I
haven't posted to this blog in a long time. My first post here in a
while was going to be a sort of year in review thing – and I will
be doing that. A response to yesterday's tragedy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20738025
is in order.
First
of all, I think President Obama said it best when when he stated what
was on my heart yesterday, what lingers today and will remain for
some time to come. “We’ve
endured too many of these tragedies in the past few years. And
each time I learn the news I react not as a President, but as anybody
else would -- as a parent. And that was especially true today.
I know there’s not a parent in America who doesn’t feel the same
overwhelming grief that I do.” Overwhelming grief indeed.
“We’ve
endured too many of these tragedies in the past few years.” Seven
mass shootings in the United States this year alone. The response
from humans that I know has been mostly focused on thinking about our
own children, grieving for the victims and their families. As it
should be probably, but also – in the words of James Brown “... I
heard a disturbing sound!”
What
was most disturbing was the (now inevitable) rage and counter rage
between gun rights advocates and gun control advocates. I understand
the rage. It's a natural response to a violent tragedy and part of a
grieving process. The thing I don't understand is the inevitable
defensiveness and vehement arguments that have ensued each time this kind
of tragedy occurs.
The
tone of the arguments often – if not always – take on angry and
extreme points of view. In one case yesterday, I saw a comic book
writer - of all people - tweet a few words (after shock, prayers and heartfelt sorrow)
in support of “sensible gun control. We need this now.” The first
argument to him came a few minutes later and asked about whether he
advocated “banning baseball bats” for deaths occur in the US due
to baseball bat violence, apparently. Other gun rights advocates
jumped in and had like things to say. Most of the arguments from gun
rights advocates either assume that gun control involves banning guns
completely, disarming “law-abiding gun owners” and taking their
guns away or a slippery-slope argument (hate the words slippery-slope
when put together! Rrrrr!) that ends in the question “where does
it stop!?” Sometimes, Adolf Hitler or Stalin are invoked as an
argument for the slippery-slope. Arguments like this were all over
the Internet yesterday (although Hitler and Stalin were thankfully
missing from anywhere I read).
The
comic book writer in question (and many others) decried a health care
system and mental health care system that is broken, overwhelmed and
overly expensive. No arguments ensued and no answers were given from
gun rights advocates for that collection of problems. The biggest gun control legislation that I
ever remember were the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act and the
Federal Assault Weapons Ban. The Brady Act took a little less than
12 years to enact and its effectiveness was undermined by the Supreme
Court when it basically made it unenforceable. Neither of these laws
led down a slippery-slope – no matter which party was in power. No
one's guns were taken away and no complete gun ban has ever been
established in the US (or proposed, as far as I know).
I
have a prediction that I hope will not come true. I predict that all
of the Sunday talk shows tomorrow will have a guest from the NRA (or a
gun rights advocate who holds an extreme view) as well as a left wing
person who advocates an extreme view of very tight gun control. A
“debate” will ensue where no one will be convinced of the other's
view. The producers and hosts of the show will be convinced that
they will have done their civic duty presenting both sides of the
argument. Yet, like the election we just had – where 90% of the
information we got from either party was fabricated lies (a total
fabrication on my part – I beg someone to prove me wrong – really
– please) – we'll end up right where we were – just angrier at
what we THINK our neighbors and friends believe.
False
equivalency is not helpful. Our society is broken if all we can do
is present specious arguments to each other that are both meaningless
and have no basis in common experience (wait a minute, that's sort of
a definition of specious).
I don't believe that ANYONE thinks that seven mass shootings – not to mention thousands of gun related deaths of individuals – per year is acceptable. If all we can do is argue vehemently about things that aren't true, we'll never make any change. I plead with you to demand from lawmakers and those in positions that have influence over change to begin to try to really understand what the problems are – then listen – listen. Listen to what solutions might work and why they might not work – not in a perfect world – not in Hitler's world – not in Stalin's world – not down some stupid fucking slope! Let's put down the Hitler dolls and our cold dead hands and make some real changes. I don't know whether that means Tension Tamer Tea distributed freely, meditation in schools or $5000 bullets. Sitting around waiting for the next horrifying tragedy to happen is not working.
I don't believe that ANYONE thinks that seven mass shootings – not to mention thousands of gun related deaths of individuals – per year is acceptable. If all we can do is argue vehemently about things that aren't true, we'll never make any change. I plead with you to demand from lawmakers and those in positions that have influence over change to begin to try to really understand what the problems are – then listen – listen. Listen to what solutions might work and why they might not work – not in a perfect world – not in Hitler's world – not in Stalin's world – not down some stupid fucking slope! Let's put down the Hitler dolls and our cold dead hands and make some real changes. I don't know whether that means Tension Tamer Tea distributed freely, meditation in schools or $5000 bullets. Sitting around waiting for the next horrifying tragedy to happen is not working.