|
David Mitchell
I may need to offer an apology here. I may have started this fire. It appears what I started in a private email to about 10 of you yestrday lit a spark that has blown up on the Forum. So I feel sort of honor bound to weigh in.
On Monday morning had had a troubling reaction, especially to the audio portion of "the video" from Las Vegas, and spoke about it to a short list of classmates. I had realized it was the "crackling" sound of an automatic weapon that got to me - somehting that I developed a very negative a visceral reaction to many years ago. It caused me some emotional issues for about an hour after I watched it.
(and it has happened before - especially right after 911, when the first person I saw for the problem was John Jackson's oldest sister Liz (Doctor Ellizabeth Jackson, MD), who was at the time, Director of the Mental Health Dept. at the Columbus VA clinic. She was the last perosn there late one Friday, and it was my good fortune that she was still in her office)
What I got back today were some very well thought out answers from a few - namely Tim, Keith, John Jackson, and Mike Mcleod. I deliberately aimed (oops, poor choice of words) sent to a list of somewhat mixed political views. I can take it from both sides, and have always enjoyed a good political or religious argument. And I stated my difficulties with certain NRA policies, and my shock at learning that it is legal to buy a machine gun in Nevada (or any state) - really, really shocked!
Now for all of you assuming I am on the "right" on this isssue, you would be mistaken. Furthermore I am one of those who (like the majority of the NRA's own membership, in a survey a few years ago) are on the side of stricter gun controls - and more efficient background checks.
I look at statistics like the murder rate in Canada and England where private ownership of guns is almost non-existant, and see the rates of homicide by firearm at a tiny fraction of ours. Conversly, I look at Honduras and/or Guatamala, countries with outrageously high murder rates (one of which - I forget which) - bans assault rifles, but allows the sale of 9mm pistols - a favorite of criminal gangs and political death squad members, which roam the streets at will in those countries.
Another interesting phenomenon is the rise of the "open carry" clubs in Texas (and elsewhere), where groups of 30 or so young guys gather in public at a local Chipoltle, posing for pictures inside the restaurant displaying their Mac-10's and M-16's and C.A.R.15's - fully loaded with live ammo clips! The argument is that they are "excercising their constitutional rights". But to me, it appears more like a frightening form of granstanding - more like the little boy who has climbed to the top of the playgrround slide and yells out "Mommy, look at me." Just imagine sitting there eating with your grandchildren, and these guys show up in their shorts and hoodies to "excercise their rights!" (or the photos of women in the checkout line at Wallmart with M-16's slung over their shoulders - or the guy in Burkenstocks and baseball cap looking though the frozen food at Target with his AK-47 slung from his shouldder?) Have they taken leave of their senses?
Sorry, it's late, and I am rambling now but a few more thougths.
While I support the 2nd amendment (as it is written and amended), I do not support the likes a one Wayne LaPierre, head of NRA, who I beleive to be an out and out liar. And I question all of you who say the 2nd Ammmednment is "sacred" and cannot be "tampered with". Exuse me, but since the constitution was first written, we have "tampered" with it 27 times - including giving women and African slaves the right to vote.
Even in the latest Supreme Court "liberalization" of the amendment in 2008, (District of Columbia vs Heller), ultra conservative Justice Scalia said something to this effect in his opinion - "this does not mean every Tom, Dick, and Harry walking around on the street."
Also one could recall the fact that when this was first written, they were using single shot, muzzle-loading guns, and had never concieved of a "multi-shot" firearm of any kind. Wow, isn't that grounds for some degreee of re-thinking the argument right there?
What seems ot me to be one of the driving forces behind this thinking is not our right of self defense, but more like, "My right to have it my way - and damn the common good."
But as I told Keith today in a private email, we need not fear, the argument will probably rise up again and last for weeks or a few months. But rest ssured, Mr. LaPierrre's little lobbyist minions will have by then passed out enough "gifts" to their friends in Congress, and the noise will quickly be stilled. Brave men those stout hearted members of Congress! (May God help us!)
p.s.
"Guns don't kill people - people do." That is partly correct. But imagine how difficult it would be for me to kill you by pointing my finger at you and saying "Bang, youre dead."
|
all of you and want to make sure our website works for everyone. 