Last Wednesday, President Obama announced the creation of a new gun violence “task force” that would immediately suggest policy changes concerning gun control in America after careful review of current laws and recent events. This new effort by the White House is to be lead by Vice President Joe Biden and comes soon after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, of which President Obama noted as a “wake-up call for all of us” in America. While this doesn’t necessarily come as a surprise to most Americans (particularly gun owners who have long been suspicious of where Obama stands concerning the NRA), many liberals are considering this a victory after a massive debate on run rights sparked heated conversations that even spread into the Twittersphere within hours of the Newtown shooting. There is even a discussion of mental health issues as people question how someone could do such a horrible thing at an elementary school.
Through these heated debates and often petty insults being thrown from both conservatives and liberals, it seems as though Americans are trying to lay blame in seeking justice for the innocent children and women whose lives were so horrifically and suddenly ended. Obviously both sides agree this tragedy shouldn’t have happened, however, both sides have failed to come up with a viable solution and failing to see what is truly at the heart of this matter. Many liberals believe it is a matter of needing stricter gun control laws with the idea that if fewer, “less responsible” people have guns the majority will be safer or more easily protected by law enforcement while many conservatives say that by removing guns the society at large will not have the ability to protect themselves and that this is a mental health issue in that parents or responsible adults shouldn’t keep guns and weaponry accessible to those who may not be mentally stable. I disagree on both counts.
Let me be clear: the heart of this matter is not a discussion of gun control, gun rights, or mental health issues. It’s a matter of morality and a lack of responsibility from parents and older generations to teach right from wrong through the years. We live in a society where abortion (the killing of our un-born offspring) is acceptable and praised, the thought of men being the stronger gender meant to instinctively protect women and children is mocked, and where the thought of God (or any sense of moral guidelines) is not only ridiculed but progressively being legislated out of society so as not to offend anyone. In such circumstances we, as Americans, do not deserve to expect anything but disastrous outcomes considering we have consistently rebuked the very morals our founding fathers relied upon when crafting our form of government and a healthy society to ensure this free land would thrive.
What has taken the place of personal responsibility and restraint is a society where anything that “feels good to you” should be considered acceptable. There’s a lack of personal motivation to do what is right, no matter the costs to one’s self or others, that is highly praised by media and pop-culture. Personally, I attribute this to a lack of morals set in place by a higher being…God. Mike Huckabee explained it best when, soon after the Newtown shootings ocurred, he was asked “Where was God in all of this?”
Attributing catastrophe to inanimate objects or lack of mental stability without emphasizing the need for a moral standard is lazy, dismissive, and exactly what we shouldn’t be doing. There is one more element the media and many writers in the blogosphere have been avoiding throughout this whole debate: the existence of evil. Adam Lanza was clearly determined to murder all those in that classroom and that school. In many cases it doesn’t matter what type of weapon (whether it be guns, knives, bare hands, etc.), anyone bent on murder will carry out their deed unless someone is able to stop them. It is not the object of what is used to kill, it is the heart and mind frame of the person that makes the murderer. Stop laying the blame on those who aren’t in the least bit responsible for this atrocity. We need to be focusing on changing society into a more accountable and personally responsible people, which starts with the foundation of the home. It’s better to instill moral principles in children when they’re young than leave it up to legislatures since morality cannot be regulated.
Elissa Roberson | College of the Desert | @ElissaRoberson
“We live in a society where abortion (the killing of our un-born offspring) is acceptable and praised”
Um, what? A major topic in the last election was about how one party wanted to outlaw abortion. When one party – that represents almost half of the country – wants to outlaw abortion in all instances, that means abortion is not acceptable and praised in this country. It means the exact opposite.
Think about it – we live in a country where its mandatory in some states to tell women there’s a link between breast cancer and abortion when all medical evidence suggests otherwise. People think abortion should be outlawed because of a false study that claims it caused depression – yet they don’t encourage ending pregnancies that can cause depression.
The idea that you could say that abortion is accepted and praised in this country with a straight face is so laughable. It invalidates the rest of your arguement.
“A major topic in the last election was about how one party wanted to outlaw abortion in all instances”
(to quote you again:) UM, WHAT?!?!?
The term “low information voter” applies specifically to YOU Chelle!
Romney/Ryan’s stance on abortion was that it IS acceptable in the cases of rape, incest and life of the mother. (you know, the very instances liberals always state when they say we need to keep abortion available for ANY REASON)
BTW, rape, incest and life of the mother only make up about 5% of abortions performed every year.
Most Republicans have the same stance, so “one party” did NOT want to outlaw abortion in this last election. That is just what the democrats said the republicans wanted because they know people like you aren’t going to do the research on their own to find the truth.
I think Trilby kicked this discussion into high gear. Denmark may be a terrifically violent country, despite its lack of gun violence and religion, in its racism toward Muslims and/or Arabs, etc. I was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kenya in the ’70’s and caught a ride with a Danish professional aid worker who feinted with his fancy car toward running down a guy by the roadside apparently because he thought the guy was some kind of threat–just by standing there, with no weapon in sight.
The Global War On Terror and its prime manifestation in the racist genocidal state of Israel (motto: there are no Palestinians) show that civil society is like a military: very few are actually delivering violence when there is a war; most are support troops.
So how to you stay out of unjust wars, how do you police wars? How do you define violence? A cliche like “horrific”? So the rule is, “Don’t do horrific things,” and the application to personal conduct is, “Oops, I’m on the verge of doing something horrific–I’d better stop”? I think “horror” means originally tending to make your skin crawl. A shiver.
On the other hand, evil is almost impossible to define. St. Augustine defined it, sort of, as the absence of good. A guy shoots his baby with his duck-hunting shotgun. The guy is good, the baby is good, the shotgun is good, but what’s missing is a reason for shooting the baby.
If virtue, then, is being attuned to spotting anomalies–unevennesses–what’s missing–then we need more, not less, “doing what feels good”. You know the (masculine?) hero in the frontier epic always says, “This doesn’t feel right.”
Your analysis seems easy to disprove by showing how gun control has worked in countries like the UK, Australia, and Japan. They have not drastically reduced gun-related deaths because they have more God (they are less religious than us), or because they outlawed abortion. They reduced gun violence because they regulate guns as the deadly weapons there are- unlike us in the United States who give virtually unfettered access (even to criminals and the mentally ill) to hand guns, assault weapons, and body armor.
And actually the states which are more religious, more opposed to abortion, and have more traditional gender views (Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc) are much more violent than our less religious states, and they are way more violent than the least religious developed country (Denmark).
You know Trilby, Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws in the world…I don’t think anyone has ever gotten shot there! (in case you couldn’t tell, that was sarcasm).
The UK has actually seen a significant RISE in violent crime since their gun ban in the late 90’s…and they still have gun violence, because now only the gang members have guns.
OH, and we actually DON’T “give unfettered access (even to criminals and the mentally ill) to hand guns, assault weapons, and body armor”.
There are already laws in this country against criminals and the mentally ill obtaining such things…but surprise, surprise, CRIMINALS DON’T OBEY THE LAWS!
The shooter in CT broke 41 state and federal gun laws…please explain to me how 42, 43,…65 more laws would’ve stopped him????
Evil exists. Evil people are going to do evil things. The way to stop evil people, is to give the good people a means to protect and defend themselves and each other.
The ONLY thing gun-bans do: is take guns out of the hands of responsible, LAW-ABIDING citizens (you know, the people who you would actually WANT to have guns!).