Hesston, a town of fewer than 4,000 residents and home to Hesston College (founded by the Mennonite church in 1909), is a quiet little town. Hesston exemplifies the way of life to which people refer when they mention the heartland of America - what they mean when they compare the violence of big cities to the quiet of small towns.
About 10 years ago, Hunky Husband was called upon, by the organization with whom we volunteer, to check out the activities surrounding a wild, grass fire up in Harvey County, Kansas - near the City of Hesston. As one in-training to become a liaison to governmental organizations, I accompanied him to see how he dealt with the emergency management and fire department officials. Since then, I've provided coordination with many different governments - local, state, and federal - but that first taste of on-the-job training has stayed with me.
Fast forward to three days ago. Late in the afternoon, I was party to a conference call among 10-15 people who are planning a disaster response training institute in early April. Our organization's local disaster program manager, who chaired the call, asked a volunteer who works in mental health to stay on the line with her after the call ended and, in the meantime, to watch the local TV news. Because my cellphone battery died toward the end of the call, when I checked back in, the conference call had ended and only the two of them were still on the line. Overhearing just enough to realize what had happened, I quickly hung up - and turned on the TV in my den. From that point (nearly 5pm, local) until I went to bed, several hours later, the local news was all about an incident in Hesston KS. On that day, The Wichita Eagle newspaper posted:
Four dead, including gunman, in Kansas workplace shooting
Authorities say a man who opened fire on the central Kansas factory where he worked was served with a protection from abuse order shortly before the attack.
Harvey County Sheriff T. Walton said Friday that the sheriff’s office served the suspect, Cedric Ford, 38, with the order at about 3:30 p.m. Thursday at the Excel plant where he worked.
Walton said he thinks that it was likely what triggered the attack, which began about 90 minutes later.
He says such orders are typically served “because there’s some type of violence in a relationship,” but he declined to specify the nature of the relationship in question or to disclose the attacker’s name.
Four people, including Ford, were killed Thursday. In all, Ford shot 17 people, according to officials, killing three.
Until such time as America manages to ban guns like Australia did or reduce them as the UK did, it will always have a problem with its mentally challenged gun owners. What kind of parliamentary majority would be needed to change the 2nd Amendment?
Before anyone nags me for being anti-gun, just let me point out that I have owned several.
Posted by: Ole Phat Stu | February 29, 2016 at 12:29 PM
Stu--Barring a re-interpretation by the Supreme Court, of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, it would take another Amendment to the US Constitution for the gun ownership by non-militia members to be banned. Article 5 from the Constitution provides the following:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Simply: 1) Two-thirds of members in attendance (and meeting a quorum) of both houses of Congress pass a proposed constitutional amendment. This sends the proposed amendment to the states for ratification. 2) Three-fourths of the states (38 states) must ratify the proposed amendment, either by their legislatures or special ratifying conventions, in order for the amendment to be adopted.
BTW: Since an amendment is considered to be a part of the constitution, changing an amendment is treated like changing any other part of the constitution.
Posted by: Cop Car | February 29, 2016 at 04:36 PM
We have had three gun killings just in the past few weeks, unprecedented for this out of the way place in Hawaii, two of them by police. It's escalating everywhere. So are we just going to let this happen and say, well, for legal reasons we can't do anything about the situation? We could start by actually enforcing the gun laws we do have.
Posted by: Hattie | March 01, 2016 at 12:38 AM
I recall hearing the news item -- so tragic -- and in "middle America." The other part of that story distressing to me is the mindset that manifests itself in violence toward women.
Gun ownership seemed harmless to me three-quarters of a century ago during the years I lived in a semi-rural area and men in my life legitimately exercised an outdoorsman life -- never killed creatures for entertainment. I, too, learned gunmanship. During the ensuing years the guns that have come into everyman's ownership and in cities is mindless. I would certainly agree a starting point is to actually enforce the gun laws we have. There is room for some additional requirements.
Perhaps if there are some Supreme Court changes there will be a court case to make its way there. As I recall the argument had been guns were allowed for the militia which some interpreted as not meaning every citizen. Some I know here have strongly emotionally echoed the Charlton Heston statement and I wonder what efforts to remove guns from households might trigger (sorry about the pun.)
Posted by: Joared | March 02, 2016 at 12:18 AM
I think you are in to something Hattie. Just enforce the laws that are already on the books. The Politcians always clamor for more laws in this type of instance, but the same people that want more laws seem to be loathe to enforce the laws on the books or actually punish criminals.
Posted by: Ingineer66 | March 03, 2016 at 12:03 AM
The local Public Broadcasting System radio station had a report, this morning, concerning how well everyone worked together in response to the active shooter event. They told how the Harvey County (I don't recall whether they said "emergency management" or "sheriff's") department had just recently joined with other communities to provide assistance to one another. The report was quite laudatory concerning how other communities helped out and how, of the 14 people shuttled to hospitals (at least one of which is in Wichita - Sedgwick County), all were still alive. (They didn't say so, but I believe that one is still in critical condition.)
That said, I can assure the reporter that the mutual-aid agreements among counties are a part of the State's emergency planning - in force for all the years that I've been in disaster work. For all the things I dislike about Kansas, I've always been pleased at how well the various local government agencies work together. About 10 years ago, I counted 10 or 11 different jurisdictions represented by fire departments working on a block-long, downtown fire in a small city. And they all worked together!
Posted by: Cop Car | March 04, 2016 at 11:16 AM