Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 12 May 2016

Created: 12 May 2016

Last Updated: 12 May 2016

Hits: 5238

Guns continued to be in the news this week when a report surfaced that there was an armed man on the White Plains Post Road. This caused all Eastchester Schools to be locked down on Wednesday afternoon. Though it turned out that there was a miscommunication and the man had no gun and was in Rye Brook, not Eastchester, the threat wreaked havoc and frightened the surrondeing communities.

Statistics show that guns pose a significant risk to the population. Here are just a few to consider:

• On average, 88 Americans are killed by gun violence each day.
• More than half of women killed by their intimate partner in the US are killed with gun.
• The risk of homicide for women in a gun-owning household is three times more likely than in homes without guns.
• People with guns at home are twice as likely to die by homicide than people without guns in their homes.
• 50% of suicides are committed with guns.
• The risk of suicide is five times higher for people in gun-owning households.

Local residents are concerned about the presence of guns in the community. The Scarsdale Congregational Church Interfaith Coalition Against Gun Violence held a screening of the film, "Making a Killing, Guns, Greed and the NRA" on Wednesday May 4th. The film traced the impact of guns on families whose loved ones had been shot and showed how the NRA has blocked initiatives to control the sale of guns and safe storage of guns in homes. Following the film, Leah Gunn Barrett, Executive Director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, shared a few ideas about how those in the room could advocate for gun control.

She informed attendees that Westchester County has a gun safety law in place but it is not currently enforced. She urged residents to ask lawmakers and police why this is so. Here is the law:

Gun Safety Law Westchester: The presence of an unsecured, easily accessible loaded weapon in the home increases the likelihood of death or injury from accidents and impulsive acts. Guns left unattended in the home should be kept locked or stored securely to prevent access by children and others who should not have access to them. Gun owners are responsible for keeping their firearms from falling into the hands of children and other unauthorized individuals.

No person who owns or is custodian of a weapon shall store or otherwise leave such weapon out of his or her immediate possession or control without having first securely locked such weapon in an appropriate safe storage depository or rendered it incapable of being fired by use of a safety locking device appropriate to that weapon.

She also pressed attendees to ask law enforcement for the data on lost and stolen firearms over the last five years. When a gun is locked up, it can't be stolen and end up on the streets.

State Assemblywoman Amy Paulin recently sponsored a bill that would require those convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence crime to surrender his/her firearms including rifles, shotguns, black powder rifles, black powder shotguns, muzzle-loading firearms, antique firearms and pistols. Commenting on the bill, Paulin said, "Intimate partner homicide is the most frequent type of domestic homicide," said Paulin, who added that firearms, including handguns, rifles and shotguns, are the weapons used in one-third of intimate-partner homicides. "We know that when a gun is in the house, an abused woman is six times more likely than other abused women to be killed."

The bill has been passed in the State Assembly and Paulin is currently seeking a sponsor for the law to propose it for passage in the State Senate.

Barrett from New Yorkers Against Gun Violence said the group also supports passage of Nicholas's Law, that would require the safe storage of guns not in the immediate possession of the owner. The bill is named for Nicholas Naumkin, a 12 year-old from Saratoga, NY who was shot and killed on a play date by a friend who had discovered his father's loaded and unlocked 9mm handgun.

Learn more about Nicholas' Law and deaths from accidental shootings here:

Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 19 May 2016

Created: 19 May 2016

Last Updated: 19 May 2016

Hits: 5695

This letter was contributed by Mike Greenberg of Brite Avenue: I'm a 15-year resident of Greenacres. Two of my three children have graduated from Greenacres Elementary. My daughter is now in 3rd grade there.

I attended the Board of Education meeting on Monday, May 16, at which the proposed renovation (Option B1) or demolition of Greenacres Elementary and construction of new school across the street on our existing fields (Option C) was discussed extensively, and I would like to note a few things.

First, I'm not sure why Option C supporters continue to compare the finished Option C building to the current school, PRIOR to renovations, as I often heard at the Board of Education meeting on Monday night. This is an irrelevant comparison. Obviously, the correct comparison is between the finished Option C building and the finished Option B1 renovated school, which will, in almost every respect that matters, be the equal of Option C at a far lower cost. The school board's most recent proposal and proposed budget illustrates that. Other than a handful of rooms at the current school that are smaller than comparable rooms at a new Option C school, as the article above points out, the RENOVATED Option B1 building will be substantially equivalent to a new Option C school, especially when features of the more expansive Option C are inevitably stripped away during the highly-charged public review period that precedes the community's vote on every substantial bond issue. This is the consistent history of every major bond issue for capital improvements in this town, as long-time residents of Scarsdale understand and those more recently here apparently do not.

Similarly, the suggestion that those favoring Option B1 primarily abut the playground defies explanation. 860 people signed the original "Save the Field" petition. As of last night (I checked with a Greenacres resident who helped create the original Save the Field petition), it is my understanding that 20 or so residents of Greenacres have withdrawn from that petition. I think its fair to say that while the handful of homeowners who abut the playground mostly oppose Option C, they are joined in that opinion by many hundreds of their neighbors. To suggest otherwise simply distorts the truth. And while we're not deciding this by counting votes, the preponderance of opinion within the Greenacres neighborhood counts. While the Save the Field petition still contains some 840 signatures, the Option C petition, despite vocal campaigning and advocacy and no shortage of publicity, has crested at 154 votes, which has not changed for several days. Based on that, it appears that the Save the Field group outnumbers the Option C group by more than 5 to 1.

The suggestion that Option C is the "safe option" also is incorrect. As described at Monday night's School Board meeting, the Scarsdale Board of Education has tremendous experience renovating old schools while students continue to attend, while it has no similar experience demolishing large school buildings that contain hazardous materials. Of course, the law requires abatement of hazardous materials before demolition occurs, but the precautions that will be taken to do so thoroughly in an empty school building that's about to be torn down, will be minimal, as anyone familiar with the hurried pace of demolition knows. Anyone concerned that renovation work will release toxic dust, as some eagerly pointed out at Monday night's meeting, even when extraordinary precautions are taken, should be more concerned about what will happen when a demolition team knocks down the entire school and releases all of those toxic substances into a pile of debris that will be shoveled from the ground into a legion of dump trucks. This sort of work threatens to release such materials not just in the limited areas of a careful abatement project, where rooms are sealed and air is filtered, but instead into the entire neighborhood. Hopefully, none of us will be down wind that day.

And can't we conduct all asbestos and lead paint abatement over the 2.5 month summer of 2017? It seems to me that with sufficient staffing, we could knock out that part of the project over the summer, at least for a large portion of the school, which would allow ordinary (non-abatement) work to take place on abated areas while students are in school.

I also have to say how insulting it is for those of us who support Option B1 (i.e. renovating the current school and saving the fields), and those on the Board of Education who are in the direct line of fire, to be told by parents of children who will attend Greenacres when it is renovated, that those in our community who won't have children there are either ambivalent or simply don't care about the welfare of their children. Do they honestly believe that a single one of us would put anyone's child at risk of injury? Do they believe the School Board would do so? Do they know a single one of us well enough to make such a claim? Their temerity in making this sort of personal attack on the basic humanity of their neighbors is beyond the pale.

I realize that the old option B (which preceded B1) was rejected, in part, because of the heavy use of temporary classrooms, which some found unsightly or inadequate for teaching or simply too expensive to justify. To at least partially address the concerns of Option C supporters about toxic dust, perhaps we use a small number of temporary classrooms to house, on a rotating basis, students who would otherwise be located in the classrooms closest to construction. That way, we could "belt and suspender" our precautions with dust. Those precautions would include sealing off areas under construction (and not with the thin plastic sheets that most homeowners are familiar with in their home renovations, but with full, temporary construction barriers, that are essentially walls that that seal off one area of a building from another), together with a second, buffer area of empty classrooms adjacent to the construction area. The "buffer area" of empty classrooms adjacent to construction areas would place students who remain in the school during construction even further away from ongoing work. The buffer area, like the sealed construction area, would be sealed off with full construction barriers and contain a filtration system to capture airborne dust and, perhaps, equipment to monitor air quality. So if any dust passes a sealed construction area into the "buffer area", it would be detected and filtered. And if dust migrates to the buffer area, we could stop work temporarily and make adjustments until air quality testing in the buffer area again indicates zero dust.

Our school and field have spent a century at the center of our neighborhood. They are part of the legacy of Greenacres and should be cherished and protected, just as the old buildings and open spaces at Yale and Harvard and other schools among our nation's academic treasures are so carefully preserved and updated to match modern building codes and academic missions, The idea that we should lose the existing school and much of our fields because of concerns about exposure to toxic substances, that have no basis in fact and are contradicted by the extensive past experience of this town with earlier renovations -- and that we must spend tens of millions of additional tax dollars over the life of the bond issue to finance this downgrade to our neighborhood -- must be called out for the misguided effort that it is. As the meeting on Monday night and some of the conversation in these threads have made clear, emotion and hyperbole have been substituted for logic. Its time for the School Board to act and approve the only sensible course, which is a thoughtful and careful renovation of our existing school, which brings our school's interior into the 21st century while preserving a field that benefits us all.

Details

Written by Stacie M. Waldman

Published: 04 May 2016

Created: 04 May 2016

Last Updated: 04 May 2016

Hits: 6727

The right to bear arms is protected in the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Though we don't like to think about it, it turns out that many of our neighbors have exercised this right to keep guns in their own homes. A map showing how many people in Scarsdale have applied for pistol permits was published in the Journal News in 2012. Many of us remember that Scarsdale, as well as neighboring towns, had a surprising number of red dots on the map indicating addresses where a pistol permit had been obtained.

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 1 in 3 homes with kids have a gun nationwide and about ½ of these are unlocked. In 2010, 116 children (0-19 years) were killed by guns in New York State and 389 were injured non-fatally in 2011. Half of all unintentional shooting deaths of kids occur when kids are playing with a loaded gun in their home.

Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws impose criminal liability on adults who allow children unsupervised access to firearms. Since this law passed in some areas, the incidence of gun-related injuries and deaths has decreased by nearly 25%. The National Rifle Association (NRA), opposed the CAP laws and developed a cartoon character called Eddie Eagle in an effort to teach kids what to do if they find a gun, thereby attempting to prevent accidents: "Stop. Don't touch. Run away. Tell a grown up". The NRA acknowledges that parents may make a mistake and leave a gun unattended. Whereas the NRA puts the onus on the child to do the right thing, CAP policy puts the onus on the adult to ensure that guns are safely stored.

When kids were asked if they know where a parent hides a gun most do know, yet most parents who are asked this same question think the kids do not know where it's hidden. The ASK campaign (Asking Saves Kids) aims to teach parents the value of asking, when your child is going to someone's house, if guns are kept locked and unloaded for safety reasons. Over 19 million people have pledged to begin asking this question.

I grew interested in this topic when I realized that I might be dropping my children off for play dates at homes with loaded guns. It's an important issue that people rarely discuss. Before leaving our kids in someone else's care, we often ask about booster seats in cars, what will be served for snack and who will be supervising the children. But we seldom ask questions about guns that could be far more lethal than sugar, and can change lives in an instant. We found that only 3 out of 99 respondents had ever been asked a question about gun in their homes by another parent. Are you comfortable asking about safety measures taken if guns are kept in a house and answering similar questions about guns you may keep in your own home?

To learn more about how local parents deal with the potential presence of guns, I conducted my own local survey and received anonymous answers. Here are the results I received from 100 respondents:

Question:
Have you talked to your kids about gun safety?
Response:
46% said yes, 54% said no.

Question:
If yes, at what age did you talk to your kids about gun safety?
Response:
3-5 21%
6-8 26%
9-12 14%
13+ 6%
n/a 45%

Question:
Have you ever been asked the question when you've had a play date come to your home: "If you keep a gun in your home, do you keep it locked up and unloaded?"
Response:
Only 3 out of 99 people said yes, they have been asked that question.

Question:
Have you ever asked that same question yourself: "If you keep a gun in your home do you keep it locked up and unloaded?"
Response:
More people have asked this question themselves than have been asked.
16% of people said yes and 84% of respondents said no.

Question:
Are you comfortable being asked the above question?
Response:
91% said yes, only 9% said no.

Question:
Are you comfortable asking the above question?
Response:
49% said yes and 51% said no.

Many people left comments on the survey. Here are some that I found interesting:

"I also don't ask about other more likely dangers"

"Somehow I feel that guns aren't likely to be owned by private citizens in this area so I haven't asked. Would anyone admit to owning a non-locked up gun though?"

"Nonsense "survey" designed to create fear and loathing for firearms."

"I never would have asked these questions until the map of gun permit holders was published a few years ago. I was shocked by the number of Scarsdale residents with weapons permits. Since then, if my children were still of playdate age, I would as."

"Anyone that keeps a gun locked up will not leave it unloaded. "

"Never occurred to ask"

"It is too politically charged (no pun intended)"

"I never thought about it. Maybe I should."

"This is a topic that is almost never discussed amongst parents. Sorely needs more awareness."

"I wish we all felt more comfortable asking this of each other before play dates."

"I was asked this once and initially I was insulted and felt like the mom was crazy. But the more I think about it now, the less crazy it seems."

"I have thought about asking the gun question but am leery of offending other families and being labeled 'that weird mom who thinks we may have a gun'. And this is even though I once worked at a magazine that did a major feature on guns and kids. I was in charge of opening reader mail in response to the story. Once I opened an envelope and out fell a photo of an adorable red headed girl with freckles and a crooked smile. The accompanying note said This was my daughter. She cut class for the first time and went to a friend's house. The friend was showing her his father's gun when it accidentally went off and killed her. The social pressure not to ask about guns is sadly even stronger than the memory of that terrible, sad letter. "

"I support the second amendment and believe we have the right to own firearms. However, given the completely inappropriate publication of names of handgun licensees by the Journal and the public harassment of conservatives, second Amendment supporters and gun owners, I would not reveal my political positions or my gun ownership or lack thereof to another parent. Given that most people here have drunk the left wing Kool-Aid I would be frankly shocked if any of my kids' friends' families had a gun. In fact, among the ones with whom I've discussed this issue, I'm the only one who even supports gun rights. The only people I know who own guns live out of state. It is also incredibly difficult to own a handgun in NY - the process is onerous. So, while this is a relevant issue, I think you are making mountains out of molehills in our little enclave. A better place to start might be an anonymous survey to see how many in Scarsdale actually own firearms."

"I feel safer knowing that a parent is able to protect my child in the event of some horrific crazed addict or burglar...gun owners who are licensed are much safer about gun safety...it is unlicensed criminals that cause issues."

"I was asked this question once about 7 years ago and I remember being shocked by then thinking 'How smart!' Thank you for this survey- we should all start asking this important question."

I decided to ask the question myself for the first time when my son was invited to play at a new friend's house where I did not know the parents. Prior to dropping off my son I emailed the mom to answer her question about whether my son had any food allergies. I then asked, "Just wanted to ask one safety question that's important to me... If ou keep a gun in the house, do you keep it locked and unloaded?" She wrote back immediately that they actually don't even own a gun. I then explained why I was asking and breathed a sigh of relief. I was surprised at how uncomfortable the question was for me to ask."

"I followed up with her for this article and asked the mom if she was taken aback by the question and what her honest impression was of me asking it. She said, "I was not taken aback only because I had a parent ask me that question before. I remember at that time being somewhat shocked by the question at first and having to think through my reaction as to why I felt so shocked. As a family we don't carry guns, we also don't promote the idea of people owning guns. I think my initial reaction came from a defensive place. Then I realized that it was in fact a very mature and responsible question to ask. You are allowing your child into my home. You are entrusting us with his care. It is your right as his mother to ask whatever questions you want regarding his safety and as his 'caretaker' I should be willing to answer those questions without being defensive or taking offense. In my opinion it's good parenting. When you asked I had already thought through all of this and I was more than happy to answer. When kids are on play dates it's instinctual for them to want to impress their friends. It's during moments like those that kids can and will try and access those things that they know they shouldn't be near."

I also asked whether she would ask the same question. She answered, "It's not something I would have considered before now, but if I felt like I needed to ask that question I wouldn't shy away from it. We live in a time where a lot of people keep guns in their homes. Not everyone is responsible in ensuring they are properly locked away as we have seen in too many news reports. Asking the question if you own a gun and if it's properly locked away is no different than asking if your pool has a fence or if your yard has a gate or if you make the kids wear helmets when they ride scooters or bikes. My honest thoughts are if it's your kid (my kid) you as a parent have the responsibility to ask those questions. As a parent looking after your child I should be happy to offer up that information to you. It's better to ask the awkward questions than live a lifetime of regret."

June 21st is National ASK Day (Asking Saves Kids) to raise awareness about guns and kids. They encourage all parents to ask, "Is there an unlocked gun in your house?" before dropping their children off to play.

Will you ask this important question to parents in your neighborhood? What are your thoughts on this issue?