Tuesday, September 7, 2010 | 28 Ramadhan 1431AH

It was a Gun that Took Away Asama's Life

 
Column Ameena Jandali | Jul 22, 2010 | 8:42 AM
CommentsRSS Feed Share Article Print Article Email Article
Add to Favorites

Ameena is a founding member of Islamic Networks Group.




It was a Gun that Took Away Asama's Life http://illum.es/auPs6s
SIGNUP FOR ALERTS

READERS ARE

0
0
0
0
0

HOW DO YOU FEEL
ABOUT THIS STORY?

I AM:


On June 28, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Americans to own a gun for self-defense anywhere in this country, scoring a victory for the all-powerful gun lobby.

That was the same day my friend buried her 20-year-old son, fatally shot a few days before in Richmond, Calif. in a case of mistaken identity after leaving a local mosque. Two weeks earlier, his friend was shot and killed in Oakland.

The paradox is painful. Even more ironic is the fact that the victim's name was Asama, close in spelling to Osama, a name that generally strikes fear into people's hearts, to the extent that many Muslim children with the same moniker have changed their name after 9/11.

Asama's family came to the United States from Palestine, many years back, with the hope that they could provide a better life for their children here one — that was secure and far from the violence we often read or hear about in the news.

But the child whose name represents violence and terror to the average American came to be himself the victim of the violence and terror that has come to be all too common in our cities and communities.

While we fight the Taliban in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq, our own streets and towns are wracked with senseless bloodshed. While we spend billions for these wars in far-off lands, our own back yard is devastated with violence, crime and poverty.

One has only to turn on the news each night to hear about the next victim, the new fallen, in this case the 11th homicide victim in Richmond in 2010.  

Asama's mother, while still mourning her loss, has decided she does not want her son to be just another statistic or blip on the news. She wants everyone to know the story of her son, who unknowingly met his death at a stop sign before he had a chance to live.

She wants people who so passionately promote gun rights to know the pain of a mother who lost her loved one because of these sacred toys. For, although one can explain such a tragedy as fate, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or for a religious person, divine decree, at the end of the day, it was a gun — an instrument which has only one aim and purpose, to maim or kill — that took away Asama's life.

The Constitution was created by our forefathers to protect and preserve all that is best for our country and its citizens. When that is no longer the case, we need to think hard about our ability as a country and a people to create change for the better.

Last updated: Jul 28, 2010 | 12:32 AM



   
Tweet 16
            submit to reddit
editor's picks
 

 
Commentary and opinions expressed by columnists do not necessarily reflect the views of ILLUME. Please ensure that all comments adhere to our conversation guidelines. We reserve the right to edit or remove comments that do not follow these guidelines.
 

"More Guns Less Crime" by John Lott is a book I highly recommend people read. My greatest sympathies to the parents of people who have lost loved ones, but the fact of the matter is that it was not a gun that killed Asama any more than it was a gun that killed Oscar Grant. It was a criminal. I don't know for sure, but if I were a gambling men I'd bet that the shooting in Oakland and Richmond were with unregistered firearms. Increased gun regulation does not decrease unregistered firearms, it increases them. The statistics bear it out. The right to self defense is more than a constitutional right, it is a natural right.

Davi |  flag
Aug 6, 2010 | 11:43 PM

Bismillah. May Allah grant Asama a jannatul firdaus and his loved ones sabr as they deal with their tragic loss. My father also died from a gunshot, so I can fully understand their pain. But I have to disagree with the author's premise here. The vast majority of guns used in crimes are illegally obtained. Moreover, study after study has shown that in states where gun laws are more liberalized (ie people are allowed to own and even carry firearms), the number of violent crimes -rape, robbery, murder, assault- goes down. All that restrictions on gun ownership do is disarm regular citizens. They have no effect on criminals, who aren't signing up for gun permits in the first place. Whatever the solution to the violence that plagues this nation might be, making the criminals the only ones armed isn't it.

Abu Omar |  flag
Jul 22, 2010 | 11:12 AM






HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS STORY?


I AM:
 
 
 
 
 






illume social


Follow illumemag on Twitter

conversations
September 7, 2010 | 3:10 AM