The Hebrew Bible is no stranger to the human capacity for violence. It is in fact filled with violent stories, some of them stories of violence between individuals - by the second chapter of Genesis Cain has murdered Abel - and some stories of violence between groups - families, tribes, or even nations. In this morning’s Torah portion the Egyptian army is destroyed by God when they are killed by the waters of the returning sea, and this morning’s haftara contains one of, if not the most graphically violent episode in the entire Bible, when Yael drives a tent peg through the head of the sleeping general Sisera.

But if the Bible reflects the fact that humanity and violence too often walk hand in hand, it also understands that one of its roles, perhaps even one of its primary roles, is to attempt to regulate human behavior so that violence in human society will be diminished, so that the uglier, darker, and more dangerous side of human beings can be kept under control. That is why the Torah is filled with laws about how warfare should be conducted, about how slaves are to be treated, and about how violent actions that occur between men are to be adjudicated and punished.

Many of these concepts, that the Torah put into place 3000 years ago, are still today fundamental to the way our society wrestles with violence. The idea that the perpetrator of a violent act should be punished, that the type of punishment meted out should reflect the level of violence in the crime, that a person who is accused of a violent crime has to be tried, and that witnesses are involved in this process, are all found in the Torah, and all still in use in our legal system. The fundamental idea of this entire enterprise is very simply this: when human behavior is regulated, it can be improved for the betterment of society. That is to say when laws, and rules, and regulations are put into place to prevent people from being violent, they will be less violent, and society will be stronger, and the citizens in that society will be safer.

And so I find myself this week - again, not for the first time - after the tragic, and horrific, and heart rending events that took place in Arizona - I find myself wondering how it is that our society - which is filled with rules and laws and regulations that deal with violence - that have been put into place to diminish violence, to protect our citizens - how is it that we cannot muster the political will to stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby to pass some intelligent and reasonable regulations about how guns can be purchased and used in this country.

Now I want to first say that I am not advocating the idea this morning that a citizen should not be allowed to own a gun, although the truth is I don’t personally think it is such a great idea to own a gun, but that is not what I am saying. And I also understand that the second amendment to our constitution is understood by many as meaning that a citizen of the United States has a right to bear arms, although if you have ever read the actual language of that amendment you would know that it is obscure at best. But even if it does mean that a citizen has a right to “keep and bear arms,” it certainly doesn’t mean that any person should be able to buy any kind of gun with any kind of ammunition at any time - which once you are over 21, is pretty much the law in Arizona.

And the truth is if you or I had just googled Jared Loughner, just googled him, on a plain old computer via the internet, any one of us would have said “you know it doesn’t seem like such a good idea to sell this guy a gun.” And if I could figure that out, or you could, or honestly anyone with half a brain in their head, how could it be legal for a person like that to just walk into a store, and walk out 5 minutes later with a semiautomatic handgun?

Of all the victims in the Tucson shooting, the one who elicited the most emotional reaction nationwide was Christina Green, the young girl who was born on September 11, 2001, the very day of the infamous violent attack on the World Trade Center in New York. She was an enthusiastic dancer and baseball player and a member of her school’s student council. She was deeply interested in civic affairs, and a neighbor, also wounded in the attack, had brought her to meet her congresswoman.

In eulogizing Christina on Wednesday, President Obama, spoke about her interest in politics and American democracy and he said “I want us to live up to her expectations...I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it.”

But the truth is that although Christina Green was the most visible child to lose her life to gun violence that day, she was not the only one.

1. Let me share some statistics with you about life in America.

- Every day 13 children under 19 die from gunshots, 4 times as many are wounded.
- Every day, an average of 80 people die from guns, and several times as many are injured.
- Since the murders in Tucson, more than 500 more Americans have been killed by guns with almost no notice. By tomorrow it’ll be more than 600 deaths.
- And each year, the daily toll adds up to 34,000 gun-related deaths in this country annually.

So given the tragic events in Tucson this past week, and the national statistics that we all too often close our eyes to, it seems to me that - MINIMALLY - minimally - the following pieces of legislation should be put into place - 

First of all, there should be an extensive background check on anyone who wants to buy a gun.  This is not an impingement on a person’s rights, in fact we already do extensive background checks in many other areas of life, and the fact of the matter is that in many of the mass shootings we have seen over the last years a strong back ground check in all likelihood would have prevented the killers from easily obtaining a gun.  In addition, there should be a waiting period from the time a person pays for the gun until they can walk out of the store with it.  In Canada, the period is 28 days, so why not start with that?

Secondly, we need to limit how often people buy guns, and what types of guns and ammunition they buy.  I would suggest starting with a limit of 6 guns a year - why would anyone even need 6 guns?  But if we limit purchases of weapons, we limit the number of weapons that are available on the black market, and we probably make guns more expensive.  And oversized magazines should be banned entirely.  The Tucson shooter had a 33 bullet magazine in his handgun, whereas the normal magazine has 10 bullets.  If he had to stop and reload his weapon after firing 10 bullets the likelihood of there being fewer people wounded and killed is very high.  And you just can’t tell me that a civilian who plans to use a gun for recreational or hunting purposes needs to be able to fire more than 10 bullets in a row.

So it seems to me that those are some simple steps that should be taken.  But of course at this point it is essentially out of our hands and in the hands of those we elected to serve us in Congress.  On Wednesday they said all the right things, on both sides of the isle, with heartfelt speeches honoring those shot in Tuscon this past week.  But now it is time for them to put their money where their mouths are, to finally stand up to the NRA, and to pass some serious gun legislation in this country.  Could anyone honestly argue that we wouldn’t be better off - as individuals, and as a society - if they are able to do it?  And could anyone honestly deny that if they are able to do this will be a safer country for every citizen?
May God help them find the strength, integrity, and courage that they need to do what is right in the months ahead.