Opinion: Latinos May Lead the Way to Gun Control in the Future

Raul A. Reyes, NBC Latino, July 22, 2012


It is a ritual scenario of grieving.  Columbine.  Virginia Tech.  Ft. Hood.  Tucson.  And now Aurora, Colorado, where 12 died and 58 were injured at a midnight screening of “The Dark Knight.”

The next part of this pattern is the response from our leaders.  Initially, politicians resist politicizing a tragedy.  Then they issue a noncommittal statement of sympathy, because they are either beholden to or cowed by the National Rifle Association.  And so our country will eventually move on and begin to heal… until the next mass shooting.

This continuing leadership void is grossly irresponsible.  For too long, our national politicians have avoided any substantive discussion of gun control.  New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got it right when he declared, “Soothing words are nice, but it’s time the two people who want to be President of the United States stand up and tell us what they’re going to do about it, because it’s obviously a problem for the country.”


While our political leaders worry about getting on the wrong side of gun control debate, Latinos are very progressive on the issue.  An April report by the Pew Center found that Latinos are more likely to favor strict gun control laws that either whites or African-Americans.  Similarly, a 2011 poll done by the bipartisan Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition found that 86 percent of Hispanic voters support requiring background checks on all gun sales.  Sixty-nine percent believe the laws governing the sale of guns should be stronger.  Perhaps in the future, as our numbers continue to grow, Hispanics will demand laws to limit the possibility of senseless gun violence.


Right now, Americans must call upon Congress and our candidates to fully discuss gun control.  A national conversation about the role of guns in our society is overdue.  If we don’t have it now, we are doomed to slip back into the cycle of tragedy, shock, grief, and moving on.  And that would be the most pointless, senseless outcome of all.

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • And how are those “strict gun control laws” working out in the countries from whence they came?  I gather not well, because those “Latinos” left a more gun control country and came to a less gun control country.

  • Francis Galton

    I noticed something very subtle, yet very telling: “…as OUR numbers continue to grow…”; in other words, he is saying: “I am a Latino (sic) first, American second (or not at all?).” 

    This is probably how most, ahem, MESTIZOS view themselves vis-a-vis the US: we will rule you (White people), we will run roughshod over you, we will BURY you!  You have no more say-so in your own nation.  You are now irrelevant.  America will soon be a de-facto annexation of Mexico. 

    • That’s exactly what they mean Francis! Overt threats in which they are telling us what they intend to do once reconquista is realized.

    • That’s exactly what they mean Francis! Overt threats in which they are telling us what they intend to do once reconquista is realized.

    • The__Bobster


      A poll for the Pew Hispanic Center finds that 55 percent of Americans of Mexican descent consider themselves Mexicans first. A similar study of Muslim immigrants in Los Angeles finds that only 10 percent think of themselves as Americans rather than citizens of the countries they abandoned for new lives here.

  • Church_of_Jed

    Civil War II will come when Whites refuse to pay taxes or obey laws forced on them by politicians who are elected by illegal aliens, illegal anchor babies, and Amnesty voters.

    White Humanity will Emancipate itself from the criminal take over and give away of Diversity America.

    • Cogitator

      I think we will have war in this country when they come for the guns. They may be a minority, but those who believe in the right to defend themselves know that they must fight rather than relinquish their guns and other weapons. Once the people are unarmed they are at the mercy of those who will still be armed — the government and criminals.

      Regarding the recent shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, the people were required by law to be unarmed in the theater. So it is easy for a gunman to run his kill total while shooting unarmed people. Notice that they never attack a police station because the people there would be shooting back.

      Since liberalism is a mental disease, they are unable to understand simple things like this regardless of their intellect.

      • Church_of_Jed

        Why do you distinguished between govt. and criminals?

        The “criminals” with guns will be a govt. unto themselves, and the govt. that operates in violation of the Constitutional limits is likewise.

    • John Bonham

       Oh what a lovely new world it will  be too… Back to the 40’s / 50’s  era .. When women were woman and men were men and everyone else knew their place… I definitely was born in the wrong century ..

  • anarchyst

    For “solutions” to the “problem”, obtain and read “Unintended Consequences” by John Ross.  Mr. Ross combines historical events and facts with a reasonably good storyline and real soutions to reign in a lawless and overbearing government.
    The book is out-of-print and is a little pricey, but well worth obtaining. 
    When the book first came out, sellers were harassed by atf types and other government “officials”.

    • Ross is a St. Louisan, and in 1998 ran for Congress (unsuccessfully) from the Congressional district where I now live.

      You may or may not have heard that awhile back, when he and his wife decided to go separate ways, amicably so, that the FBI tried to shake her down on her way out of the marriage that soon to be ex-husband really intended UC as a secret coded tome for killing law enforcement agents.  Needless to say, she didn’t say that it was, obviously because it wasn’t, because it is a work of fiction.

      Ross now runs CCW classes.  He runs ads on local news and sports talk radio, stating that local (read: black) crime is a more worrisome form of terrorism than the kind of terrorism that took place on 9/11.

  • anarchyst

    The Constitution is still the “law of the land”.  What these “reconquistas” don’t understand is that there is a rifle behind “every blade of grass” in “flyover country”.  Pre ww2 Japanese understood this.  I guess that it may be time to repeat the “lesson”. . . for a new “enemy”…

  • anarchyst

    The Second Amendment to the Constitution ain’t about hunting . . .

  • anarchyst

    All of these “massacres” occurred in “gun free (criminal safety) zones”.  The town of Aurora prohibits concealed carry. . .In every case, a concealed carry person could (and would) have minimized loss of life by taking out the gunman.   Prohibition on concealed carry ANYWHERE is an affront to all decent human life. 

  • Mexican citizens are not allowed to own guns.  How is that working out for them?  

  • mikejones91

    Less guns…More knife/savage hand to hand murders. Sure, guns are part of the problem but more so, its a BLACK problem. I heard a stat last night on John Stewart that said “32 Americans are killed everyday by guns (on average).” I believe that absolutely. What I would really like to know is how many of the 32 are black? I’m gonna go with at LEAST 27. Focus less on gun regulation, and focus MORE on Black regulation.

  •  Combine the nutbars of Tucson and Aurora, and you have a murder tally akin to two summer weekends in Chicago.

    • NM156

      Exactly two weekends in Chicago! x D Notice that the anti-gun left has said nothing about the mayhem going on in Chicago. No coincidence that the silence corresponds to the Trayvon Martin case, which the media latched onto at the same time the warm-spring violence on the South and West sides began.

      • redfeathers

        The problems in Chicago will be solved soon.  Rahm Emmanuel has asked Farrakhan to help! 

  •  Why point fingers at Amren? If Hispanics considered themselves “Americans”, then they would call themselves “Americans”. For many (or even most) of them, their loyalties lie first and foremost with their “Hispanic” ethnic group. We’ve seen, over and over again, that “Mexican Americans” are loyal to Mexico, not the U.S. I have seen it with my own eyes.

    • Larssonenar

      I’m not sure what you mean pointing the finger at Amren. I only meant that the first time I read this article I read it with sensitivity to gun control rather than to race. But the article made it on AR because of the issue of race, not gun control. So I re-read the article from a racial perspective and left another comment based on that reading. 

  • The second amendment and our gun culture are a big part of what makes us Americans. More proof that our “new Americans” are really very un-American. 

  • I have two words for Raul Reyes about taking my guns, and they are NOT happy birthday.  I’m an old guy, so I’ll give my life to let a younger White couple survive and have kids. 

    “RUN, dammit! I’ll hold ’em off!”

  • Of course it is. It will always be Mexico and La Raza first with these people. We are committing national suicide by not enforcing our immigration laws, as well as sovereignty regarding Mexicans.

  • Strider73

    3) Where did an unemployed college student get the money to buy all those guns, magazines, bullets and whatever body armor he had, plus all the explosives and detonators that he booby-trapped his residence with?

    The Aurora massacre is looking more and more like another Obama false-flag op against the 2nd Amendment, just like the “Fast & Furious” gun-running scandal. Apparently Obama & Holder decided killing two or three Americans (vs. thousands of dead Mexicans) wasn’t sensational enough.

    And don’t forget to add Tim McVeigh to that “lone nut” list. Clinton openly admitted the Okla. City bombing was the key to his re-election.

    • He got the money from  you and I. 

      He got a $26K NIH grant to study “mental illness” and he got that dough even after he dropped out of his Ph.D. program.  He used that money to buy all that stuff.  This means the NIH admins didn’t check up to see if he was still a real grad student.

      Meanwhile, a Denver gun club turned him down before that because of his bizarre voice mail messages.  This is important b/c he wanted to use the gun club as the route to get his materiel.  When they did, he came up with the NIH grant angle.

      The people who run gun clubs should be put in charge of doling out NIH grants.

  • Michael C. Scott

    I doubt this is very likely, since the US Supreme Court has already ruled that the Second Amendment refers to an individual right, and is not something that merely authorizes the government to arm the National Guard.  SCOTUS almost never rehears a case that it had earlier ruled on.

    In an era of “shall issue” concealed carry laws and state legislatures pre-empting and overriding stric municipal gun laws, gun-control isn’t likely to resurface as a hot issue during our lifetime; most Democrats have wised up to the point where they’ve decided that it’s pure kryptonite to them in election years.

  • Texan1st

    When the Supreme Court becomes permanently liberal due to US demographic changes, this is when someone will take a case to them arguing that the 2nd Amendment may cover the private ownership of firearms but it doesn’t cover the private possession of ammunition and the supplies/equipment to make your own.  The liberal Supreme Court will side with this argument.  This decision will effectively shut down companies that provide ammo/supplies to the public.  As we shoot our stash, the supply of available ammunition will slowly evaporate until eventually we will be left with a bunch of guns with nothing to shoot through them.


    In my experience, Hispanics, even educated ones, have a very hard time understanding the abstract concept of rights.  They tend to be gullible and go along with whatever the status quo is.  

  • anarchyst

    ALL of the above mass-murders have taken place in “gun-free zones” (criminal safety zones).
    Yes, there have been many violent and bloody wars throughout human history utilizing the “weapons of the day” (bows and arrows, swords, rocks, sticks, etc.) but us whites have seemed to learn from it. 
    Face it,  wars are rarely run by individuals, but governments start and perpetuate wars all of the time.
    Our American Revolution was unique because it banded freedom-loving geurilla warfighters against (which was thought to be) a much superior traditional fighting force.
    The gun is what made America.  I have no apologies for that. Japan was reluctant to atack the American mainland because they perceived that there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
    An armed man is a (free) citizen, a disarmed man is a subject (slave).
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow (as slaves) for those who don’t.

  • anarchyst

    The U S Constitution is a uniqe document because it defines what limited powers government has and what government is allowed do.  Constitutional limits are on government, NOT the citizens.
    Of course, the Constitution has been shredded throughout the years by self-serving politicians and apathetic citizens . . .
    A “reboot” will be necessary in order to restore Constitutional principles . . . the time is coming.
    Most immigrants and many American citizens do not understand the concept of “rights” being “endowed by our creator” and NOT given to us by government.