Its a Saturday night special
Got a barrel that's blue and cold
Ain't no good for nothin'
But put a man six feet in a hole
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.
Fetish:
Any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or
devotion.
-
Dictionary.com
The USA has a problem that it refuses to
admit is a problem. Gun violence in this nation of ours has reached epidemic
proportions. Movie theaters and office buildings have become free-fire zones
while the NRA and gun manufacturers not only sit back, playing Nero while
America burns, but add fuel to the fire by fighting against anyone that dares
disagree with them. One of the latest arguments I’ve seen buzzing around the
Interwebs tries to compare gun ownership with car ownership. I’ve used this
argument myself to advocate for mandatory registration, training, and liability
insurance for gun owners similar to what I have to have on my car to legally
operate it. I will use this apples-to-oranges argument no longer thanks to the
following irrefutable fact:
Motor vehicles, used as the manufacturer intended, transport people and
cargo. Handguns and assault weapons, used as the manufacturer intended, kill
people.
You can try to compare guns to any other
item in human experience. The only comparison I have seen where lethality is
the intended purpose is the Ebola virus. American culture has always had an
unhealthy fascination with guns and gun violence. We are surrounded by this
violence in our media every day. Games, television, movies, and music all
extol the virtues of gunplay. Show a bullet going through three heads in a row
(I’m talking to you, Deadpool), get an R rating, show two people having sex,
here’s your X. If that isn’t a sign of a thoroughly fucked up culture, I don’t
know what is.
The NRA would like you to believe that the
answer to gun violence is more guns. Let’s go back to our Ebola comparison. The
answer to the spread of Ebola is NOT more Ebola. The answer is vaccination and
curative medicine. More guns is simply not a viable solution to gun violence.
Not only do I want to not have to worry about some disaffected idiot with a gun
and a grudge when I go out in public, I also don’t want to have to worry about
a passer-by thinking he or she is Dirty-bloody-Harry and shooting back!
Gun fetishists (see definition above)
almost always rush to the 2nd Amendment as defense of their choice.
In doing so, almost all dive right past the “well-regulated Militia” part of
the sentence straight to the “shall not be infringed” clause. The writers and
signatories to the Constitution did not intend the current free-fire zone that
America is becoming. They were working from their own recent experience of
standing up to a government that did not allow a voice to the governed being
deposed by bands of home-grown militia members with the guts to stand up to one
of the best professional armies of the day. They were talking about
muzzle-loading black powder muskets and rifles. It is my firm belief that, as
with much of American culture and politics of today, those who wrote our
Constitution would be appalled by how their words have been interpreted,
especially in relation to the advances in people-killing technology.
This is the point in my rant where the
Constant Reader of this inconstant blog would normally get my wise and
well-thought (snicker) answer to the problem at hand. I don’t have one. I do
know that just as more Ebola isn’t the answer to the spread of Ebola, more guns
is not the answer to the spread of gun violence in America. The answer is probably
going to be comprised of many different initiatives. Common sense would dictate
that one of those initiatives would have to be the reduction in the number of
guns on the street. All that I know right now is that the status quo of gun
violence in America is no longer acceptable.
