Gun law activists mobilize in response to Connecticut's recent tragedy. Their outcry for stricter gun laws and greater oversight on the sale of arms begins to fill the news. Pundits respond by posing two distinct aspects against each other: our culture versus our guns. Familiar mantras resurface: "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and "it's our culture that enables violent gun use". The country frames the issue, ceiling the box it believes it belongs in... narrowly establishing the paradigm for which others must be expected to debate.
This debate is rigged... politicians and pundits hold the public hostage to moronic statistics... reducing the argument to emotion and sensationalism. Taking the public down their specified rabbit hole for political gain, they avoid the tough questions... they defer real and logical discussions. We've got to wake up, folks!
The CDC reported in October of 2012 that the United States averaged 16,799 homicides per year of which 11,423 were the cause of firearms (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm). The unknowing gun activist may engage the apparent statistic... that roughly 2/3 or all homicides are committed by firearms... but what do these numbers mean? I contend that while guns make the act of homicide more successful it doesn't make mortality more rampant.
In the same report, the CDC cites that over 36,000 people commit suicide annually... nearly 35,000 people die annually from motor vehicle accidents... just under 25,000 people unintentionally fall to their death... and a whopping 32,000 people unintentionally poison themselves to death. These numbers indicate that people have proven to be statistically more likely to intentionally (or unintentionally) harm themselves... by way of something other than a firearm... than to inflict harm on others. Why is this relevant?
When is the last time you saw politicians mobilize to reduce national suicides? Guns don't kill people, people kill people (suicide... case and point). When have you seen them legislate staircases, buildings, and bridges... can we blame such objects for death falls? Despite massive numbers of motor vehicle deaths, why aren't politicians taking cars off the streets? We've proven less capable to responsibly own these 2-ton machines than firearms.
The real question: why are politicians and activists alike so interested in prohibiting or protecting gun laws? Statistically, firearm-related homicides contribute a fractional amount to the nation's annual mortality rate... numerically paling in comparison to more psychologically startling fatality acts such as suicide. What's wrong with our Constitutional right to bear arms (2nd Amendment)? If we deem such an amendment to be flawed, should we consider adding an amendment to restrict motor vehicle ownership (which has proven far more dangerous)?
Politicians and activists ultimately know that it's not about principle... it's about power. Strict constitutionalists and loose constitutionalists debate the relevance of expressed and implied powers of the constitution. As more loose interpretations of the constitution take center stage like divas and strict interpretations sit on the sideline like poorly fabricated sock-puppets, the country idles in the audience... waiting to throttle the sensationalism of popular media.
My sorrow deepens as the media reduces such an event to power politics and cliche tabloid headlines. The issues associated with such a tragedy transcend gun laws and cultural mores. They expose a conspicuous war on our constitution... a bloodless but fatal engagement, which has hidden a great many tragedies within American society... leaving a multitude of grieving families unconsoled... lest their losses parade a political position.
Grief overwhelms my pen. My deepest condolences are to the families of the victims in Connecticut. To the innocent and heroic victims in Connecticut, your life and sacrifice are remembered.
This debate is rigged... politicians and pundits hold the public hostage to moronic statistics... reducing the argument to emotion and sensationalism. Taking the public down their specified rabbit hole for political gain, they avoid the tough questions... they defer real and logical discussions. We've got to wake up, folks!
The CDC reported in October of 2012 that the United States averaged 16,799 homicides per year of which 11,423 were the cause of firearms (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm). The unknowing gun activist may engage the apparent statistic... that roughly 2/3 or all homicides are committed by firearms... but what do these numbers mean? I contend that while guns make the act of homicide more successful it doesn't make mortality more rampant.
In the same report, the CDC cites that over 36,000 people commit suicide annually... nearly 35,000 people die annually from motor vehicle accidents... just under 25,000 people unintentionally fall to their death... and a whopping 32,000 people unintentionally poison themselves to death. These numbers indicate that people have proven to be statistically more likely to intentionally (or unintentionally) harm themselves... by way of something other than a firearm... than to inflict harm on others. Why is this relevant?
When is the last time you saw politicians mobilize to reduce national suicides? Guns don't kill people, people kill people (suicide... case and point). When have you seen them legislate staircases, buildings, and bridges... can we blame such objects for death falls? Despite massive numbers of motor vehicle deaths, why aren't politicians taking cars off the streets? We've proven less capable to responsibly own these 2-ton machines than firearms.
The real question: why are politicians and activists alike so interested in prohibiting or protecting gun laws? Statistically, firearm-related homicides contribute a fractional amount to the nation's annual mortality rate... numerically paling in comparison to more psychologically startling fatality acts such as suicide. What's wrong with our Constitutional right to bear arms (2nd Amendment)? If we deem such an amendment to be flawed, should we consider adding an amendment to restrict motor vehicle ownership (which has proven far more dangerous)?
Politicians and activists ultimately know that it's not about principle... it's about power. Strict constitutionalists and loose constitutionalists debate the relevance of expressed and implied powers of the constitution. As more loose interpretations of the constitution take center stage like divas and strict interpretations sit on the sideline like poorly fabricated sock-puppets, the country idles in the audience... waiting to throttle the sensationalism of popular media.
My sorrow deepens as the media reduces such an event to power politics and cliche tabloid headlines. The issues associated with such a tragedy transcend gun laws and cultural mores. They expose a conspicuous war on our constitution... a bloodless but fatal engagement, which has hidden a great many tragedies within American society... leaving a multitude of grieving families unconsoled... lest their losses parade a political position.
Grief overwhelms my pen. My deepest condolences are to the families of the victims in Connecticut. To the innocent and heroic victims in Connecticut, your life and sacrifice are remembered.
As a responsible gun owner I have been pleasantly surprised that the "gun control" narrative has not gain any traction during the media reports on the Sandy Hook School tragedy. The trend of the commentary seems to be trending toward responsible gun ownership. Moreover, the irrefutable facts that countries, states, and counties with the least gun control have the lowest incidence of homicides and crime.
ReplyDeleteMorgan Freeman recently admonished the media for sensationalizing these horrific crimes against humanity and giving previous nameless and psychologically imbalanced perpetrators the notoriety they crave. Freemen recommends the media name and eulogize the victims and ignore the perpetrators completely. This makes sense.
Finally, people that are responsible for protecting citizens that cannot protect themselves should be trained and properly equipped to to do so. No homicidal maniac has ever walking into a police station and started blasting away. They always seem to pick on innocent and unprotected victims.
The Second Amendment grants more than a right to bear arms, it implies that gun ownership is a responsibility that should be borne by every citizen in a free society. When the government restricts an individual's right to protect themselves and others they are depriving all citizens of their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.