Nothing Inevitable about Latest Tragedy

Last night the country was again shocked to learn of yet another mass killing. Even churches provide no sanctuary against people filled with hate who have access to deadly force. While the pace of American mass murder has increased, the political energy to do something about gun safety is harder to detect than ever. At Wesleyan within recent weeks, we heard from a variety of scholars about the history of guns in America, and we learned that a large majority of our fellow citizens favor regulations to promote gun safety. There is nothing, nothing inevitable about our rash of killing. Again, I quote from a statement from Connecticut’s Senator Chris Murphy:

“The paralysis you feel right now — the impotent helplessness that washes over you as news of another mass slaughter scrolls across the television screen — isn’t real. It’s a fiction created and methodically cultivated by the gun lobby, designed to assure that no laws are passed to make America safer, because those laws would cut into their profits. My heart sunk to the pit of my stomach, once again, when I heard of today’s shooting in Texas. My heart dropped further when I thought about the growing macabre club of families in Las Vegas and Orlando and Charleston and Newtown, who have to relive their own day of horror every time another mass killing occurs.

“None of this is inevitable. I know this because no other country endures this pace of mass carnage like America. It is uniquely and tragically American. As long as our nation chooses to flood the county with dangerous weapons and consciously let those weapons fall into the hands of dangerous people, these killings will not abate.

“As my colleagues go to sleep tonight, they need to think about whether the political support of the gun industry is worth the blood that flows endlessly onto the floors of American churches, elementary schools, movie theaters, and city streets. Ask yourself — how can you claim that you respect human life while choosing fealty to weapons-makers over support for measures favored by the vast majority of your constituents.

“My heart breaks for Sutherland Springs. Just like it still does for Las Vegas. And Orlando. And Charleston. And Aurora. And Blacksburg. And Newtown. Just like it does every night for Chicago. And New Orleans. And Baltimore. And Bridgeport. The terrifying fact is that no one is safe so long as Congress chooses to do absolutely nothing in the face of this epidemic. The time is now for Congress to shed its cowardly cover and do something.”

 

2 thoughts on “Nothing Inevitable about Latest Tragedy

  1. A seriously mentally ill individual perpetrated an extremely tragic heinous act at this peaceful Christian church. A bad conduct discharge should have been enough to prevent this felon from purchasing these weapons, which were not “flooded” across the U.S. by the NRA. As you well know, the 2nd Amendment preceded the founding of the NRA by nearly one hundred years. It was the 2nd Amendment and our pioneer spirit that led to the creation of the NRA, not the other way around. Clueless liberals like you simply don’t understand the intense passion that lawful gun owners (and members of the NRA) hold for their right to bear arms. In fact, when you go off on silly tangents like the one above, you only further remind legal gun owners why they never want to be disarmed because of the tyrannical and totalitarian notions people living in bubbles like you embody. The inner city single mother can’t wait even ten minutes for the urban police to arrive when a crime is being committed, it’s too late for her or one of her children. But, you don’t have a clue what life in the inner city is really like. Living in your “free” mansion, earning nearly $1million a year will never allow you to speak on her behalf. Yet since “gun safety” laws are strictest in urban areas (even in landmine Chicago) you opine about gun safety from your lofty perch in Middletown. Politicians of your ilk like Terry McAuliffe in Virginia now allow over 150,000 ex-felons to vote and purchase weapons. Why don’t you attack him and the leftists in Virginia who supported the reinstatement procedure. Why, because all of you leftists go after vulnerable, less informed groups with the expectation they will keep idiots like you in power. You didn’t learn after Vegas (interesting how gambling interests impede that investigation, and in particular casino unions which support leftist ignorant policies like yours–i.e. based on feelings but not facts) and now you cite some, (I’m sure without knowing (a liberal trait) incredibly biased group of anti-gunners who appeared at your latest “informative” seminar on “gun safety.” And, to end where I began, this disturbed idiot with his horrific track record should have never been allowed to purchase any weapon, that maybe we can agree on. But to indict the NRA, the gun industry and the stalwart believers in our constitutional rights, is tiresome, irrelevant and prosaic. But thanks again for being the second best gun salesman to former President Obama.

  2. Regarding your Sasha Seminar, if you relied on Patrick Charles as your authority for the English roots (common law) of the 2nd Amendment and assumed he somehow was the definitive interpreter of the 2nd Amendment, you were gravely mistaken. While Prof. Charles is an astute historian, he is well known in NRA circles as a very left wing interpreter of the English common law. Just because he is an occasional advisor to the USAF’s Socom history wing, doesn’t give him credence as a fair representative of what the original intent of the 2nd Amendment was. Prof. Saint George Tucker, the American law professor and Madison appointed Federal Judge, who was an expert on Blackstone’s Commentaries, properly understood that the right to defend one’s self was a “natural” right, not one conferred by government. It is in that context that our Framers’ intent must be seen, not in an historical context (as Charles is known to do) containing an analysis of English or American governmental powers conferred to individuals or militia. In essence, Charles is a fancy lib like most academicians today with a bent towards secular humanism, which grossly conflicts with those of us who believe in our natural rights. Next time you hold a seminar on the 2nd Amendment, contact the NRA for a list of experts.

Leave a Comment