguns.
Observation: The net impact of the gun issue on men is close to a stand-
-18-
off, with the anti-gun control group outvoting the pro-gun control group by
a bare two points. By contrast, a significant 10-point margin separates
those women who are pro-gun control and those who are anti-gun control.
This means that the net political advantage among the pro-control group
is eight points. The implication is that if gun control were to be a major
issue in a nationwide election, the pro-gun control group could convert a
dead-heat standing for a candidate into an 8-point margin of victory for the
gun control candidate.
Patterns of Gun Ownership In the United States
The number of households reporting ownership of a gun has declined slightly from
45% in 1989 to a current 42% of all homes. This translates into 40 million American homes
which possess a firearm.
Almost two in every three households with a gun possess a handgun, coming to
25 million homes. The number owning handguns has remained constant, despite the slight drop
in overall gun ownership. The median number of handguns in each gun-owning household is
1.95. This translates into 49 million handguns owned by the American people.
A total of 26% of all households report owning a shot-gun and only a slightly lower
25% own a rifle. Those with shot-guns average 1.87 such guns in their possession, while rifle
owners own a higher 2.28 per household.
The pattern on handgun ownership by key groups in the population shows that
such ownership is more prevalent among residents of the West, among men, those aged 50 to
64, whites, those with less education, political moderates and conservatives, Republicans and
independents, and NRA members (93% of whom own a handgun).
When asked what motivates them to own a gun, 69% say "as a recreation weapon
for shooting practice or as a collector's item," 60% answer "to protect my family and myself
against intruders," 54% "as a means of protection in my home," 44% "as a means of making me
feel more secure," 17% "to carry on my person in certain situations," and 11% "in connection with
my occupation."
-19-
Clearly, self-protection is a main motive for owning a gun in America in 1993, in
spite of the earlier admissions by gun owners and others that guns in their own right can be
dangerous and hazardous to possess and to keep around the house. Fifty-nine percent of all gun
owners say they "feel more secure in owning a gun."
Among the 44% of the parents of children under 18 who own a gun, only 43% say
they keep their gun under lock and key in a gun cabinet or drawer. One in four, 24%, keep their
gun in a closet, 9% in an unlocked drawer of a desk or dresser, 2% on a bedside table, and 3%
on the floor under the bed. Another 26% have another, unspecified place they keep their guns.
A substantial 20% of all gun owners say they sometimes leave their gun loaded
and locked for "ready use," while 13% of such owners keep their gun loaded and unlocked "for
ready use." The number of parents who leave loaded guns around is a much lower 6%. But
25% of all gun owners and a higher 28% of parents of young children report that they sometimes
carry a gun on their person when outside their home.
-20-
1
REMARKS OF LOUIS HARRIS
PRESS CONFERENCE
GUNS AND CHILDREN
JUNE 3rd, 1993
IN THIS STUDY I BELIEVE WE HAVE UNCOVERED AN EXTRAORDINARY
CHANGE IN PUBLIC OPINION ON WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT HANDGUNS IN
AMERICA IN PLANNING THIS STUDY, WE HAD WONDERED IF THE UNEXPECTED
PASSAGE OF GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION IN BOTH VIRGINIA AND NEW JERSEY,
TWO STATES WHICH HAD BEEN MAJOR SUPPLIERS OF HANDGUNS FOR NEW YORK
CITY AND WASHINGTON, D.C.WERE HARBINGERS OF A SEA CHANGE IN PUBLIC
ATIITUDES.
WE ALSO EXPLORED THE IMPACT OF RISING GUN VIOLENCE ON YOUNG
PEOPLE. FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE MEASURED PUBLIC REACTION TO FACTS
GENERATED BY THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND THE AMERICAN
ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS. THESE INCLUDE THE FACT THAT "AMONG TEENAGERS
15 TO 19 YEARS OF AGE, ONE IN FOUR DEATHS COME FROM GUNSHOT WOUNDS."
AND OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD, "GUNSHOT WOUNDS TO CHILDREN AGED 16
AND UNDER NEARLY DOUBLED IN MAJOR URBAN AREAS." AND THAT THE
LIFETIME COSTS OF GUNSHOT INJURIES IN THE U.S. IS $14 BILLION A YEAR."
THE RESULTS ARE DECISIVE.
THEY SHOW THAT ON CONTROLLING HANDGUNS, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
WANT LEGISLATION FAR MORE DRASTIC THAN ANY SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED UP
TO NOW BY CONGRESS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE BRADY BILL HAS HAD GREAT
DIFFICULTY PASSING CONGRESS AND BECOMING LAW. A NEARLY UNANIMOUS 9
IN 10 FAVOR IT, INCLUDING A 2 TO 1 MAJORITY OF NRA MEMBERS. NOW FOR THE
FIRST TIME, A MAJORITY FAVOR OUTLAWING THE SALE OF ALL HANDGUNS, A FAR
2
MORE DRASTIC REMEDY.
MAJORITIES SAY GUNS ARE A MAJOR CAUSE OF THE RISE OF VIOLENCE IN
AMERICA.AND CHILDREN HAVE BEEN AMONG THE CHIEF VICTIMS. IN THE
FUTURE, THE ISSUE OF CONTROLLING GUNS WILL NO LONGER BE REGARDED
SOLELY OR EVEN PRIMARILY AS A CRIMINAL PROBLEM, BUT AS A HIGHLY SERIOUS
THREAT TO THE BASIC HEALTH OF THE NATION'S CHILDREN. MOST AMERICANS
FEEL STRONGLY THAT THE WORLD THAT YOUNG PEOPLE TODAY ARE
CONFRONTED WITH IS A RADICALLY DIFFERENT WORLD FROM WHAT IT WAS
WHEN THEY WERE GROWING UP. FOR EXAMPLE, OVER 9 IN 10 SAY THERE HAS
BEEN A SHARP RISE IN "TEENAGERS BEING KILLED BY GUNS," AND IN "CHILDREN
SHOOTING OTHER CHILDREN." 3 IN 4 ARE DISTURBED BY "ALCOHOL AND DRUG
ABUSE AMONG CHILDREN," THE RISE OF "SUICIDES AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE,"
"SEXUAL ASSAULTS OF YOUNG PEOPLE," AND "INJURY OR DEATH AMONG YOUNG
PEOPLE FROM DRUNKEN DRIVING." THE CONSEQUENCES ARE NOT HARD TO FIND.
ONLY 25% FEEL "MOST KIDS LIVE IN SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS,' ONLY 29% THAT
"MOST CHILDREN ARE SAFE FROM VIOLENCE," NO MORE THAN 30% SAY THAT
"MOST YOUNG PEOPLE LIVE IN HOMES SAFE FROM VIOLENCE," AND ONLY 39%
FEEL THAT "MOST CHILDREN ARE PHYSICALLY SAFE GOING TO AND FROM
SCHOOL." COMPARED WITH 1986, THE NUMBER WHO BELIEVE "CHILDREN TODAY
ARE BETTER OFF THAN WHEN THEY WERE GROWING UP" HAS DROPPED FROM 68%
TO 46%. THE NUMBER WHO THINK "PROBLEMS AFFECTING YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE
GROWN WORSE" HAS RISEN 10 POINTS TO 84%. 8 IN 10 CONCLUDE THAT A ROOT
CAUSE IS THE FACT THAT "THE AVAILABILITY OF GUN AND THE INCREASE IN
GUNS HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE VIOLENCE."
A NEARLY UNANIMOUS 92% OF PARENTS SAY "THERE IS MORE VIOLENCE IN
3
THE SCHOOLS THAN WHEN THEY WERE GROWING UP. "THUS, A 77-19% MAJORITY
CONCLUDES, "YOUNG PEOPLE'S SAFETY IS ENDANGERED BY THERE BEING so
MANY GUNS AROUND THESE DAYS." 79% SEE THE "PROBLEM OF GUNS AS
SERIOUS," ON THE STREETS WHERE THEY LIVE, ON THE STREETS WHERE KIDS GO
TO SCHOOL, AND IN THE SCHOOLS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. THUS, OVER 6
IN 10 PARENTS REPORT THAT THE PRESENCE OF GUNS HAS DRASTICALLY
CHANGED THEIR CHILDREN'S LIVES: THEY ARE ABSORBED WITH THEIR SAFETY
IN SCHOOL, ON THE STREETS GOING TO AND FROM SCHOOL." CHILDREN HAVE
HAD TO WORRY ABOUT HOW TOUGH THEY HAVE TO BE TO PROTECT THEIR OWN
SAFETY.
A BOTTOM LINE: 1 IN 3 KIDS, THEY REPORT, ARE "LESS EAGER TO GO TO
SCHOOL EVERY DAY," AND "IT IS MORE DIFFICULT TO PAY ATTENTION TO
LEARNING IN SCHOOL," AND OVER 1 IN 4 "ARE LESS INCLINED TO PLAY OUTSIDE."
1 IN 5 PARENTS KNOW A CHILD so WORRIED THAT "HE OR SHE GOT A GUN FOR
THEIR OWN PROTECTION." 1 IN 7 SAY THEY KNOW A CHILD "WANTS A GUN FOR
HIS OR HER PROTECTION." 1 IN 6 KNOW CASES OF CHILDREN "FOUND PLAYING
WITH GUNS THAT WERE LOADED," AND AN IDENTICAL 1 IN 6 KNOWS A CHILD
"WHO ACCIDENTALLY SHOT HIMSELF OR HERSELF WITH A GUN," AND 1 IN 5
KNOWS A CHILD "WHO WAS WOUNDED OR KILLED BY ANOTHER CHILD WITH A
GUN." FACTS SUCH AS THOSE CITED BY THE CDC AND THE AMERICAN ACADEMY
OF PEDIATRICS MAKE PEOPLE FEEL MORE URGENTLY THAT IMMEDIATE ACTION
IS NEEDED. IN THE MEANTIME, A SUBSTANTIAL 4 IN 10 SAY THEY WOULD TELL
CHILDREN WHO WERE ATTACKED TO "DEFEND THEMSELVES, EVEN IF IT MEANS
USING A WEAPON." MOST NRA MEMBERS WOULD URGE THEIR CHILDREN TO USE
A WEAPON. HOWEVER, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE NUMBER IN THE ADULT
4
POPULATION WHO HAVE SOMEONE IN THEIR HOME WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE
NRA HAS DWINDLED FROM 14% IN 1987 TO A CURRENT 7%. WHEN PRESSED ONLY
2% OF ALL PARENTS THINK THEIR KIDS WOULD BE SAFER IF THEY HAD GUNS.
THE REMEDIES PEOPLE SEEK ARE FAR-REACHING. AS I REPORTED AT THE
BEGINNING, AN 89-9% MAJORITY SUPPORTS THE BRADY BILL. AN 82-15% MAJORITY
WANTS FEDERAL REGISTRATION OF ALL HANDGUNS. BY 72-26%, MOST WANT IT
MADE ILLEGAL "TO CARRY A HANDGUN OUTSIDE THE HOME WITHOUT A SPECIAL
PERMIT." BY 70-26%, MOST SUPPORT "A LAW PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF
HANDGUNS ACROSS STATE LINES, UNLESS GIVEN PERMISSION BY COURT ORDER"
BY 67-28%, A MAJORITY ALSO FAVORS "LIMITING THE PURCHASE OF GUNS BY ANY
ONE PERSON TO ONE A MONTH." BY 62-34%, A MAJORITY BACKS "A SPECIAL TAX
ON GUNS, SUCH AS THAT ON CIGARETTES." A 52-43% MAJORITY FAVORS "A
FEDERAL LAW BANNING OWNERSHIP OF ALL HANDGUNS, EXCEPT BY COURT
PERMISSION." ONE PROPOSITION WE TESTED FAILED TO GET MAJORITY
SUPPORT:"A FEDERAL BAN ON ALL HANDGUNS, EXCEPT THOSE GIVEN PERMISSION
BY A COURT, AND A BUY-BACK OF ALL HANDGUNS FROM PRESENT OWNERS AT A
PRICE OF $200 FOR EACH HANDGUN A PERSON TURNS IN." THE BUY-BACK IDEA
HAS NOT RECEIVED MUCH ATTENTION AND YET 46% FAVOR IT AND 47% OPPOSE
IT.
A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT DIMENSION TO THIS STUDY IS THAT IT DID NOT
SIMPLY TEST A WHOLE HOST OF PROPOSALS OF WHAT MIGHT BE DONE ABOUT
GUN CONTROL WE WENT MUCH FURTHER. AS YOU KNOW, THE ENTIRE HISTORY
OF GUN CONTROL HAS BEEN MARKED BY A PHENOMENON, WHICH THE
CONGRESS HAS BEEN IMPRESSED BY: WHILE MAJORITIES OF A RATHER DORMANT
PUBLIC MIGHT FAVOR STIFF GUN CONTROL, THE NRA AND THE GUN-OWNING
5
CONSTITUENCY APPEARS TO BE so ACTIVATED THAT IT WILL PUNISH ANY
MEMBER WHO VOTES FOR TOUGH CONTROLS.
WELL, LET ME REPORT TO YOU THAT A MAJOR SHIFT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN
THE POLITICAL BALANCE ON GUN CONTROL. WE ASKED THOSE WHO FAVOR OR
OPPOSE OUTLAWING HANDGUN OWNERSHIP: IF A CANDIDATE FOR HIGH OFFICE
WITH WHOM YOU AGREED ON NEARLY ALL ISSUES WERE TO TAKE A POSITION ON
GUN CONTROL YOU DIDN'T AGREE WITH, WOULD YOU CERTAINLY VOTE AGAINST
THAT CANDIDATE, PROBABLY VOTE AGAINST, PROBABLY NOT, OR CERTAINLY NOT
VOTE AGAINST THAT CANDIDATE. WE COUNT ONLY THOSE WHO SAY THEY
CERTAINLY WOULD VOTE AGAINST SUCH A CANDIDATE. ALL TOGETHER, 21% SAY
THEIR VOTE COULD CHANGE ON THE BASIS OF THIS SINGLE ISSUE. THIS IS
HIGHER THAN THE AVERAGE OF ABOUT 12% WHOSE VOTE CAN CHANGE OVER AN
ISSUE.
HERE ARE THE RESULTS: 19% OF THOSE OPPOSED TO A BAN ON GUN
OWNERSHIP SAY THEY WOULD VOTE AGAINST A CANDIDATE WHO FAVORED
OUTLAWING HANDGUNS. BUT A HIGHER 25% OF THOSE WHO FAVOR A BAN ON
HANDGUN OWNERSHIP WOULD VOTE AGAINST A CANDIDATE WHO OPPOSED
SUCH A MEASURE. THIS IS A REVERSAL OF PREVIOUS POLLS IN THE PAST, WHICH
HAVE SHOWN THE ANTI-GUN CONTROL GROUP MORE LIKELY TO VOTE AGAINST
THEIR OPPONENTS. TRANSLATED INTO VOTES, THIS MEANS THAT A 62-38%
MAJORITY OF THE AFFECTED VOTE WILL COME DOWN FOR A HANDGUN BAN.
THEY WILL VOTE AGAINST A CANDIDATE WHO OPPOSES SUCH A BAN. IN TERMS
OF THE TOTAL ELECTORATE, IT MEANS THAT THE ISSUE OF BANNING HANDGUNS
WOULD YIELD 13% OF THE VOTE GOING AGAINST AN ANTI-GUN CONTROL
CANDIDATE AND 8% WHO WOULD VOTE AGAINST A CANDIDATE WHO SUPPORTED
6
A BAN ON HANDGUNS. THIS IS A NET SWING OF 5 FULL POINTS.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT COULD TURN A DEAD HEAT INTO A 10 POINT LEAD FOR THE
CANDIDATE SUPPORTING A BAN ON HANDGUNS. IF THE SAME FORMULA WERE
APPLIED TO THE BRADY BILL, THE DIVISION WOULD BE 18-3% OR A 15
POINT SWING AGAINST THOSE WHO WOULD OPPOSE THAT BILL. BY ANY
MEASURE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE DEEPLY DISTURBED BY THE THREAT OF
GUNS TO SOCIETY, BUT MOST PARTICULARLY UPON THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF
CHILDREN. THEY ARE PLAYING FOR KEEPS, MARK THAT WELL. AND WHAT
HAPPENED IN NEW JERSEY AND VIRGINIA IS MILD COMPARED TO WHAT THEY ARE
LOOKING FOR NATIONALLY.
BY KEY GROUPS, WHITES TEND TO BE MORE DIVIDED, WHILE BLACKS AND
LATINOS ARE OVERWHELMINGLY FOR TOUGH CONTROLS. ALSO ARRAYED ON THE
PRO-CONTROL SIDE ARE THOSE WHO ARE BEST EDUCATED, POLITICAL
MODERATES AND LIBERALS, PARENTS, AND WOMEN. ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE
MEMBERS OF THE NRA, MORE REPUBLICANS, GUN OWNERS, AND HIGH INCOME
PEOPLE. CONSERVATIVES COME DOWN ON THE PRO-GUN CONTROL SIDE BY 58-
42%. WOMEN EMERGE AS A MAJOR FORCE FOR GUN CONTROL. WOMEN ARE FAR
MORE WORRIED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON CHILDREN AND FEEL MUCH MORE
URGENTLY ABOUT BANNING HANDGUNS. POLITICALLY, THE WOMEN'S VOTE
COULD BE DECISIVE OVER THIS ISSUE ALONE.
THESE RESULTS WOULD SUGGEST THAT GUN CONTROL HAS NOW PASSED
FROM AN ISSUE THAT SHARPLY DIVIDED AMERICA TO ONE WHERE A NEW
CONSENSUS HAS ARISEN. NO SMALL PART OF THE REASON IS THE FACT THAT
PEOPLE NOW ASSOCIATE THE ISSUE WITH THE WELLBEING OF THEIR CHILDREN.
GUNS ARE so PERVASIVE, MOST BELIEVE, THAT THEY ARE A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR
7
TO THE PALL OF VIOLENCE IN SOCIETY, ESPECIALLY IN THE LIVES OF CHILDREN.
AS A NATION, AS OUR SURVEY INDICATES, WE SUFFER A DEEP SENSE OF GUILT
ABOUT THE NEGLECT OF OUR CHILDREN. IT IS PATENTLY CLEAR FROM THIS
STUDY THAT THE TIME HAS COME TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS OF CHILDREN
FRONTALLY, AND THE IMPACT OF GUNS ON THEIR LIVES APPEARS TO BE THE
ISSUE THAT WILL LEAD THE WAY FOR A LASTING CHANGE IN THE SECURITY AND
STATUS OF CHILDREN IN AMERICAN SOCIETY.
12/13/93
04:34
202 690 7595
HHS OFF OF SEC
002
December 13, 1993
POINTS FOR PRESIDENT'S ANTIVIOLENCE PROGRAM
(Peter Edelman and Phil Heymann)
1. Enact the crime bill (especially community policing)
2. Next steps on guns (whatever the President decides to propose --
the details here as far as our working group is concerned are
separate and apart from the study on registration and licensing
which is being done by a separate ATF-Justice group and is expected
to take a considerable period of time. our list of options will
cover assault weapons, juvenile possession, ammunition, and
technology to make guns safer, among other things.)
3. Media (President announces he is inviting leaders of all the
media -- networks, cable, filmmakers, record companies, video toys
-- to White House for meeting to discuss what they can do. This
obviously needs careful honing of list of requests and knowledge of
how they are going to respond. Jody Greenstone indicates that
separate activity is under way on this, timed to fit with the
industry's need to respond to Senator Paul Simon's early January
deadline.)
4. Neighborhood and community-wide antiviolence coalitions (These
are absolutely key to the President's call to take our cities back
block by block and neighborhood by neighborhood. They are
developing on their own in many communities. We have worked with
Denver and Omaha, but seven cities in Texas have action plans for
crime prevention connected to broad-based coalition building, and
cities like San Diego and Seattle have done their own city-wide
task forces. Fort Worth says it has reduced crime in all
categories by 25 to 30 percent by the totality of its activities.
Could say U.S. Attorneys will lead federal team to draw on federal
expertise to help in any city that wants it. Could also propose
modest federal cash assistance on a formula basis to statos and
major cities as "glue" to start up and staff the coalitions. Major
message point here: everyone has to take responsibility.)
5. Drug and alcohol policy, including both law onforcement and
treatment/prevention (This goes here because drugs and alcohol are
so closely interwoven with so much of the violence. There will be
a new hard-core drug and alcohol abuser treatment initiative in the
FY 95 budget and there is a significant criminal justice drug
treatment portion of the crime bill. We will coordinate this with
Lee Brown's staff so that it reinforces the drug policy strategy
that he is developing.)
6. Federal law enforcement activities to prosecute and assist local
prosecution of violent crime:
-- At local level, define the problem, inventory federal and local
prosecution and investigative resources, and develop joint anti-
violence strategy. Use integrated force of federal investigators
(FBT, DEA, and Customs) to work with local law enforcement.
12/13/93
04:35
202 690 7595
HHS OFF OF SEC
003
-- Design federal role as part of the locally determined strategy,
based on special advantages of the various federal tools available
to assist.
-- Coordinate and share intelligence among federal' and local law
enforcement agencies.
-- Create new Violent Crime Section in Criminal Division to support
training, help in the field, racilitate coordination and share
intelligence and ideas.
7. Juvenile Justice (recommendations primarily for state and local
action on both the law enforcement side for violent crime and on
the alternatives side for minor offenders)
8. Safe schools (Enact the Safe Schools Act and the Safe and Drug-
Free schools and Communities Act portion of the Elementary and
Secondary Act reauthorization)
9. Million Mentors Initiative (Get a million mentors out there with
young people -- there are perhaps 150,000 to 200,000 now by rough
cstimates, so this is a reasonable aim. This is prototypical
reinventing government. Doing good mentorship programs is neither
simple nor free. It requires careful organization to recruit,
screen, train, supervise, monitor, support, and provide logistical
assistance for mentors. Could propose small grant program to
states to distribute as they think most wise. Leverage would be
multiplied many times over, because the heart of the effort would
be private action.)
10. Turn schools into community centers and enact "Ounce of
Prevention" program in crime bill (Would enable nonprofit
organizations, colleges, and others to work with schools within
neighborhoods to reach "at risk" youth with after-school, evening,
and summer academic enrichment and recreation, with lots of adult
role models to create meaningful adult relationships for kids who
so often lack them, and organized activities to connect youth to
labor market. Call for enactment of Ounce of Prevention (Dodd) and
Bradley-Danforth-Domenici amendments in crime bill to do these
things. Major message point here: There is a tendency to send the
message that all youth or all youth in certain categories are
threats. All youth have strengths and we need to build on them
even as we punish those who engage in violence. Need to treat
youth as assets, not collections of problems.)
11. Massive public education
- re guns as dangerous consumer products
- re "time out" or "squash it" to appeal to kids to
settle disputes nonviolently
- re real men don't heat women
- re underage drinking
(fund Centers for Disease Control to work with private sector to
develop messages)
2
12/13/93
04:35
202 690 7595
HHS OFF OF SEC
004
12. Use national service to get full-time volunteers into violence
reduction and prevention activities. (Mention in State of Union
that Summer of service in 1994 will be Summer of Safety and call on
everyone involved at grass-roots and on up to make violence
reduction a priority in implementation of the program.)
13. Get prosecutors and police and social service people to
cooperate in each community to implement tough domestic violence
arrest and prosecution protocols and safe places for battered women
and children to go (Enact Violence Against Women Act provisions in
crime bill. Message point: there is a continuity of violence.
What children see and experience at home reflects itself all too
often in their later behavior.)
14. New hate crimes legislation
15. Strengthen families and parenting skills (Implement recently
enacted Family Preservation legislation)
16. Strengthen neighborhoods via the Empowerment Zones (already
enacted)
17. Promote jobs and opportunity and hope for young people (This is
a missing piece at present, especially for young men, since we will
concentrate some effort on young women via welfare reform -- we
need some kind of youth employment initiative as part of Job
Training Partnership Act reorientation, concentration of resources
within national service, or connected to Bill Galston's zero to
three year old initiative. Bob Reich tells me he has a $5 billion
idea to revive the CCC -- not bad if we could find the money.)
18. Cut red tape for localities, develop improved on-line
computerized information about federal resources, new resource
guides and how-to manuals about promising activities to reduce
violence.
NOTE: Martin Luther King's birthday would be a good time to do
something or things to dramatize all of the above -- possibly a
speech or lead a march against violence or go to Lincoln Memorial
or meet with kids and talk about Dr. King or some combination.
3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Nancy Hernreich
Pam Barnett
FROM:
Anne Bartley
MB
DATE:
November 29, 1993
RE:
North Carolinians for Gun Control
Enclosed is a letter and materials from Lisa Price for the
President and Mrs. Clinton describing the North Carolinians for
Gun Control, a statewide educational lobbying organization she
helped found. Lisa Price is the wife of Congressman David Price
of the 4th District of North Carolina.
106 Collums Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
November 19, 1993
Ms. Ann Bartley
OEOB Room 100
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Ann:
Will you see that this gets to President and Mrs. Clinton.
Thanks very much.
Sincerely,
Lisa Price
Lisa Price
-Pan Barnett
-Nancy Hernreich
106 Collums Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
919/967-7862
President and Mrs. William Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President and Mrs. Clinton:
Congratulations on the NAFTA victory!
I write to tell you how extremely pleased many of us are about
your leadership in the terrible problem of gun violence. We were
thrilled at the reception to President Clinton's remarks about
gun control when he spoke at the October 12 UNC Bicentennial.
In August I helped start a statewide educational and lobbying
organization, North Carolinians for Gun Control, and we have met
with enthusiastic and growing support. Members include William
Friday, Dean Smith and a number of elected officials. We keep in
close touch with Handgun Control, Inc. Enclosed are newspaper
clippings, our basic letter, and some of our statements.
If there is anything North Carolinians for Gun Control can do to
help you work for strict, effective national gun control please
let me know.
Thank you for your outstanding leadership in today's major
issues. Nothing is more important, I think, than reducing
violence in America.
Sincerely,
Lisa Price
Lisa Price
Enclosures
Greensbero
EDITORIALS
Greensboro
Mainstream campaign
News
Record
takes aim at handguns
10-15-93
Raleigh
There's no reason to leave the de-
getting things accomplished in the right way.
bate to those with extreme views.
This week, the group met with a coalition
of religious leaders representing 40 denomi-
nations as a means of seeking ideas on ways
The Dean's other 'deal' 10/17/9 N+O
The good news about gun control in North
to to accomplish the mission of reducing
Carolina is that more solid citizens are get-
violence from guns. Already the head of a
efore he signed a lucrative
those courageous folks who bring
ting concerned and involved.
police organization representing 4,300 offi-
Part of the problem with past efforts at
cers has asked to become part of the effort.
B
deal with Nike, which has
passion to the cause but can't
slowing down the proliferation of handguns
gotten him a lot of attention
match the National Rifle Associa-
Next week the group will sponsor a confer-
is that too many people speaking out were on
lately, UNC Tar Heel Coach
tion in money or visibility. It's quite
ence on problems of violence. The speaker
the fringe, those who feel all guns should be
will be Sarah Brady, the spouse of former
Dean Smith put his pen on some-
another to stand in the ring with a
banned and those who feel no restrictions
Ronald Reagan press secretary Jim Brady,
thing more important - a personal
fellow of Smith's reputation and
should apply. These hardened positions
who was grievously wounded with a pistol
check for an organization that is
fame.
haven't left much room for compromise or
during an attempt on Reagan's life.
promoting responsible gun control
A Tar Heeler hereabouts won-
relief from the problem.
The group of about 100 people came to-
in North Carolina. This-is only the
ders, in fact, what might happen if
But that may be changing. There's a new
gether after a single mailing to 300 North
latest gesture from the coach and
Smith told the next gathering of the
gun control group coming together that
Carolinians, asking for support. That solicita-
his wife, Dr. Linnea Smith, in
Rams Club that he wanted gur
seems to represent a reasonable approach to
tion came about after three concerned citi-
support of good and thoughtful
finding solutions without going to extremes.
zens in Chapel Hill began talking about the
control or he might take off for
causes.
Given who some of the leaders of the North
growing problem of gun violence in their
UCLA. One suspects the Rams
Carolinians for Gun Control are, we're en-
neighborhoods and after watching lobbyists
North Carolinians for Gun Control
would call a special session of the
couraged about the chances of success. And
for gun enthusiasts continue to get their way
qualifies as both. It is the state's
General Assembly, and arrange foi
by success, we mean reducing the number of
in legislative halls without much opposition
guns floating around the streets in the hands
first organized gun control lobby
a blank bill which Smith could fill ir
from the other side. NCGC so far operates
of people who shouldn't have them.
and includes, besides the Smiths,
however he liked.
essentially off the kitchen tables of the found-
Among the members of the NCGC are
ers and out of a post office box in Chapel Hill.
UNC system President Emeritus
Seriously, of course, Smith's par-
William Friday, retired president of the Uni-
But it has raised $3,100 toward the goal of
Bill Friday and his wife, Ida, and
ticipation is important in drawing
versity of North Carolina system; UNC bas-
hiring someone to create higher visibility.
Lisa Price, wife of 4th District Rep.
attention to this campaign. Gun
ketball coach Dean Smith; Lisa Price, wife of
The early success of NCGC seems to sup-
David Price. All these folks add
control advocates always seem to
U.S. David Price; and Collins Kilburn, execu-
port what public opinion polls continue to
brainpower and strength to the
tive director of the N.C. Council of Churches.
start strong in the General Assem-
show: that more people with more clout are
effort to stem the dangerous spread
These aren't fringe loonies as the National
willing to stand up and say enough already of
bly, but, in the face of heavy
of guns in society in general and
Rifle Association likes to call anyone who
the wanton killings from with handguns and
opposition from big-money lobby-
favors control of handguns.
this area specifically.
assault rifles. The group's presence is a
ists, the issue fades by session's
But they are people who are astute at
welcome sign.
The gun lobby must not like this a
end.
bit. It's one thing to battle what
Maybe now it will be different.
they would call the "usual
Dean Smith's teams are never
suspects" in the gun control fight
inclined to fade.
Front Page Raleigh News + Observer
N+O
State 93 gun-control group gathering force, welcoming Sarah Brady
10-12
BY JANE STANCILL
North Carolinians for Gun Con-
massive membership drive.
where a jogger was gunned down
leaders of the gun control move-
on a legislative agenda. We expect
STARP WRITER
trol has attracted 140 members
This week, board members will
in July, touching off the gun
ment say.
them to be serious players."
CHAPEL HILL - The debate about
from across the state some of
meet with a coalition of religious
control debate in Chapel Hill.
"They've got leaders who are
them political heavyweights like
leaders. On Oct. the
Members of the group that
gun control in Chapel Hill is
William Friday, former president
The talk of tougher gun laws
politically astute and know how to
started with three women in Cha-
nearly three months old, and so
lence; its Insymote -
also has been fueled by a steep
get things done," said Susan
of the UNC system, and Lisa
pel Hill say they're taking their
far it's been a shouting match,
rise in the number of gun-related
Whitmore, a spokesman for the
cause across North Carolina.
with gun entbusiasts making most
Price, wife of U.S. Rep. David
Sarah Brady, head of Handout
crimies in Chapel HAM in the past
national advocacy group Handgun
Price, D-N.C.
"It's on people's minds like
of the noise.
Control 1 at former
few years - from seven incidents
Control, which has provided some
never before," said board mem-
And that's without trying hard:
Reagan James
The group put at one mailing of
Brady, She will speak m Guy B.
in 1988 to os Incidents
guidance for the local group.
But now a citizens group that
ber Collins Kilburn, executive
"Although they've just gotten
supports stricter gun laws is
300 letters and has not launched
Phillips Middle just a few
The group's early
started, they've had some strong
quistly marahaling its forces.
an advertising compaign or a
hundred yards Trbes the spot
ments are impressive, pational
early meetings. They're working
SEE GUN CONTROL, PAGE 6A
GUN CONTROL
together a realition of dosens of
National Rifle Association mem-
educational, religious, health and
bers, the group came out in full
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1A
business groups that support gun
force at Chapel Hill's public hear-
control legislation.
ing.
director of the N.C. Council of
Price said she hopes NCGC will
Now, it too is setting its sights
Churches. "For a long time polls
be able to assemble the same kind
on statewide membership drives,
have indicated a majority of
of backing.
fund-raising and lobbying.
citizens want firmer restrictions
So far, the group has attracted
Andrew Bare, one of the found-
on guns in society, but we haven't
ministers, lawyers, community
ers of the group, said he was not
been organized enough to counter
activists, a Carrboro town official,
prepared to release current mem-
the NRA and the pro-gun lobby.
at least one school board member
barship numbers or the amount of
The time is right for us to get our
and a nationally known retired
money raised so far.
act together."
university president.
"We hope to have everything in
Lisa Price, a founding member,
Friday, who led the University
order," be said. "We do have a
said the group plans to be up and
of North Carolina system for 30
substantial membership."
running by the beginning of the
years, was one of the group's first
Bare said he isn't worried about
General Assembly's short session
members. He said be found a
the emergence of gun control
in May 1994. It hopes to have a
growing support for the idea of
advocates.
substantial statewide member-
gun control in his travels.
"They don't concern us at all,"
ship by the 1995 regular session.
"The people I have heard across
he said. "It's a small minority
She said NCGC may consult
the state are very energized by
considering the majority of North
with groups that have made in-
this," he said. "I'm interested in a
Carolinians who have firearms in
roads in other states, like the
serious, rational discussion. It's
their homes."
powerful Marylanders Against
time for everyone to sit down
Price said she's aware her
Handgun Abuse, a 5,000-member
together and work out a policy
group will have a formidable
group that a few years ago suc-
and stop the name-calling and,
adversary. But that's not daunt-
cessfully defended a law restrict-
most of all, stop the killing.
ing. she said.
ing so-called Saturday night spe-
Meanwhile, the N.C. Constitu-
cials, a type of cheap pistol.
tion Defense Association is work-
"We're not trying to take them
The Maryland group, which
ing out policies of its own. Com-
on," she said. "We're doing what
started a decade ago, has put
posed of gun enthusiasts and
we think is best for society."
Statement for Gun Control Public Hearing, Nov. 4, 1993
I want to speak, for myself and as a member of NCGC, in support
of the proposed new gun control ordinance.
Many of us have been distressed for years at the staggering level
of gun violence in the United States. No other modern
industrialized nation comes anywhere near ours in the role of
firearms in accidents, domestic disputes, suicides or homicides.
There are many underlying reasons for violence, such as poverty,
joblessness, family breakdown, alcohol and drugs, anger and
despair. Other countries have these problems, too, but they do
not tolerate and glorify firearms as we do. Nations like Great
Britain, Sweden, Canada, Australia and Switzerland have strict
licensing and registration for handguns.
What many of us envision for the United States is a climate which
does not tolerate violence and enacts laws which control the
manufacture, distribution, possession and use of deadly weapons.
We also want to see the underlying causes of violence greatly
reduced and a criminal justice system which keeps violent people
away from society.
A NC municipality is very limited, as you know, in what it can do
to limit guns. I am very appreciative of what Chapel Hill is
proposing to do, given this limitation, to "promote the health,
safety, and welfare of citizens" by adding a new firearm
ordinance. I am also pleased with other efforts our town-- local
government, private citizens, schools, agencies, and companies--
are making to reduce violence: increasing the number of police
officers; providing a civilian security force; increasing
lighting; having a Town violent crime and drug abuse program;
considering a gun buy-back program; encouraging non-violent
conflict resolution; and supporting social programs which
alleviate the causes of violence.
Chapel Hill has long been a model of an attractive, civilized,
friendly town. I hope it will become a model, too, of a town
that will not tolerate violence. I hope that other NC areas will
copy our gun laws and ways of discouraging violence.
I also hope that the NC General Assembly will pass new statewide
legislation. They have the power to enact such laws as: ban
assault weapons, ban possession of handguns by youth through age
20 (rather than the present 17 and under), crack down on illegal
gun dealers, license and register firearms, and limit the number
of handguns one can purchase. They could also give metropolitan
areas the power to enact the stricter gun control laws that most
urban residents want.
Lisa Price
Dean Smith
joins ranks
of gun foes N+O
93
BY JANE STANCILL
STAFF WRITER
CHAPEL HILL - One of the most
famous Tar Heels of all is lending
his name and celebrity to the gun
control movement in North Caro-
lina.
Dean Smith, head basketball
coach at the
University of
North Carolina
at Chapel Hill,
has joined a
group called
North Carolin-
ians for Gun
Control. He and
his wife, Lin-
nea, signed up
and sent in a
large contribu-
Smith
tion, according to Lisa Price, a
board member for the group.
"They contributed generously,"
Price said. "I don't want to say
how much."
The Smiths could not be reached
for comment Thursday.
Three Chapel Hill women
formed the statewide organization
in September to seek tougher gun
control laws. It is the state's first
organized gun control lobby.
Other well-known members in-
clude former UNC President Wil-
liam Friday and his wife, Ida, and
Price, who is married to U.S. Rep.
David Price, the Democrat who
represents the 4th District.
The Smiths have been social
activists for years.
In 1983, the coach appeared in
statewide commercials calling for
a nuclear freeze. The campaign
was sponsored by the national
Committee for a SANE Nuclear
Policy.
Letter published in the
Raleigh newsand Observer
407 Elliott Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
The People's Forum
Nov, 1993
PO Box 191
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dear Editor:
While we found October 24 article, "Reason to Fear," discussing
Triangle violent crime, informative, we believe that an important
factor in reducing crime was omitted.
We agree that society must tackle problems of poverty,
joblessness, despair, drugs and dysfunctional families; that we
must try to rehabilitate criminals; and that the most violent
must remain incarcerated. We also believe, however, that
stricter gun control in another crucial step.
The supply of guns to criminals can be reduced. Your article
mentions that when authorities broke up a gun-running gang
"suspected of putting 1200 firearms on the streets. shootings
dropped dramatically and immediately." North Carolinians for Gun
Control believes that tightening up regulation of gun dealers
will drastically reduce crime.
It is much too easy to become a gun dealer. Individuals over the
age of 21 can get a 3-year federal license for $30 from the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. (In North Carolina there
is an additional $50 fee). Because of the ATF's inadequate staff
and loophole-ridden background check for felony convictions, many
felons get licenses and sell weapons to criminals. About 75% are
"kitchen-table" dealers doing business out of their own homes.
President Clinton has directed the ATF to improve its procedures.
Senator Simon has proposed that Congress limit license availa-
bility to legitimate storefront operations by raising the fee to
$2,500 and making sure that dealers have necessary local and
state permits.
Can our state and counties do something now about our
unscrupulous dealers? Strict control of gun dealers is, we
believe, a major part of controlling violent crime.
Sincerely,
Fran Weaner
Fran Weaver
North Carolinians for Gun Control
942-7265
106 Collums Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
November 10, 1993
Editor, The Chapel Hill News
505 W. Franklin St.
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Dear Editor:
I wish to clarify a misunderstanding which occurred in a November
7 article about the founders of North Carolinians for Gun
Control. The only guns which NCGC seeks to have banned are
assault weapons, which are designed for mass destruction. Last
week NC Attorney General Michael Easley proposed such a ban.
NCGC does not seek to ban handguns but rather to put further
regulations on them. The United States has many laws controlling
motor vehicles; surely something as dangerous as handguns should
be strictly regulated. Polls have repeatedly shown that most
Americans want more gun control.
Health officials speak of an epidemic of gun violence in the US.
No other modern industrialized nation comes near our country in
the prevalence of firearms in homicides, suicides, domestic
disputes or accidents. In regard to homicides, for example,
handguns were used in 1990 to murder 22 people in Great Britain,
13 in Sweden, 68 in Canada, 10 in Australia, 91 in Switzerland--
and 10,567 in the United States. All of these other governments,
unlike ours, have strict licensing and registration of handguns.
NCGC believes that crime and other gun violence in America can be
reduced by the enactment and enforcement of reasonable, strict
handgun control laws. We support the proposed additional Chapel
Hill gun control ordinance, the federal Brady Bill, and a ban on
military-style assault weapons. As specific situations develop,
NCGC will give its positions on other local, state and national
gun control legislative and public policy proposals.
Sincerely,
Lisa Price
Lisa Price
NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL
PO Box 9204
Chapel Hill, NC 27515
TO: Concerned Citizens of North Carolina
FROM: Founders Board of Directors
IF you are dismayed at the epidemic of gun violence in our country,
IF you are horrified at the specter of guns in the hands of children,
IF you want to join with other Americans who are taking a stand,
Then join NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL and share our goal of making society
safe from gun violence - whether by criminals, accidents, domestic disputes, or suicides -
through public education and the enactment and enforcement of strict gun control laws. We
shall work together to promote gun control legislation locally, regionally, statewide, and
nationally. We acknowledge that there are many causes of violence in our communities, but we
believe that gun control is an essential first step in reducing that violence.
As a member of NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL, you will receive a newsletter
informing you about gun violence and the legislative initiatives taking place in your community,
our state, and across the nation.
As a member of NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL, you will know when and how to
send your messages on gun control to your elected officials.
HERE IS HOW YOU CAN HELP TODAY:
Become a member of NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL by sending a
contribution and/or volunteering to work for its goals.
Copy this letter and give it to friends.
Encourage your civic, religious, business, educational, human service, or other
group to join NCGC.
I want to become a member of NORTH CAROLINIANS FOR GUN CONTROL.
Name:
Address:
Phone
Enclosed is my donation for $
I want to volunteer:
You may use my/our name(s) in advertising or publicity. ] Yes [ ] No
Make check payable to NCGC and mail to PO Box 9204, Chapel Hill, NC 27515
(Contributions to lobbying organizations are not tax-deductible)
FAX COVER SHEET
guns file
LH RESEARCH
Surveys by Louis Harris
1270 Avenue of the Americas
New York, N.Y. 10020
Phone: 212-332-2950 Fax: 212-332-2932
TO: MRS. HICLARA CLINTON
FROM: LOU HARRIS
DATE: 05/01/93
RE: GUN STUDY
NUMBER OF PAGES (Including Cover Page) 3
(If you do not receive all pages please call 212-332-2950)
COMMENTS:
HILLARY: THIS IS ANISSUE FAR
BIGGERTHAN I THOUGHTX IT IS
D MAJOR CHILDREN'S ISSVE x
I AM C CONFIDENT DOLS WILL
GO FOR IT, AS WILL MITIHPICA
FOLEY.
En
LH RESEARCH
Surveys by Louis Harris
1270 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10020
TEL.: 212-332-2950
LOUIS HARRIS, CHAIRMAN
ROBERT F. WASHER, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN
May 25, 1993
Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Hillary,
I think I have come upon an issue and a potential
landmark event whose time has arrived and on which you and the
President can play a crucial role in making reality for generations
of children and their parents to come. This is the issue of guns
and children's health.
I have just finished a fascinating study of a cross-
section of the American people on their views toward children
generally and specifically toward guns and their impact upon young
people today. A wonderful woman, Deborah Leff, President of the
Joyce Foundation, whom you know, has commissioned the study.
The final report is just now being completed and will be
finally printed early next week. But the results will show that
the country is ripe and ready for solid and substantial gun reform,
not because of the reasons that those advocating such reform have
put forth before. Instead, it will all happen because: a.) As a
nation we have a terrible guilty conscience about the neglect of
children that has taken place in this country; b.) Guns have become
the leading killer of teenage boys white and black alike -- and
gunshot wounds and deaths among young people 16 or less have
increased 77% over a three year period; and c.) the NRA and the gun
lobby are finally ready to be routed by an aroused electorate, as
witness the recent surprising measures passed in both Virginia and
New Jersey, states which had been the major suppliers of handguns
to Washington, D.C. and New York, who both have tough anti-gun
laws.
I spoke with Bob Dole, whom I've known for a long time,
yesterday about this issue, since Sen. John Chafee, one of the
three GOP leaders in the Senate, has sponsored a bill to outlaw all
handgun ownership in the country. While Bob spoke in confidence,
he said that the way children have been victimized by guns is a
national scandal and disgrace, and he thought he might well go
along with Chafee on "real, tough anti-gun legislation for the
first time." He did say he thought the Republicans in the Senate
(of all people) might get the jump on this issue! His rationale:
they need to show some compassion not just blind opposition.
NOT AFFILIATED WITH LOUIS HARRIS AND ASSOCIATES
Page Two
My own view is that suddenly there is a coalescence on
this issue, and the time to move is quickly now. I realize that
you are totally immersed, as you should be, in the healthcare
issue. But I also think there is a need for the country to come
together on an issue that will not cost any money to pass, will not
be victimized by gridlock, and which will make people believe that
at last the leadership in Washington can get things done. I am sure
that George Mitchell and Tom Foley would agree with this. I will
be talking to both today on the phone.
If you could spare a few minutes next Wednesday, Debby
Leff and I will be in Washington preparing for a press conference
on our report on Thursday, June 3rd, and we would like to have the
chance to brief you on what we have found. I think you will find
it exciting and the facts about attitudes toward children will
particularly please you. The good part of it all is that once as
a nation we break the ice and begin to do something for children,
my judgment is that the next steps on that agenda will be much
easier to achieve.
Thanks for giving this consideration. Incidentally, I am
not impressed by all the handwringing about recent events, and can
see a few dramatic turnabouts such as this gun issue as restoring
the deep underlying craving the American people have for a change
toward a sense of real community and a caring for each other. We
are sorely tired of attacking each other instead of our common
problems.
Warmly,
hanttanns