Answer: Neither one will.
In reaction to the shocking massacre of young students and their teachers at school in a small Connecticut town, the media are in the usual attack mode about U.S. Second Amendment rights. Most of them never having owned, fired or even held a gun, seem to think video games or violent movies - and guns - make people do this. And they also talk as if this violence is a uniquely American phenomenon. It's not:
A man with a knife injures 22 school children in China, a man kills 16 students in Dunblane, Scotland before killing himself. Thirty-eight school children died in a bomb blast in Bath Township, Michigan (in 1927). School massacres have not been limited to guns or America. They've happened all over the map. Mass murder seems to be something persistent that would be better solved by addressing the psych problem, not the tools used by maniacs. Kakistocracy Report made this observation:
A man with a knife injures 22 school children in China, a man kills 16 students in Dunblane, Scotland before killing himself. Thirty-eight school children died in a bomb blast in Bath Township, Michigan (in 1927). School massacres have not been limited to guns or America. They've happened all over the map. Mass murder seems to be something persistent that would be better solved by addressing the psych problem, not the tools used by maniacs. Kakistocracy Report made this observation:
As one blogger pointed out, "it’s not the weapon, it’s the psychopath who preys on the undefended... it’s the reason we have the right to bear arms. Mass murders occur in places where personal arms are prohibited. In the worst cases, it’s one’s own government that’s the perpetrator." Of course, the 'progressives' will never believe this. It is the reason we must utterly defeat progressivism.
Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. ~ Benjamin Franklin
Maybe the coarsening of our culture goes hand-in-hand with the lessening of our freedom. (Read the entire post...)
Our hearts sincerely go out to the victims and their families, friends and classmates. But the media are trying to chalk this up as a lesson about "the American gun culture." WE just want it to be the right lesson.
What's consistent between tragedies of mass murder around the world (there have been so many) is that there's so little consistency between them. Browse the history and statistics about rampage killers. Few other nations have a Bill of Rights or "gun rights," much less a Constitution meant to defend personal freedom (that's still rare). Asia, Europe, Russia, and other places with immense government control over citizens have a large share of senseless losses caused by maniacs. As blogger Velociman puts it:
What's consistent between tragedies of mass murder around the world (there have been so many) is that there's so little consistency between them. Browse the history and statistics about rampage killers. Few other nations have a Bill of Rights or "gun rights," much less a Constitution meant to defend personal freedom (that's still rare). Asia, Europe, Russia, and other places with immense government control over citizens have a large share of senseless losses caused by maniacs. As blogger Velociman puts it:
Forget the political poseurs. They will be, and are, raising their needy heads. I have no desire to enter the fray of gun-free-zones versus heat-packing librarians. I've eaten herring before, and did not particularly care for it.
What we do have, however, is a seriously psychotic individual acting out a rage that is incomprehensible to the vast majority of us. Shooting toddlers. Someone, somewhere, brought this upon this village. I find it inconceivable that this fellow awakened this morning and thought for the first time Today is the day I go berserker.
Again, I do not see this as a gun issue. It is a crazy people issue. I have no facts, I am intuiting here, but I would wager this young fiend, who is by various descriptions autistic, Asbergian, schizophrenic, has a well-documented history of aberrant, dangerous behavior. I am by no means casting aspersions on the autistic. I have friends with autistic children. It is a heart-rending challenge, but it is by no means this. This is something else entirely. (Read the entire post...)
So, WE suggest that a vulnerable and well intentioned public should be very wary of knee-jerk policy that would do little to solve this puzzling human problem that's far from an American one. There is a more tangible risk that "never waste a crisis" opportunism will rear its ugly head in short order.
WE don't question that the President's reaction was sincere, but wonder what he meant when he said, "we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics." "Regardless of the politics" seemed a bit loaded. WE don't think that dealing with the issue of the deranged, who suffer from whatever syndrome leads them to commit such heinous crimes, should have anything to do with "politics."
WE don't question that the President's reaction was sincere, but wonder what he meant when he said, "we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics." "Regardless of the politics" seemed a bit loaded. WE don't think that dealing with the issue of the deranged, who suffer from whatever syndrome leads them to commit such heinous crimes, should have anything to do with "politics."
Attorney General Holder, in comments that followed on December 14th said, "we need to discuss who we are as a nation, talk about the freedoms that we have, and the rights that we have, and how those might be used in a responsible way." That was very glib, but "who we are as a nation" meant what?
It was former presidential Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (nickname "Rhambo") who said, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." That is about as ominous as it gets for a cabinet member. Fortunately he resigned his cabinet position, and WE hope the rest of the regime never agreed with it in the first place. However, WE'd be very surprised if that wasn't a widely held belief. It is so in character.
This feels like a serious crisis - given the series of similar incidents recently - which is creepy. But the Second Amendment says what it means, and means what it says. The Supreme Court upheld the idea that it represents an individual's right to keep and bear arms - not to commit crimes with them, for goodness sake. Regardless, WE also know that this administration is vehemently opposed to gun rights. With a stunned public ready to accept any solution, this could be a perfect storm (and not in a good way) for politics to kick-in divisively. Would diminished "gun rights" diminish lunacy or crime?
Our founders intended the Second Amendment to serve multiple objectives: for individuals' self-protection, national defense, and as a general warning to would-be despots. The last one seems remote to us of course, but The Revolutionary War was still visible in the rear view mirror when the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. The very idea of a people needing to overthrow their government seems laughable now. The protections written into The Constitution were so effective, nobody has had to worry about it for 209 years. "It can't happen here!" And what good would our little pea shooters be against the best equipped military in human history? I pity the fool...!
Just make sure you keep an eye on both hands, and pay close attention to the man behind the curtain. Just in case...
This feels like a serious crisis - given the series of similar incidents recently - which is creepy. But the Second Amendment says what it means, and means what it says. The Supreme Court upheld the idea that it represents an individual's right to keep and bear arms - not to commit crimes with them, for goodness sake. Regardless, WE also know that this administration is vehemently opposed to gun rights. With a stunned public ready to accept any solution, this could be a perfect storm (and not in a good way) for politics to kick-in divisively. Would diminished "gun rights" diminish lunacy or crime?
Our founders intended the Second Amendment to serve multiple objectives: for individuals' self-protection, national defense, and as a general warning to would-be despots. The last one seems remote to us of course, but The Revolutionary War was still visible in the rear view mirror when the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. The very idea of a people needing to overthrow their government seems laughable now. The protections written into The Constitution were so effective, nobody has had to worry about it for 209 years. "It can't happen here!" And what good would our little pea shooters be against the best equipped military in human history? I pity the fool...!
Just make sure you keep an eye on both hands, and pay close attention to the man behind the curtain. Just in case...
RSS Feed
