Each tragic mass shooting should make us look in the mirror and ask ourselves whether we will offer platitudes or act to protect our communities.

I spent last Friday morning meeting constituents in Virginia Beach and the evening mourning the death of 12 people shot dead at the city’s municipal complex. Laquita Brown, Keith Cox, Tara Gallagher, Mary Louise Gayle, Alex Gusev, Joshua Hardy, Missy Langer, Richard Nettleton, Katherine Nixon, Christopher Rapp, Bert Snelling, and Bobby Williams should not have died. Their deaths have robbed Virginia Beach of neighbors who served the community and their loved ones of countless future memories. Devastated, distraught, confused, angry, afraid: the adjectives a person, community, state, or even entire nation feels after a mass shooting could fill a large dictionary on their own.

I wish I didn’t have prior experience with this, but I do. When I was governor of Virginia in 2007, a gunman killed 32 people at Virginia Tech. Like the 12 Virginia Beach victims, these 32 people had friends, families, accomplishments, and aspirations, all cut short in a matter of minutes. The emotional weight of that day was overwhelming. Parents learned they would never hold their children again. A Holocaust survivor sacrificed himself so his students could escape. Students, faculty, and staff wondered whether they would ever again feel safe on campus.

We turned our pain into action then. Despite a judge previously finding the gunman mentally ill and in need of treatment, he was still able to purchase the guns he used in the attack because the court hadn’t entered its finding into the national background check system. Determined to address this shortfall, I signed an executive order requiring courts to report such involuntary mental health commitments and later cemented this policy into law. No one thought that this one fix would prevent all gun violence, but it was an important change that aimed to stop dangerous people from buying weapons. We tried to do more by closing the gun-show loophole that allows someone to buy a gun without a background check, but Republicans blocked our efforts.

In the same way we examined how weaknesses in our laws led to the Virginia Tech tragedy, we should examine which ones led to the Virginia Beach tragedy. Police have already said the gunman used extended magazines in his rampage. Magazines holding more than the standard capacity enable a shooter to fire repeatedly with fewer pauses to reload, giving potential victims less of a chance to escape and allowing the killer more shots until he’s stopped. Despite this clear hazard, Virginia has no legal limit on magazine size.

Earlier this year, a Virginia Senate committee considered a bill to ban the sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds; Republicans defeated it. In recent Congresses, I’ve cosponsored similar bills on the national level; Republicans refuse to bring them up for a vote. We can’t say for certain how Friday might have been different had magazine limits passed and gone into effect in time, but it is entirely plausible that, had the shooter been limited to smaller magazines, he would have fired fewer rounds and some of those victims might still be alive.

With all due credit, the Trump administration did the right thing by recently banning bump stocks, the rifle attachment used when a gunman killed 58 people in Las Vegas in 2017. That was a good step, and I hope the president and congressional Republicans will work with us on banning high-capacity magazines and closing the background check loopholes. We should also acknowledge that nearly two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides and strengthen the background check system to stop suicidal individuals from buying a gun.

We should pass a bill in Congress to encourage state, local, and tribal governments to adopt extreme risk protection orders that would remove firearms from individuals who exhibit signs of a mental health crisis. We should wake up to the fact that more than a million American women have been shot by an intimate partner and pass laws that prevent domestic abusers from keeping a gun.

The bottom line is this — after each tragedy, we have the opportunity to learn and improve. And Americans, even those who own guns, strongly support many of the common-sense measures I mention here. The question is whether we will continue to offer platitudes but refuse to act to protect our communities.

After a high-profile shooting, we mourn the victims and ask questions about the motivations of perpetrators. But we should also look in the mirror and ask something about ourselves. Will we continue to be bystanders, allowing carnage to occur all around us, taking no action to stop it? Or will we muster the backbone to improve our laws?

Tim Kaine, a Democrat, represents Virginia in the U.S. Senate. This opinion first appeared in USA Today.

(3) comments


The idiocy and vacuous substance of Sen. Kaine's argument is, to most common sense Americans, just that...without substance. Since Cain and Able it has been illegal to kill another human being. Most rational Americans realize that passing more laws and restricting the freedoms of those who abide by the law, will not have any effect whatsoever on the insanity of these tragedies. I suspect it was already illegal in Virginia Beach to take two weapons into the government facility there and kill twelve innocent human beings. No statute would have prevented that tragedy. If Democrats truly and honestly want to help resolve this problem, and not constantly try to use every tragedy as an opportunity to further their gun control/anti-2nd Amendment agenda, then they can start by allowing folks who are willing, to carry the ability to protect their own lives into their workplaces. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun" is at least worth a try. These human rejects that commit these mindless atrocities always seem to have enough mental capacity to start shooting where they can expect the least amount of resistance. If targets were a bit more unpredictable, I suspect we would see a decline in these tragic events. Isn't THAT at least worth a try, Sen. Kaine? We gave you ten years to restrict so-called "assault weapons" and it had absolutely no effect. Why don't you give the innocent, law-abiding citizens of this Commonwealth the chance to defend themselves for ten years and see how that works? Sadly, though I suspect this is going to fall on "tin ears".

Steve Cunningham

We need to find a way to keep felons and gang members who should not have access to guns away from guns and not focus so much on legal gun owners. From the National Institute for Justice: "Gangs and Gun-Related Homicide Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes. In 1980, the percentage of homicides caused by firearms during arguments was about the same as from gang involvement (about 70 percent), but by 1993, nearly all gang-related homicides involved guns (95 percent), whereas the percentage of gun homicides related to arguments remained relatively constant. The percentage of gang-related homicides caused by guns fell slightly to 92 percent in 2008, but the percentage of homicides caused by firearms during the commission of a felony rose from about 60 percent to about 74 percent from 1980 to 2005.["

Spock Here

Yes, you are right. What gang have these mass shooters in the past few years belonged to? The Parkland Gang? The Las Vegas Gang? The Virginia Gang, covering Va Beach down to Tech?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.