I'm disgusted. At gun shops across Oregon, the response to the Connecticut Children's Massacre is to go out and buy guns. Guns for 'protection' and guns because they are afraid that this slaughter of innocents may finally wake this country up to the problem of our pathological reverence for the gun. That this is the response of my countrymen is beyond appalling. Unlike all who will no doubt object, I have treated the broken bodies of children wounded by bullets. I know the effects both short term and long. My message to those out buying up the guns - you obviously love guns more than children.
So here's my challenge to the believers out there who oppose abortion and end of life autonomy - care about innocent lives as much as you do the fetus. Make it harder for deranged souls or complete losers to go out in a blaze of gunfire that catches the innocent in the crossfire. Stop the inane commentary about guns not killing people.
Here are some thoughts -
1: Screw the 2nd Amendment. It's an amendment after all - repeal it. (admittedly a hard road). The founders never intended civilians having more firepower than the military. The only freedom we will give up is the freedom to slaughter large numbers or get some idiotic macho jollies by firing one of these things.
2: Ban military style weapons in civilian hands. If you want to fire an assault rifle, go out and enlist in the army, reserves or the Guard. Assault rifles aren't varmint guns or legitimate hunting weapons, they are designed to kill humans, period. Or buy a video game. That way you can sit on your fat behind at home and leave the rest of us in peace.
3: Ban semiautomatic handguns to civilians. If personal protection is your goal, a revolver is safer, more reliable, and plenty. If you can't hit something with 6 shots then we don't want you spraying an additional 9 in the air for us to duck. From what I know, it's not likely to save you but, if you need an adult pacifier, it's better than a high capacity semiauto.
4: Ban antipersonnel rounds other than standard hollow points. If it's against the Geneva Convention it should be illegal against your fellow countrymen.
5: Make gun manufacturers subject to the same liability laws as the rest of industry.
6: Put some teeth into background checks and waiting periods. Limit carry permits to those under legitimate threat or with extensive background checks and training.
Would this end private ownership of guns? No. If you are a true hunter or sports person you would still have access to hunting weapons like shotguns, bolt action rifles, and black powder firearms. If you are deluded enough to insist on a handgun for protection, the revolver should suffice. (a 12 guage with a Deerslayer is a better home defense option in any case.) If you want something else then you are a potential threat. Grow up and get a more productive hobby. If you find yourself getting off on the thrill of shooting, consider counselling.
Ok, you defenders of life. Prove that it isn't all rhetoric. Put the brakes on this violence. Care about the living as much as the yet unborn. And spare us the NRA bullshit, because we aren't buying it.
7 comments:
When I was in the Army I trained with the M-60 machine gun, among other things that went boom. I felt a rush of power firing that machine, sending .308 rounds cascading out into the range to strike old trucks and such. There were tracers, and those let you spray into a target with deadly sufficiency.
Following that experience they introduced us to napalm. The idea of the machine gun was to be able to control activities within line of sight. The purpose of napalm, at least in part, was to eliminate annoying people with machine guns.
Individuals can own the same guns as the military, that is true, at least in places. Some of my friends with guns can literally equip a fire team, sans the grenade launcher. I am not absolutely sure of the grenade launcher, but they are generally not legal for public consumption.
"Why so many?" I have asked them, pointing out that an individual can only use one at a time. The answers vary, but it almost always came down to emotion. They like the feel. The sense of power. The sense of controlling their destiny. They embrace an illusion, not remembering napalm and the fact that there are bodies out there with more.
I really don't care what happens with weapons bans, either way. The repercussions of taking the guns would be significant, unless the underlying emotional needs of gun owners are met. The taking would be bloody, and probably not terribly fruitful.
Yet as things go, there is blood already. Who is to blame? Not the real question, though addressing culpability might be a beginning. How to bring a viable solution should be the goal of all, but those damned emotions on various sides of the issues will cloud reason.
Statistics won't matter. They appeal to reason. To solve this, or at least make it better, it will be necessary to appeal to the emotions behind guns and their abuses. Masterful manipulators managing the media might make things better.
So far, they just sell cars, and tampons, and sometimes guns.
Why do I trust in God? It is a better madness than trusting man.
Mike I understand the emotions. I understand the seductive sense of power that guns provide. I have over the years felt it myself. Remember I'm a country-boy liberal. I've fired dozens of models from shot guns up to an M2. I still enjoy the odd sporting clay. But as an adult man it's my responsibility to ignore those senses to provide for the common welfare. That's one of the divides I see in this country. Self gratification vs communal good. There's a lot that needs to be done to correct our culture of violence but squad level firepower is not a right when it puts the rest of us at risk. It's a start.
Insecure paranoia fueled by a sense of power. That's the message of the gun culture and organizations like the NRA.
Funny thing is in 25 years of treating GSW's I've never treated a perp stopped by a citizen with a gun. Not because they are dead either. No I've treated cops- and those they've shot, gang bangers, suicides, domestic abuse victims, hapless victims, etc.
Then we have this sort of crap from the politicos of the religious right:
"We ask why there is violence in our schools, but we have systematically removed God from our schools. Should we be so surprised that schools would become a place of carnage?"..."We don't have a crime problem, a gun problem or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem. And since we've ordered God out of our schools, and communities, the military and public conversations, you know we really shouldn't act so surprised ... when all hell breaks loose."
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee
------------------
So governor, are you telling us that your god condones the killing of children to make a political statement? To get our attention? Who are these people?
Yes let's all rally around god and the gun because the combination makes so much sense. I really don't understand this at all.
Don't think about it too much, you'll just give yourself a headache.
Michael's comment was dead-on. You can't appeal to them with reason.
I would suggest we try the napalm.
(not really)
There are believers and there are thinkers... the former group is not in our universe in the first place, so how can facts affect them?
The sad thing about the issue of gun control is that these perverters of the second amendment (NRA) conveniently overlook the part of the Preamble to our Constitution that says "...ensure domestic tranquility..." and ...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
The second amendment does not suggest that individuals need assault rifles to provide any of the aforementioned aims of the preamble and it should be the duly constituted military and police forces that are charged with "provide for the common defense".That we should be held hostage to nutcases and conspiracy theorists to the extent that any mentally challenged individual can take it upon him/herself to waste twenty innocent and promising lives is unconscientable!!
Post a Comment