The Weekend That We Wish Never Was……12-17-12…3:09am
I’ve spent the past few hours trying to figure people out. So far I’ve come up empty. The thing is I’m not sure it’s me. I believe it really is them this time. Somehow I’ve become the voice of sanity while acting insane to some. They’ve become the voice of insanity while proving to be insane to most. That makes perfect logic to me
The majority of my public spouting off has been about gun control and the rights of Americans. The second amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms. Actually it states:
“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
Humph! That can be, and has proven to be, very confusing. In one way I can easily say that we as Citizens of the United States according to its Constitution have the right to own weapons. I can also comfortably state that weapons are only legal in the defense of the United States. This has been the cause of a nationwide debate for three days, and counting, due to the massacre in Newtown Connecticut. And the country has been at war with itself all weekend over the very wording of the second amendment. I for one am completely disgusted and sick over this confrontation!
I have stated my position and my reasoning as well as my answers for how to fix a seemingly unimaginable problem on other things I’ve written. My position, in quick form is we need stricter laws on weapons. My reasons are that more access to weaponry leads to more lives lost. My answers on how to fix this is simple- Less guns, more gun tracking, less gun making, more Law Enforcement. Now I’ve gone into this in much more detail already as I’ve stated, but I’d be more than happy to answer any questions anyone has if a more in depth explanation is warranted. For now I’ll allow my answers to be my answer
The puzzling part of this fight to me is the excuses people who are gun enthusiasts come up with to defend their position. I am truly confused as to why anyone needs a weapon that can shoot off a round of bullets in a matter of moments. Did mankind discover Bigfoot only to realize that he has an addiction to chugging kegs of Redbull with a side of the entire inventory from your local Starbucks thus making him impossible to pin down? I cannot fathom who or what needs to be killed that fast and in such a brutal way. Now before anyone questions what I said please let me explain that to me any killing is brutal. No ifs, ands, or whatever’s. Killing is killing and a life lost is a life lost. The point that I’m trying to make is that I do agree that in certain cases it may be okay to own and use a gun as a means of protection. I just think that if a burglar breaks into my house brandishing a weapon and if I am properly trained in the use of a gun, then I can defend myself with one shot. If I’m correct- and I have never touched a gun in my life, proudly, so I am no gun expert by any stretch of the imagination- a six shooter means the gun can have six bullets at the ready in the chamber. If this is correct then I am to also gather that a nine millimeter possesses nine shots at the ready. If these presumptions are true, then as the song says “If 6 was 9, I don’t mind” I think either is enough for protection, especially in this age of everyone carrying a cell phone on their person wherever they are. No burglar can cut the phone line of a mobile phone like they do in the movies before entering a house. Hear burglar, call police. See burglar, shoot 6 to 9 times while waiting for the police to arrive.
Are there flaws in my opinion, probably? I don’t know for sure having never been in this situation myself. I just can’t see the reasoning behind spraying the house up with so many bullets at such a maddening pace that the walls look like a Jackson Pollack design. Once again- More bullets equals more of a chance of killing the wrong person. It just seems illogical to me on so many levels
I saw where someone posted the following statement tonight on the Facebook page of a friend of mine who more or less agrees with my anti-weapons stance. This was the dumbest justification that I have seen so far:
“46k people died in car accidents, more than gun crimes. Even more so if you take away suicide by gun”
As I not so eloquently asked/scolded/questioned with malice of this idiot, “did you really just say that?” Trust me I was much more inquisitive and colorful in my disgust of his statistically filled farce of a point. I’m just doing everything I can right now to write something clean for once.
This misuse of statistics was wrong on every level. For starters he equated car accidents to gun crimes. Then he equated gun crimes to something meaningless. Worse yet was that he just out and out dismissed suicide by gun as being important. It was as if he was saying “hey if you killed yourself it’s your fault so you don’t really count as a death.” Or something like that I guess. I honestly blew a gasket when I read that garbage (I was so close to breaking my clean language mandate just now)
Now normally I have a rule when it comes to social media- Keep your real life out of it! I broke that rule 100 times over tonight, with ease. My internal temperature was set to boil and my veins mixed with my brain and somehow I left my state of mind at the enter button right after I typed out a scorching retort that included these basic facts:
I have a sister who died in a car accident
I have a brother who shot himself to death with a gun
To me our dear Mr. Statistic had crossed a line so personal that if we were in the same zip code violence would have been the only answer. I had to settle for flying words of vengeance backed up by truth and reality with a deep portioned side of sarcasm.
He responded by talking about drunk drivers killing people and something about getting a gun in Mexico. His response was so beyond disbelief that one can only hope that he wasn’t driving anywhere tonight. He would’ve become one of his own non justifiable statistics
Still the arguments continued in full force on every TV show. I watched as news reporters interviewed the children who attended the school where the massacre took place. Then I watched a host- Wolf Blitzer- explain that these interviews only took place after asking their parents for permission first. It was obvious that his station-CNN- had begun to see the barrage of tweets and other various social media displays of disgust quickly sent out by outraged Americans from all corners of the country. Most likely people from countries around the world chimed in as well. It was that revolting to many of us.
I watched as one host-Piers Morgan- was so livid about the lack of gun control in this country that I was beaming with pride every time he spoke. Then I watched in shock as I realized on his panel was a guy hawking a book espousing the virtue that if everyone owned a gun we’d all be safe. What struck me as unbelievable was that this host booked this same guest after the shootings in Aurora Colorado a few months back. It was already clearly known to the host, the producer, as well as the audience what this man’s opinion was, yet the need to book a show took precedence over common sense. Sitting next to madman number one was a guy who shared his belief that if every teacher in every school all across America possessed a gun on their person during school hours, then these tragedies wouldn’t happen anymore. I literally smacked myself in the head and threw something at the TV. Being married to a woman who has taught second grade for the better part of the past 14 years or so- only to be interrupted by trying her hand at teaching first grade and elementary school autism for a year each- only reinforced my thought process that if I were a computer I would have been in meltdown mode
On Saturday I watched as a United States Senator- Toni Boucher of Connecticut- was being interviewed on live TV-MSNBC- from the scene of the shootings. She had to look down at her notes as she named the town of Newtown. She continued to slyly read from her script as she offered up her full-fledged support of the surrounding towns. I don’t believe she attempted to mention the names of the surrounding towns though. Her script would have been too long to hide.
I also saw a tweet proclaiming that another United States politician proudly proclaimed that she would introduce an Assault Weapons Ban when Congress reconvenes in January. Her name is Dianne Feinstein and she has been around Washington DC for years. I wondered where her Assault Weapons Ban has been hiding all this time. My best guestimates were that it was either never written or it was sold out for something else that she desperately needed to pass through Congress, or the Senate, that she deemed to be of the utmost importance at the time. Give a politician a tragedy and you give a tragedy over to a false hero
I also watched as a mother stood at the scene, I believe this had to be Friday night, next to her daughter and was interviewed about the day’s events. She had nothing to offer in the way of insight. She wasn’t at the school when it happened nor had she ever heard of the teacher that she was asked about. Yet there she was exposing her very young daughter to a bank of lights beaming off of a remote television truck while she explained nothing. Her daughter even stated that she couldn’t hear the interviewer- I think it was Anderson Cooper- because her ear piece was having a problem. That struck me as a kid who was being trained in the ways of the media in order to sell a story. Was this mother out there only to ready her family for a forthcoming book tour? This thought sickened me so I stopped watching the TV for a while. Then when I returned to my viewing quarters I changed the channel- this time to Fox News and Bill O’Reilly- and guess which mother/daughter combination was being interviewed by the host of The Factor? Yep
Anger was forming inside of me, replacing my sorrow, and that was making me even angrier. The rub is that I was now angry with myself now for allowing this all to consume me. So I began again to read the social media comments and lost it. Facebook was full of prayer chains, prayer candles; never forget pictures, and the wrong name of the shooter. Twitter was full of the same, only I had to click the links of people who had nothing to say so they just passed along what their friends had passed to them. This to me reeks of people wanting to be noticed for being nice. I have another much more descriptive phrase for what my thoughts are exactly for those people, but I refrain
Even the people on the side of gun control were in on the “Look ma, I’m so smart” action. I read a statistic stating that 18 women died as well as 8 men. This was accompanied by an explanation that serial killers are almost always males and almost always single out women to kill. I was annoyed, angry, troubled, and disgusted by this misuse of the public’s trust in someone proclaiming to have the interest of the people at heart in his every action. I asked him via twitter if he was seriously going to go with that as a report. I received no response. I mentioned in another tweet that I was disgusted by what he’d said. Still he said nothing to me in return. However his sheep- my nick name for people that believe everything famous people say- started to tweet me in his defense. How could I challenge these undeniable facts? Did I not know that the principle of the school was female as were most for the teachers? Did I not know that when the Amish shooting took place that yes, the shooter did aim at the women? In fact the line about women being targets was constantly being tossed at me as if I was a male chauvinist pig or something? None of the women defenders of the faith understood my original question, so I calmly explained my question to them. After all I wasn’t angry with them. I was disgusted by their fearless leader. Why did this famous male refer to the 20 children as women and men? Did he truly believe this was a case of a shooter picking out his targets and doing whatever he could to only kill the very young girls? Even if this proves to be true he didn’t have any facts to base this opinion on. I was and still am appalled that the esteemed Michael Moore, protector of the wronged, rich film maker who makes more money off of one documentary than most of will see in a lifetime, yet dresses like a bum in order to look the part, would use dead babies- to me a 6 or 7 year young child is still a baby- just to prove he’s smarter than the rest of us? Di-sgust-(but never by him)-ted! At least his sheep heard me out and one of them eventually ended up favoriting and retweeting some of the things I said. Little victories to me seem so little when fighting a fight that just seems so much bigger than being retweeted by a stranger
Another cause of contention with me was a guy whose job is to check up on the media-Howard Kurtz, ironically also of CNN. Trust me I was not looking to attack CNN. I just happened to watch their coverage more than I did the other channels for some reason- He tweeted out a link to an online article he had written that bashed Facebook for getting the name of the shooter wrong. This was incredulous to me. Here was a man who writes a blog on an online news site and holds court on a show that is shown on an all-news channel blasting social media for allowing what his very own employers allowed. Then never mentioning that his bosses did the same thing! Ugggghhhh!!!! I of course tried confronting Mr. Kurtz as well and as well it was to no avail. There is a basic rule of thumb on social media sites that will rarely let you down. Unless you are a celebrity your questions will never be answered. The only way that you will receive a response at all if you are a nobody like yours truly, is if you say something so ludicrous that the person you are aiming your question at shows it to everyone in order to prove that they have nut cases attacking them. What this proves however is that they read everything that is sent their way, yet will never respond to an honest question. They are too good for the little people that they are supposedly speaking up for with their famous voices of type written word. They will send out almost everything that is sent in that praises them however, especially if it’s sent in by another famous person. This you can always rely on
What held me glued to the ongoing debates so passionately was the continuous use of the term “gun control” Over and over everywhere and under and out of everything people were either totally against the idea of gun control in full or whole heartedly for the idea as an act of brilliance. A few people were wishy-washy, but like I said, that was only a small portion of the people that chimed in with an opinion on this by now raging debate. This just kept leading everyone around and around in a circle as the second amendment was debated in front of the world. So I got an idea; what if we changed the term to “weapons restriction” or something similar? Could this take the idea of hiding behind a law that was written well over 200 years ago out of the equation? After all isn’t a gun really a weapon and isn’t restricting a weapon a good idea to most people with basic human common sense?
Once again just to touch on where my beliefs stand, I am not trying to push the idea that all guns need to be removed from society right away. I understand the complications in enforcing such a law. I may be against guns, but I’m not crazy! I would just go back to what I said earlier- we need more rules. Rules can come in many shapes and forms. For instance I believe in a tracking system that can track every gun in this country whether legal or illegal. You mean to tell me we could send a man to the moon over 40 years ago, but we can’t keep a database up to date? I’m for psychiatric evaluations in full, not some simple five minute test. I believe in deeper, longer background checks I’m for a much longer period of time in between the request to purchase a gun and when that gun can be purchased to allow for a cooling off period in case it’s being bought for revenge. I also wonder why all guns can’t be made with the serial number engraved in it in as many places as possible if only to make it more difficult to scratch the serial number off? And of course I’m for an all-out ban on anything that can shoot fast and furiously at another living thing. A six or nine shooter seems plenty enough to me
These are just a few of my ideas and only a brief description on each. Once again, if someone wants to ask me questions feel free to do so. I’m all vocal chords
Another part of the debate that swept the country this weekend has been one of timing. Was it or was it not the proper time to approach these subjects? As with everything else that was brought upon us by these tragic events the country seemed split with their opinions. If you were very vocal such as me then the timing seemed appropriate. If you are for weapons restrictions, but aren’t the most vocal of speakers, well then maybe we should wait until after this tragedy is behind us. If you’re pro weaponry then you just think the entire conversation is stupid because you have the right to form a Militia at any time…or so you believe.
I believe that there is a wrong time to be right, a right time to be right, and never a right time to be wrong. If you don’t strike while the fire is lit you risk the fire being extinguished before you can even warm up. I chose to speak up, obviously
Now we head into a new week and an entire new set of questions will arise as we still struggle to answer the questions we’ve been faced with for the past few days. This will be accompanied by the videos of funerals being held around the town of Newtown Connecticut for the entire world to see and weep along with. And I’m not sure the country is ready for what’s next.
Last night President Obama spoke in Newton Connecticut and for the most part I believed his words rang true. However being the natural born pessimist that I am, I question whether or not he will back up his words with actions. Something somewhere in the back of my mind keeps harkening back to this past election season. Way back then neither candidate would speak out against guns for fear of losing the voters who attached themselves to the National Rifle Association. Will the president stand up to the NRA now that he has no votes to lose or will he buckle to the wishes of the very noticeable few? Just like every other part of this debate-only time will tell.