Submitted by Guest Blogger, Lawrence Rafferty
In light of the tragic shooting today in Arizona, I have to wonder aloud if automatic weapons should be banned by this country. I realize that the 2nd Amendment right to own a gun is strongly defended by the NRA and other right-wing groups, but I am sick and tired of reading about all of the shootings the past couple of years. Whether it was the shootings earlier this year at various United States Marine sites around the country or the California shootout in July with the guy who was trying to attack the ACLU and the TIDES non-profit organization; the vitriol seems to be on the rise. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40978517/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ And with politicians fanning the flames, this vitriol is not bound to be diminished anytime soon.
The Second Amendment is a very concise Amendment. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am2 We have seen various attempts over the years by the Feds and many States and municipalities to restrict gun ownership. The recent Supreme Court case of McDonald , et al vs. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al affirmed the fundamental right of Americans to own a gun by a 5-4 decision. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf The McDonald decision did not give us any guidance on what kind of restrictions to that fundamental right the Supreme Court would allow. However, how can automatic weapons or high-powered rifles be exempt from an outright banning of their ownership or at least significant restrictions on their use? Can a good faith argument really be made that an automatic weapon is necessary for personal protection?
The Supreme Court Justices do not live in a bubble and they must see what damage these weapons have already brought to families across the nation. Don’t they?
How come when illegal immigrants kill people, we don’t see a bunch of liberals calling for tighter border/immigration controls?
Hard to fathom how quickly time passes. Maybe the “quickening” of life inversely guarantees how pathetically slow we are to improve our lot. Pity,there seems no clear way to slow it all down.
So today I realize it’s been a quarter-century since my partners & I responded to the San Diego McDonald’s bloodbath in July, ’84. It was there another tweaked freak took up arms in his rage against the “government.” He walked into a restaurant, and with the fortitude of his best buds (think Uzi & shotgun & automatic handgun) he butchered 40 people. Of the 40, I seem to recall half of those we assessed were dead as they lay. And wonder of wonders, not one of the bleeding worked for any government at all.
Like many, I suppose, I’m cursed by seeing both sides of this tortuous issue. Make no mistake, I find myself in a cold, silent rage over the liberties this government has taken, in the gouging of human rights, one by one by another. The very term ‘Patriot Act,’ for one, makes me want to puke.
On the other hand, I find it almost – but not quite – hilarious, that those of survivalist bent envision themselves actually defending their rights by shooting it out with a dastardly SEAL team. In the darkest of times, can’t you just imagine you & your righteous neighbors firing away at an F-14 Tomcat?
We ain’t the Taliban, folks, and how many of your friends are willing to hunker down in a cave in a protracted, 10-year war with the U.S Marines? I mean, minus our flat screen TVs and all.
If one’s basic reasoning for retaining a weapon is self-protection,then I see a micro-argument in favor of that. But I can fairly report that in my 12,000 EMS responses, precious few victims of gunshots (and 19 of them were cops) had any response time at all. And every one of them carried a weapon for a living.
But if one’s core reason for weapons is “battling a tyrannical government” I suggest you go take another pill. Because like the admonished little leaguer told his dad one day, “I had a no-hitter going, till the big kids got in the game.”
My take is, it’s time we all create another fantasy.
Elaine and Blouise,Thanks.
Swarthmore Mom, that was a very interesting link!
SM,
That link lists the Oathkeepers as an Anti-governmental group… I do not think this is accurate at all. This brings into question the veracity of the rest of the information which I can’t verify appropriately due to lack of exposure personally to the subject matter. The fact that anti-governmental ideals are assumed, and spoken in a negative light exposes the bias of the person compiling the information, and therefore invalidates the entire document on its face, unless someone wants to set up a large peer review group on those facts.
Blouise,
Must I remind you that some people’s opinions are based on logic–while some people’s are based on emotion.
Maybe you and I should hire a logician to tutor us in the art of “non-emotional” debating.
😉
rafflaw,
With 175 posts and counting Bob.Esq,’s opinion is just that … Bob Esq.’s opinion. Next …
It’s okay Bob,Esq., you can blame me for I purposely hi-jacked the discussion.
Usually I stay away from the issue because, quite frankly, I’m not a Second Amendment fan. (I know, I know … sacrilege) I don’t like guns but I’m always interested to see how far people who do like guns will go in defending their precious weapon.
In my opinion, the gun-loving train is without a rational engine as it whirls down the tracks leaving carnage and death in its wake. There really is nothing to debate …
Very interesting, Smom. Good link.
When I was in the military I read a book titled “On Killing”, written by a retired Lt. Col. It mostly dealt with the psychological toll killing takes on a person.
One of the topics discussed at length was the increasing popularity of video games where the main character is a first person shooter, and how such games desensitize youth to killing. The author argues that these games are a large contributor to situations such as this one in Arizona and others such as Columbine.
http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/guns-democracy-and-freedom/insurrection-timeline List of political violence and violent rhetoric over the last two years.
guns are already heavily regulated. how much more regulation is needed? Maybe more effective enforcement of existing regulations would be a more germane topic?
rafflaw,
I think in regard to some gun enthusiasts–there’s never a “good” time to discuss gun control.
Bob,Esq.
I am sorry if you do not agree with the timing of this discussion or how the issues were framed, but I have to respectfully disagree with you. This latest tragedy is just one of many over the past few years and eventually people need to discuss the idea that gun control might need to be increased or improved. I am not sure where the machine gun came into the discussion, but I could have easily missed it. Whether someone can shoot 15-20 times by individually pulling the trigger rapidly or just spray 15-20 shots with an automatice weapoon was not the issue. The issue of deadly weapons that many think are not necessary for home defense or hunting should be discussed. When current events provide everyone the ability to understand the carnage that can be brought by a semi-automatic handgun, it is a proper time to discuss it in my opinion becasue it shows everyone what the stakes are.
I posted the following video on another thread. I thought I’d post it on this thread too.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIpLd0WQKCY&fs=1&hl=en_US]
Bob,Esq.,
Elaine: “What facts can you add to the discussion to help ground the debate and to make it a more meaningful one?”
Bob,Esq.: “How about argument from emotion sans any attempt at clarification or grasp of the current status of what is being debated inevitably results in meaningless chatter that resembles an engine without a drive train; spinning endlessly and going nowhere.”
*****
Now that’s what I’d call adding a lot of factual information to the debate. You asked me a lot of questions–but failed to provide the facts that I requested. Why is that?
Did I state anywhere in my comments on this thread that I think guns should be outlawed?
Did you read this earlier comment that I addressed to savaship?:
“My family had a ‘gun’ situation last year. We cleaned out and sold my mother’s house. One of the objects that she kept down in the basement was a German luger that my father had brought home after WW II. Because of the gun laws in my state, my brother-in-law was afraid to transport the gun to a gun dealer–so he had to have the dealer come to my mother’s house. I, too, think that some gun laws may be too restrictive.”
*****
BTW, I did know what an automatic weapon was before the debate began. Maybe I should note that my father was an expert marksman and won a significant number of competitions when he served in the military.
P.S. After reading your comment to me, I’d say you’re the one who’s getting agitated/emotional about the subject.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexico/8249042/14-beheaded-in-resort-of-Acapulco-in-escalating-drug-gang-feud.html
Could be worse, 14 decapitated bodies found in Acapulco.
Sorry, addressed to Bob, Esq.
The guy who tackled the shooter was carrying. He decided just to physically overpower the shooter instead. It was the right choice. Even if someone close by was carrying a semi automatic, for them to try and hit the shooter while he was shooting may have caused even more innocent deaths. And the fact that these things happen in a matter of seconds when talking about semi automatic weapons-the damage is done before anyone can react.
Arizona is absolutely nuts for guns. Lets hope now that we might be able to get some common sense rules for gun licensing-ie, required gun safety courses, special license for these semi automatic weapons that includes psychological screening, etc.
We can go too far in either direction. We have all sorts of laws to protect the innocent, as much as possible, from the damage that can be done by reckless drivers. We should do the same when it comes to lethal weapons.
Fat chance though, when the right wing and the NRA are absolutely insane when it comes to this issue and they have lots of lobbyists and money supporting this gun orgy of a free for all.
The shooting of Reagan started a gun control debate, eniobob.