One More Massacre

PrintSmith wrote:

Science Chic wrote: <

---

READ THAT!!!!![/color]

I did - and what I came away with was that it was written by someone who feels that by enacting more legislation something bad like this can be stopped. What good would a waiting period have done SC? The madman started planning for this months ago. If the law had been he had to wait two weeks or a month to take possession of his firearms are you really thinking that this would have stopped him? Are we really, seriously, going to have someone make an appointment with a mental health professional every time they wish to purchase a gun to make sure that they have at least a thin tether to reality first?

You did? Because I didn't get that result at all. I saw a guy who was extremely fluent in sarcasm and irreverence, bashing the media for their whoring for ratings, Americans for their knee-jerk reactions and using the situation to justify their own political beliefs (every party, not just one side), and someone who didn't say anything about whether there should be more or less legislation, just that we will go through this process at the next shooting until someday we get completely desensitized and callous.

I haven't said one word about gun control, waiing periods, background checks, or anything else gun-related. My comments have been, and strictly are, about changing the human condition because that's the root of the problem. We can give guns to every man woman and child, or take guns away from every man woman and child, in this country and neither scenario is going to solve the underlying problem: that we still do not hold life sacrosanct. That we do not first listen, respect, and learn from others but rather rush to judge, spew our opinions, try to change others to our way of thinking, condemn, and think nothing of the harm we cause others either with our words, or our actions. Imagine if the entire world were like a Buddhist monastery? Now imagine the entire world like the worst slums of Cambodia. We are somewhere in between, and as a species I hope working our way toward enlightenment, but not even close to it. So no, taking the guns away will not solve the problem; we'll just find other ways to hurt each other because that's still what we do.

And that's what I saw that blogger saying - that every side is ridiculous.

I noticed that the biggest weapon in that blogger's arsenal is ridicule of others - Alinsky would be very proud of that effort. That piece is simply wasted bandwidth. Legislation whose goal is a perception of security is a waste of everyone's time, effort and treasure. Waiting periods and psych exams won't stop the guns sold to those of solid character and sound mind from being stolen from them by those of poor character and unsound mind. Laws won't protect anyone from what happened last Friday morning from happening again. Pass as many of them as you want, even an outright ban on all guns that aren't black powder muzzle loaders won't stop it from happening again and again and again.

There's a fine line between ridicule and sarcasm/irony to prove a point. I don't think it's wasted bandwidth if it says something that no one else has said; that we are all absurd. (btw, read Stage 6 again, I'm pretty sure he's NOT saying he's for more legislation [nor am I, it won't do any good]).

PrintSmith wrote:

Science Chic wrote: <

---

READ THAT!!!!![/color]

I did - and what I came away with was that it was written by someone who feels that by enacting more legislation something bad like this can be stopped. What good would a waiting period have done SC? The madman started planning for this months ago. If the law had been he had to wait two weeks or a month to take possession of his firearms are you really thinking that this would have stopped him? Are we really, seriously, going to have someone make an appointment with a mental health professional every time they wish to purchase a gun to make sure that they have at least a thin tether to reality first?

P.S. That blogger just posted an update to the bottom of that entry 35min ago - go see what he has to say (especially the part in bold).

This is the sentence that sticks out in my mind from the original post:
The only thing Americans will remember, is that James Holmes is yet another sterling example of whatever political point they're trying to make at that particular moment."

Supposedly liberals will argue for more gun control, supposedly conservatives will argue for protecting our 2nd Amendment rights so we can protect ourselves from crazies like that...the arguments never end because we don't listen to one another. (his quote: "Both sides are equally convinced that they are right. That's it and that's all. No compromise...You cannot reason with unreasonable people.") The point he didn't make, and that I am, is that they also don't address the root of the problem - it's not the availability of guns, it's our propensity to use them, our cultures that still celebrate/endorse/encourage violence, and our fundamental lack of holding life sacred. Until that attitude/biological urge changes, no artificially imposed law will change anything and it won't matter what type of weapon it is, be it swords, guns, or bombs.