Skip to content

guns are like babyfood

November 10, 2018

There have been 35 mass shootings since a classroom full of first graders and educators were murdered in Sandy Hook. 35 mass shootings in 5 years. A mass shooting is considered more than 3 people since the definition changed in 2013. So, murders of 3 or more people include that Dad that murdered his two daughters and his pregnant wife and other murders like domestic violence. But mass shootings, there have been 307 of them in the last five years so 35 of those were committed by a lone gunman.

It seems so weird to me that the idea that we need better mental health in our country because people go buy legal guns and kill a lot of people. Is that really why we need better mental health care in our country? By and large mentally ill people do not murder people. Mentally ill individuals are more likely to have a crime committed against them versus them committing a crime, especially a violent crime. I don’t think we need better mental health care as a means to avoid mass tragedy. We need better mental health care in our country because mental health care is health care but out broken health care system isn’t what I am talking about.

I think about the word motive a lot. When my friends like family were murdered 11 years ago this month there was a lot of talk about motive. As if a motive could provide some framework to digest the atrocity that happened. Once you have been closely associated with murder understanding the reasons why someone could do something so horrible don’t really matter. It doesn’t change how you think of what happened.

When Gail, David, Megan and Brandon were murdered it was natural to try and make sense of the enormity of what happened. To try and break it down into pieces that could be turned over, looked at closely and understood. There is no understanding of why someone would do something so horrible, so black, so terrifying to another being. I think, once a person has gotten to that point, that moment when it is happening, everything that occurs from that point is meaningless when it comes to understanding the impulse that would compel you to do it.

Gail was a victim of domestic violence and after many years she broke free from her marriage and made a new life with her children. She was required by law to continue to have contact with the man who threatened her regularly and hand over her children to him. He threatened her so many times with the gun that he eventually used to kill her and the kids that there are pictures of the gun because she went to court several times to ask a judge to remove it from his home.

The gun, a hunting style rifle was purchased legally at a gun show in Pennsylvania and the judge, despite the murderer’s domestic violence convictions stated that the law allows it to be legally owned and not removed from his home. That law is now changed because people like Gail’s sister Janet and many other people worked tirelessly to change that one tiny bit of the laws that support gun ownership.

I think that framing the issue of entitlement versus motive is more helpful. Gail’s ex-husband felt he was entitled to rape her, harass her, stalk her, threaten her and eventually murder her because he felt she was his. Once she broke off their marriage and left him, his sense of entitlement increased and he felt more and more threatened. Once threatened he became angry. So angry that he eventually murdered her and their three children and then himself.

Entitlement means you believe, above all else, that you can have what you want. That is the issue. What YOU want, regardless, well, of anything else. Take the second amendment and look at it from the side of the sensible gun owner. They are responsible, they are careful and safe. They are not a threat and consider themselves to not be a danger to society and the few (actually, a bunch) people who use them irresponsibly and murder people that don’t deserve it are not in the same category as the responsible gun owner.

I have problems with this line of logic on many levels. The second amendment says, “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.”

Why do random joe’s think they are part of a well-regulated militia? The security of a free state, what does that really mean? What it meant at the time the amendment was ratified is not applicable to today’s way of living. We have an army. We have a national guard. We have four branches of military, police and a detailed and intricate structure of law enforcement and protection.

I have understood that many gun owners believe they need their guns to protect their property, their families and to be prepared in case our government rose up against the people. I have watched enough TV news to know that a bunch of people with guns are no match for an entity that has nuclear weapons, tanks, planes, helicopters, rocket launchers and submarines. Okay, so you can make your home a fortress against the government oppressors. What then? The natural conclusion is you would have to become a hermit in the woods and live off the land and be ever vigilant against threats way bigger than you with your guns. How is that a way to live? You feel entitled.

The same people who feel that there should be no regulation related to the second amendment also seem to be pretty excited about overturning the first amendment. Often I see those supports also support school prayer and attempt to heave their religion around in a manner that seems to me, to be against the first amendment. Our own president on a daily basis attacks the press and calls for his supporters to join him in demonizing the press. That narrative is so prevalent right now that another entitled angry white man with a gun murdered a bunch of journalists. Police have beaten and arrested citizens exercising their right to protest because they are brown people protesting the government and police violence. The same people who support the second amendment are angry about those protests.

So really, people tend to pick and choose what suits them and they object when others do the same thing.

I think the right to living peacefully supersedes the rights of people to own whatever and however many guns they want.

People who want gun laws changed want common sense laws. I think all guns should be illegal BUT I can acknowledge that some people could own a gun. Why don’t we require a written exam to own a deadly weapon? We do that for cars, which can be a deadly weapon. Why don’t’ we have mandatory training for gun handling and use? Why isn’t there a limit on how many and what types of guns you can have or sell? How can you buy a gun in one state without a background check (like at a gun show) and then take it to another state where that would be illegal? Why do some states have open carry laws but open carry is illegal in other states?

The laws that we have currently do not protect people. Its not because of mental illness. Mental illness is all over our country. All over the world. No other country has the problems that we do. None.

Is us. It’s the guns. Its the sense of entitlement. Its unreasonable arguments that are not based on reality but based on a vague and pervasive fear that the NRA tells people could be real unless they own guns.

The NRA telling us we need guns and no infringements on owning them are a lot like companies that make baby food. Baby food companies make it seem like their food is safe food. It’s the only food for babies. You have to buy premade food in individual containers because that is what babies are supposed to eat.

Baby food is a convenience food that the manufacturers have convinced the world is a basic need. Baby’s actually can just eat food you make. Its pretty simple actually if you just give them the food you make as long as they can’t choke on it. Are people that dumb that they would just give a baby a hotdog and grapes and peanuts? So dumb we can only feed them jars of food especially pureed? Really? I think most parents are capable of giving their kids food they can eat and watch them while they eat it. But the baby food company has convinced us that is what babies eat.

Guns are like baby food in little jars of individual servings. The NRA, with literally their millions of dollars budget, has convinced Americans they need the baby food because without it we will die at the hands of a tyrannical something.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: