<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<BODY.CONTENT>
<UID>
0003050230
</UID>
<PUBLICATION>
DETROIT FREE PRESS
</PUBLICATION>
<DATE>
000305
</DATE>
<TDATE>
Sunday, March 05, 2000
</TDATE>
<EDITION>
METRO FINAL
</EDITION>
<SECTION>
COM; CHOICES
</SECTION>
<PAGE>
1E
</PAGE>
<ILLUSTRATION>

</ILLUSTRATION>
<CAPTION>

</CAPTION>
<BYLINE>
MITCH ALBOM
</BYLINE>
<AFFILIATION>

</AFFILIATION>
<MEMO>

</MEMO>
<COPYRIGHT>
Copyright (c) 2000, Detroit Free Press
</COPYRIGHT>
<HEADLINE>
ANOTHER FIREARM, ANOTHER TRAGEDY
</HEADLINE>
<SUBHEAD>

</SUBHEAD>
<CORRECTION>

</CORRECTION>
<BODY>
A6-year-old is dead, and it is your child. It is the child you have loved. It
is the child you tucked under the covers and kissed good night.

What is your child's name?

That is this child's name.

They called you at work. They said, "Your child was shot by a classmate." You
rushed to the school. You gasped at the bloody body.

What is your child's name?

That is this child's name.

  You cried and you wept. You planned a funeral. You stood over the casket.
So small, the box was.

What is your child's name?

That is this child's name.

Imagine this. Believe it for a terrible moment. Not some faraway figure. Not
some member of the other class. Your child.

And your child is dead.

Now, grieving and angry, you hear the arguments.

"This kid who killed your child was a bad seed," they say. "He'd been in
trouble before."

Yes, you say, but without a gun, my child would be alive.

"He had violent tendencies," they say.

But without a gun, my child would be alive.

"He picked on others. He stabbed a kid with a pencil."

Yes, you say, but without a gun, he might have hit my child. He might have
pushed my child. He might have scratched or thrown a stone or poked a pencil
at my child. But he would not have shot my child. And my child would be alive.
Isn't that simple?

"Not so fast," they say.



Violence on TV

"This kid had no guidance," they insist. "His father is in jail. His mother
just got evicted. He was dumped off to live with a relative in a flophouse
full of drugs and bullets and a steady stream of lowlife visitors. No place
for a child. The kid was corrupted."

Yes, you say, but without a gun, he would have been a poor, sympathetic
6-year-old. But he would not have fired a bullet. And my child would be alive.

"Listen," the voices say, "look at our violent society. Look at movies and TV.
Look at video games where creatures murder one another, complete with bloody
animation. These things turn our children violent. These things make them
desensitized. This kid saw these things. He even said, after the shooting, 'It
kind of happened like it does on TV.' "

Yes, you say. The programming corrupts. It poisons. But without a gun, this
kid has fantasy without reality. He would not have shot a bullet.

And my child would be alive.

"Come on now," the voices say, "be practical. You can't take away people's
guns. All that does is remove them from the good people. The crooks will still
get them."

This child was not a crook.

"But the gun he used was stolen."

Not originally, you say. And if it wasn't there to steal, it would not have
been there to use. If it wasn't there to use, my child would still be alive.
Isn't that simple?

"Not so fast," they say.



Violence in society

"We have rights," they say. "Check the Constitution. Second Amendment. Right
to bear arms. Doesn't that matter to you?"

That was 200 years ago, you say, before concealed weapons and assault rifles
and the Internet. That was about a "well-regulated militia being necessary to
the security of a free state" -- not about everyone on my block being able to
shoot everyone else.

"But aren't you afraid of the government?"

Right now, you say, I am more afraid of a 6-year-old.

You think about that, and you start to cry. It is absurd, a 6-year-old
murderer. You want your child. The grief is unbearable. It is ripping you
apart.

You live in a country where, after Columbine High School, after 11-year-old
Nathaniel Abraham and after 6-year-old Kayla Rolland, our lawmakers still will
not budge on even registering a gun the way you register a car, or demanding
safety locks the way medicine has safety tops, or recalling a single new
firearm, even though we recall millions of products the moment they are proved
dangerous.

Guns are protected. As for your children? The good news is, this time it was
not yours who was shot.

The scary news is, next time, it might be.



Contact MITCH ALBOM at 313-223-4581 or  albom@freepress.com.
</BODY>
<DISCLAIMER>
THIS ELECTRONIC VERSION MAY DIFFER SLIGHTLY FROM THE PRINTED ARTICLE.
</DISCLAIMER>
<KEYWORDS>
COLUMN;KAYLA ROLLAND;SHOOTING;HOMICIDE;CHILD;SCHOOL
</KEYWORDS>
</BODY.CONTENT>
