Have we in America, or for that matter, the world, lost our humanity completely? Of course by now most of my readers will have at least heard of the tragic shooting of the news reporter and cameraman, shot to death, along with another person seriously injured in Virginia today, on live television.
And of course the inevitable discussion of guns has raised its ever-present head once again in response to what, in my opinion, is not a matter of guns, but is a matter of people, for whatever reason, have lost, or never possessed, the ability to control their impulses to inflict violence upon others.
But right now I could care less about how anyone feels about gun control. I don’t care if you think there are too many guns in this nation, and that no one should have one. I don’t care if you believe that there is a conspiracy to confiscate all guns and rob us of our 2nd Amendment rights.
What I want to discuss here, is whether or not we as a society have lost our humanity, especially when it comes to our politics?
While these types of tragedies have become all too common, so has the knee jerk, and formulated responses from both sides of the political spectrum.
Within hours the White House Spokesman was in front of TV cameras with a call on Congress to do something legislatively about the so-called gun issue.
I cannot tell you how angry it makes me to see the lives and the deaths of these innocent people being used for a political agenda. I mean does the White House have these press releases pre-written so that they can just trot them out as soon as the next shooting happens?
I fear for many days coming, we will be bombarded by the progressive media about the need for stricter gun laws. We will find out that either this crazed killer bought his gun legally and that something was missed in his past that should have exempted him from gun ownership, or we will be told that the gun was stolen. Either way the left will be telling us that if only there was one more law, one more background check, one more layer of government, that these innocent people might still be alive. And I am wearing my loose-fitting pants for that day, because I expect monkeys to fly out my ass too.
But as angry as I am at the White House for their response, and the expectation of the media’s handling of this in the days to come, I am equally angry and outraged by some on the right’s response, and repugnant attitude about this event.
Social media is full of both sides of this debate. Someone sent me screen shots of one Facebook page from a group called “Active Self Protection” or ASP, like the snake, get it? Ha Ha!
This seems to be an aggregate site that may have several people posting under the name Active Self Protection, and while I was told who one of them may be, who is a local proponent of the 2nd Amendment, I will not give out that name. If he would like to contact me here at Delaware Right and defend his actions, as always we allow all to join the conversation.
Here are the screen shots from the site.
Much of this has since been taken down, but as I write this the video is still up.
Let me first address the fact that this group chose to post the video. Why? For what purpose? They could have had the gun debate without posting the graphic video, but of course that would not have driven quite so many to their site. And if you don’t think that is important to them, look at this in the comment thread.
Frank,
If discussion of gun violence makes you angrier than the gun violence itself, then yes, you have lost your humanity.
I actually agree with Frank on this one. Folks that know me also know where I stand on gun control. However, my position (or anyone else’s) is simply irrelevant and reactionary within the scope of this tragedy.
Both sides have immediately politicized this terrible event, which is shameful. The bigger issue – the root of the problem, is just as Frank has described. We have developed into a society of drones – virtual robots without conscience, soul, moral compass, impulse control, or sense of consequence of our actions. We expect and demand instant gratification, with no maturity of thought process, and absolute adherence to our own narcissistic tendencies.
We can argue for months about how we made it to this point and how gun control may or may not have made a difference. But until we somehow address the underlying problem, we will see more and more examples of this type of unthinkable behavior.
“Both sides have immediately politicized this terrible event, which is shameful.”
We all knew what the reaction of the Democrats would be , but I’m not sure I follow you on how the Republicans politicized this.
FBH – Frank gives a pretty good example in his post, and I have also seen similar threads on FB and talking head debate on TV.
I do believe that the left is far more guilty of politicizing this, both in quantity and intensity. But sadly, some on the right are doing the same thing.
We live in a nation that sanctions- and pays for- the ripping from the womb of a viable baby and the selling of its organs. You don’t think the culture of abortion on demand has an effect on the culture in general?
A callous disregard for the sanctity of life in the womb has consequences outside the womb. I’m not saying that legalized abortion was the only factor in this particular case- it is merely a component of the culture of death and mayhem in the aggregate that is dispensed to Americans through the media.
Abortion- Kill…Movies- Kill…Video games- Kill…Rap “music”- Kill…ISIS- Kill
Kill, kill, kill, kill…you reap what you sow.
“I do believe that the left is far more guilty of politicizing this, both in quantity and intensity. But sadly, some on the right are doing the same thing.”
Maybe so, but I don’t know of a single “Republican” that has publicly politicized this event.
Delacrat, I wish either you would actually read what I write, or stop acting as if you don’t. I said above, “Let me first address the fact that this group chose to post the video. Why? For what purpose? They could have had the gun debate without posting the graphic video, but of course that would not have driven quite so many to their site. And if you don’t think that is important to them, look at this in the comment thread.”
So you see, my post is not about not having the debate, but about how we have divided into our camps to do so. The people who kill indiscriminately usually don’t care about your politics. They would kill you as quickly as me. This is all of our problem. If we can’t get past the playbook rhetoric then we are doomed to see this happen again and again.
Frank,
Arguing that evidence of ugly realities should be suppressed is hoping ugly realities will go away if they’re swept under a rug.
Delacrat, acting as if you don’t under what is being written is evidence of agenda driven politics. But thanks for again being the perfect example of what I have written about. What would I do without you?
Frank,
I understand what what you wrote. You just don’t want to understand what you wrote is BS.
Why is it BS to think we can have the discussion without using the graphic video, and without having to come out within hours of the shooting, with nothing new, just the same old rhetoric from both sides?
Obviously you can’t. Progressive 101.
“Why is it BS to think we can have the discussion without using the graphic video, and without having to come out within hours of the shooting,…” – Frank
Graphic video or no graphic video, you don’t want a discussion. You just want guns.
Ah Delacrat, last time I checked I write this piece, and we are having a conversation, unfortunately you were unable to have one without the playbook rhetoric.
You say all I want is guns, yet it seems that all you want are my guns.
If you want to revoke the constitutional right of gun owners, then get off your ass and amend the Constitution. Oh but that’s too hard to follow the rules, easier to bully weak legislators and judges.
Now answer why it is unlikely you could get that done?
First, let me say that I don’t like graphic pictures or videos. I didn’t watch the shooting video, and I won’t watch it. I’m upset without seeing it.
But…
Frank says this: “Let me first address the fact that this group chose to post the video. Why? For what purpose? They could have had the gun debate without posting the graphic video, but of course that would not have driven quite so many to their site. And if you don’t think that is important to them, look at this in the comment thread.”
And then this: “Why is it BS to think we can have the discussion without using the graphic video…”
Remind me again why Dave Burris booted you from Delaware Politics years ago, Frank? Might it have something to do with you posting “graphic” images? Make up your mind. Are graphic images only okay if you agree with the cause? Abortion graphic image – okay! Gun shot killing graphic image – not okay. Flesh out these inconsistencies for us, Frank.
Ah, sorry Pandora, nice try. There were no images involved. Back then I rarely used photos or images. I was “booted” as you call it, for posting the medical discription of an abortion.
Seems Mr. Burris didn’t want to have a conversation either.
I notice you offered no ideas for how to revoke the 2nd Amendment either, you simply attempt to deflect by attacking me.
So… graphic “writing” is okay with you, but not images? Got it. But I’ll email Dave B. to confirm.
Not sure where you draw the line, but my guess is you draw it where it fits with your ideology. Most of your commenters haven’t been around as long as I have. I remember, and this is quite a new leaf for you.
You can email whoever you like. And I didn’t “write” anything. I post a medical discription of a medical procedure. Which I got from the CDC. It did not involve any specific people by name.
Pandora, is this really the best you can do?
Again, tell us your plan for revoking the 2nd Amendment. But of course you don’t have one.
Please show me where I’ve called for revoking the 2nd Amendment. Go on, prove that claim.
Nice try at diversion, but we all see how you’re splitting hairs – graphic images are different than graphic writing. Graphic writing is a-okay. Everyone commenting on here get that? Be as graphic as you want when commenting. Frank says graphic writing is fine with him.
Please show me where I’ve called for revoking the 2nd Amendment. Go on, prove that claim.
Nice try at diversion. The truth is… you believe nothing is too graphic when it comes to abortion because you are 100% against abortion – therefore the ends justify the means. If graphic imagery/words helps end abortion then Frank will be all for it. (I get that) However, when it comes to guns… well, that’s too graphic because Frank is okay with guns. Consistency, please.
Sorry about the double post. Technical difficulties.
Pandora, you are showing your weakness. You are attempting to make the debate about me, rather than about the issue. Again, playbook rhetoric.
I put out the challenge to revoke the 2 nd Amendment in an earlier comment, since in my view, to obtain what the left clearly wants, no guns, that is the only way to do so without infringing on constitutional rights. There is a process to do it, so as an agent of the progressive agenda, what Is your plan?
As for the abortion post you are referring to, why would you find that anymore graphic than if I posted a medical discription of the removal of a tumor?
After all, the position of your beloved progressive ideology is that the doctor is simply removing a lump of flesh.
And again, since the post had no reference to any particular party, no family members were subjected to seeing there loved ones shot down in a hail of bullets.
Keep making things up, Frank, and then crowning yourself the king of your masturbatory debate.
Still waiting for you to prove your claim about me wanting to revoke the 2nd Amendment. You can prove that statement, right? You didn’t just pull it out of your a$$, right?
“the constitutional right of gun owners” – Frank
If Vester Flanagan did not exercise his “constitutional right of gun owners”, three people would still be alive.
Delacrat, we have the right to keep and bear arms, we do not have a right to kill others. So what is your progressive idea to revoke the right to keep and bear arms, so that people will not be able to own guns, and in your world, end all the killing.
How will you revoke the 2nd Amendment?
Pandora, I am not saying you said you wanted to, I am asking you how you will to stop all the killing. Or are you saying you prefer to infringe on constitutional rights with legislation.
“we have the right to keep and bear arms, we do not have a right to kill others.” – Frank
If that worked in practice, three people would still be alive.
Okay Delacrat, agreed. So what is your solution? Let’s have the conversation.
Frank,
We treat private gun ownership like private pipe bomb ownership.
That is true on one level, but actually it is easier to make a pipe bomb then to “legally” buy a gun. And we already have many restrictions on types of guns that people can “legally” buy and own.
I will admit that I have not heard whether the TV shooter was a legal gun owner or not.
In most cases we are not talking about a person who illegally obtained a rocket launcher and shot it into a mall.
We are talking about weapons that are legal to own if the person is not restricted.
So how do you further restrict access to these types of weapons, without infringing on the rights of citizens who will never use them to harm others?
Remember, if we ban “assault” weapons they will use hand guns, if we ban hand guns they will use shotguns.
So how do you tell the millions of hunters they can no longer hunt?
In my view, the only way you can do what so on the political left want, which was a total ban on all guns is to revoke the 2nd Amendment. Because then all citizens are held to the same rule of law.
I think even you recognize how unlikely that is, and even it it were possible, it would only remove the guns from law abiding citizens, and create a new class of victims for the non-law abiding citizens.
I think we are too focused as a society on then end result, which is someone takes a gun and kills others. When we should be focused on why we are seeing so much of this.
“…how do you tell millions of law abiding gun owners they can no longer hunt.”
They can still use the bow and arrow.
Funny. I’ll wait for your serious response. But aren’t you worried about illegal blow guns falling into the hands of maniacs?
“I will admit that I have not heard whether the TV shooter was a legal gun owner or not.” – Frank,
Frank,
That’s exactly the point.
By all accounts, the TV shooter was a law-abiding citizen, what the NRA would call “a Responsible Gun Owner”, that is …. until he shot two people.
Delacrat, you are stating the obvious. Solution? After all, no one is crazy until they are crazy.
Please show me where I’ve called for revoking the 2nd Amendment. Go on, prove that claim.
You tacitly revoke free speech every time a conservative kicks liberal butt on Delaware Censor.
Frank,
It is better to state the obvious than to ignore the obvious. I offered my solution above on August 30, 2015 at 9:28 am.
What’s your solution?
Ok, so how do you do that? Give me the mechanics of it.