(Updated) Guns, Hypocrisy and Forgiveness
I caught some grief yesterday for my insta-post tying the Virginia Tech massacre to America’s sick obsession with guns. Several folks accused me of trying to make political hay and one right-wing critic harrumphed that I had not even let the bodies get cold before piling on.
It turned out that this hypocritic was mightily stirring the pot at his own blog, but he had a point:
When a grossly public tragedy like a Columbine, a West Nickel Mines or a Virginia Tech occurs, there is a fine line between being respectful of the dead and taking advantage of them.
This was very much on my mind when I awoke this morning after a night’s sleep punctuated by Hieronymus Bosch-choreographed dreams of a society awash in violence, fueled by pious hypocrisy, in the thrall of sex but ashamed of it, and led by the morally bankrupt. See what happens when you watch cable news all day?
To paraphrase John Cole:
Our Imus-driven national dialogue about race has now officially turned into a national dialogue about gun control. Until, of course a 13-year-old blonde girl turns up missing, so there’s not much time to be reflective.
That duly noted, allow me a couple of follow-up points to my previous screed and I’ll be done piling on.
Please click here to read more at Kiko’s House.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
50 Responses to “(Updated) Guns, Hypocrisy and Forgiveness”
interesting point, makes me wonder if the blog-race – trying to keep up with commenting the news – really leaves room for reflection? I know blogs are not supposed to have this function, but what if we had a goal of letting 10 days go by and then comment on issues? Would it be too boring or would the content of the blog and the comment be more creative and interesting to read?
Karma Karla, Denmark
Shaun has hit upon an interesting point, I think: Is the blogosphere mirroring the MSM in this regard…talking about the news while it is still news.
It was before blogging…but Oklahoma City is a good case in point. I recall very clearly how it was believed to be Muslim terrorists at first…and news programs invariably mentioned this.
Shaun’s comment yesterday connecting it to America’s love of guns seems premature now…given that the shooter has been identified as an Asian visa student.
Yet, is Shaun — or are other bloggers — expected to sit on their hands and not say what they are thinking in times of fast breaking news events, for anxiety that the eventual news might not exactly fit?
While Shaun made an anti-gun case, other bloggers are making a pro-gun case by arguing if all the students carried guns, this would not have happened.
I can see both sides, so I don’t really have a dog to hunt here. It is just interesting to note that blogs are feeling the same effects as the MSM…perhaps this is a sign of the growth of the medium.
But as Karla asks, should blogs wait? or publish right away? or both?
Marlowecan:
Your mention of the OK City bombing resonates with me. I was tasked with writing my newspaper’s lead story on the bombing from the newsroom while our reporter and photographer were still in the air.
The Internet was in its infancy and blogging was a few years off, so I winged it based on wire service reports and other information I was able to glean as I raced against an awfully early deadline for both our paper and the national wires. I came upon a reference to OK City have a largish Muslim community and the fact that was a source of some friction.
Desperately needing the WHO piece of the WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHY and HOW, I wrote in the fifth paragraph of my story about that Muslim population. The implication was that the bombing might have been a terrorist act stemming from more radical elements of that community.
How utterly wrong I was, so wrong that I use that I sometimes use that egregious error as a talking point when I speak to university journalism classes.
I set the students up by distributing photocopies of my story and then ask them to point out a major error in the story.
I have yet to find one student who points to that paragraph.
From a personal axe to grind dressed up as soi-disant world-weary wisdom. And wildly wrong at that.
To self-serving treacle re: forgiveness and redemption — which originate from religious precepts the secular left find delusional; combined with a gratuitous and vicious imagined set-piece re: the President.
In twenty-four hours.
Take two weelks off (as suggested for Imus). Read this: http://www.amazon.com/Honor-History-James-Bowman/dp/1594031428
stevesh:
You obviously have not taken my earlier advice about changing your medications.
There is much to learn from other value systems, including that of the Amish. I find nothing that you say here or have said previously to be of any value whatsoever except as thinly disguised hate speech.
Meds? Hate speech said previously? Please cite.
Don’t use a lazy and familiar trope to characterize “passionate dissent,” as hate speech, please.
You jumped, you were wrong. I would have no difficulty saying what I wrote in the above to you face to face.
Can you say the same?
stevesh:
Thank you for reinforcing my point.
Shaun,
Honestly?
No citation. “Thinly disguised?” “Meds?”
Forgive me if I touched a nerve.
Wow.
Shaun,
I like the message of this post much more than yesterday’s. I suppose that leaves me open to criticism that I don’t have a problem with using an event to illustrate a religious message though I do have a problem with politicization, but if that’s a criticism then so be it. The message of forgiveness can never be stated too many times in my opinion.
Interesting that you brought up the Amish; their belief in forgiveness is really no different than what other Christians believe but they do practice it more completely (as we all should). I was actually just reading Chesterton on the Christian ideal of charitable forgiveness-here’s an excerpt (from Orthodoxy):
Shaun- I think you did a good job of course. When I first arrived in Mogadishu Somalia Dec 1990, you could buy a Kalashnikov and full magazine for ten bucks at any of a fifty street kiosks. The experience instilled in me the profound truth that idiots and guns should be kept separate at all costs. Ever see a human road frisbee?
Don’t worry about the dead still being warm. Maybe they can still hear you speak in their defense.
CStanley:
You and G.K. just made my day. And although it is a bit of a leap, that Mr. Kurt Vonnegut would crack a big smile, too.
Well, you can definitely argue with Chesterton on many of his points, but he will always make you think AND make you smile.
Karma Karla, Shaun Mullen, C. Stanley…Thank you…Excellent points worth pondering…
I agree this post is much better than yesterdays. My opinion of Shaun took a deep dive after reading it.
As for the President – it’s a catch-22 situation. If he doesn’t go, he’ll be accused of not caring and being a cold-heartless SOB; if he goes, he’s accused of attempting to boost is popularity.
Entropy:
Nah. It’s a no brainer. It would be inexcusable for a president who adamantly refuses to attend the funerals of the several thousand men and women whom he has set to useless deaths in Iraq to not go to Virginia Tech. I mean, what kind of message would he be sending?
Mr. Mullen,
This is a much more thoughtful piece than yesterday’s. Still, I think the criticism of the President is unfair. I suspect that any president, of any party, would be condemned regardless of what he did – attend a convocation on campus, or issue a press release announcing his sympathy from the Oval office, or say nothing. Perhaps we are all too eager to politicize everything in life. If so, we are not well served by that tendency.
I think you make a good point about the need for reflection and analysis to support in depth reporting on events. This case, like Oklahoma City, or for that matter, the Duke Lacrosse fiasco, show the hazards of rushing to judgement. Perhaps the best thing the media and bloggers can do in the case of something like this is to:
1. Report the facts.
2. Avoid speculation aka half-baked analysis.
3. Avoid constantly repeating the same bits of information every five minutes.
4. If you make a mistake, quickly issue a correction.
5. If events prove your initial premise wrong, be prompt to admit that you were wrong.
6. Issue an apology if necessary following No. 5.
This is why I have so much respect for the blog run by KC Johnson, Durham in Wonderland. I think he has shown the power of careful research, thoughtful analysis, expressed with calm, factual writing, and a policy of prompt corrections, even for minor typos. I think he is a class act.
Again, I think this posting offers a lot more meat for us to chew on than the first one. And vote of thanks to C Stanley for her usual thoughtful follow-up.
Reflexion can clarify and cleanse, I agree. It can also bring a moment of quiet talk to the blogosphere, which is a special blessing.
But, the outrage of yesterday’s post is also valid. After all, this is the umpeenth event of this kind, not the first, and the intervals between shootings are getting shorter.
This event is our reflection in the mirror, and it’s not pretty!
Orson Buggeigh and domajot:
Outraged yesterday, thoughtful today. That worked for me.
And in the service of Mr. Buggeigh’s No. 5, I was incorrect in anticipating that the Virginia Tech perp was white.
As for George Bush, he gets no free passes.
A statement of condolence for the shooting victims is, of course, appropriate, but it smacks of rank hypocrisy because it is so transparently false given his unwillingness to come to grips with the tragedies that he has visited upon 3,309 American families who lost their sons and daughters to his war.
Apropos to some of the comments above, this from Andrew Sullivan:
W should stay home, send the wife and two daughters. On the “gun control” thread, I am a libertarian/liberal who opposes strict gun control. However, the clips used in the maasacre were illegal until the assault weapons ban lapsed. The difference between eight shot and 15-20 shot clips could have resulted in sigfificantly less carnage. I have yet to hear if the rounds were hollow point armour piercing or just sports rounds. Their is a difference between offensive weapons and sporting/hunting weapons. Canada doesn’t ban hand guns or assault carbines, just highly regulates their ownership and useage. Violence (murder and assault) are three times higher in the US, no coincidence.
Dave Shuler has stated my feelings on the matter.
Entropy – DS says this:
For those of you who believe this is an opportunity to place tighter controls on firearms, what’s your program?
If the clips used in yesterdays killings had 50% less capacity as in the assault weapons ban, give the same number of clips the shooter would have fired 50% fewer rounds. Fewer rounds would have lesened the carnage. What is the sporting pupose of a 18-20 shot Glock clip?
Rudi,
First of all, I’m not sure we know what sized clips were used. Secondly, large capacity clips were banned a few years ago, though obviously there are still many still in existence. Thirdly, considering it only takes a moment to change a clip on a typical autoloading pistol, the level of firepower would not be significantly reduced. Fourth, reducing the size of clips does not mean a shooter will have fewer bullets – it means the shooter will have more clips. Fifth, from the initial reports the shooter killed himself when police closed in – not because he ran out of ammo. If you look at the history of these types of atrocities, the threat of police capture is what ends the violence, so police response time is a critical component.
Therefore, your assertion that “fewer rounds would have lesened [sic] the carnage” is not only untrue, but based on faulty assumptions.
Rudi said:
Well, there’s no real sporting purpose in handguns anyhow. Certainly not in hunting. I was struck by the fact that the killer did all of this with the one handgun.
Also, as someone who has spent a good chunk of my life in and around universities, the thought of university students all packing concealed weapons is horrifying. I have no problem with the Second Amendment, but the American gun culture is always puzzling to me coming from another culture.
I thought Shaun’s reference to his coverage of the OKla City bombing is very apposite. While the Andrew Sullivan piece Shaun quotes has a point, I think in the long run it is often probably better to express one’s reactions…even at the risk of being wrong…whether pro or anti-gun in this case.
As Shaun points out with his OK City story, being “wrong” can be revealing of beliefs and preconceptions that it is often useful to look back and reflect upon.
Much better than just silence, I think.
There isn’t one. It’s also irrelevant. The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with sports.
No Entropy given the same number of clips, the clips from the assault weapons ban law would contain 10 or less. Todays a clip can hold 18 to 20. Both the US and Canada tightened laws after massacres in California and Quebec.
8 clips X 18 rounds = 144 total rounds
8 clips X 9 rounds = 72 total rounds
What is wrong with my math, also the US is 3X deadlier than Canada.
UPDATE ALERT:
President Bush and the Missus will be attending the convocation this afternoon at Virginia Tech. I have added the following passionate plea from a Tech alumnus to my original post:
It should go without saying that I could not agree more.
Entropy posted a piece from Dave Shuler which was interesting… particularly in his discussion of how some tried to bring the Iraq War into this story.
Such a thing is beyond the pale, and reflects how some manipulate this tragedy for their own hobbyhorse/obsessions.
But the pro- and anti- gun aspects are legitimate points I think. The killer had just bought his handgun, and even had the bill in his backpack.
Rudi, the Canadian perspective on all this is an interesting angle of where not to go. Their federal government’s registration program is a multi-billion dollar fiasco that has driven rural people and hunters nuts, while not removing handguns from the hands of criminals.
In fact, the previous Liberal government had fought tooth and nail against mandatory sentences for handgun crimes…a law that the Conservative minority government is currently trying to bring in against Liberal opposition.
The politics of gun control is extraordinarily complex…but it seems for Americans intensely emotional too.
> As for the President – it’s
> a catch-22 situation. If he
> doesn’t go, he’ll be accused
> of not caring and being a
> cold-heartless SOB; if he
> goes, he’s accused of
> attempting to [recover his]
> popularity.
The anti-gun nuts will attack him along with the playpen liberals on campus as well as those here on this site.
Shaun said: “
I have to totally disagree with you here. In the post-Katrina environment, Bush would be crucified if he did not go.
The same thing could be said of Katrina, where Bush’s security detail etc. would only have disrupted recovery. But leadership is often symbolic…as with Guiliani on the streets of NYC…so I thought he should have gone to NO straight from Crawford on Day One.
You might not like the guy, the Presidents serve this symbolic function, I think. Clinton certainly understood the value of presidential symbolism, and Reagan mainlined it into the core of his presidency.
> Well, there’s no real sporting
> purpose in handguns anyhow.
They’re intended for short-range self-defense work (and by government agents and criminals, to attack and kill people at close range).
> Certainly not in hunting.
> I was struck by the fact
> that the killer did all of this
> with the one handgun.
Rudi addressed something I did earlier, namely the possibility of limits to ammo possession on one’s person. Reducing clip sizes isn’t the only thing needed; the total amount of ammo is what needs to be addressed (someone can just carry multiple clips).
> Also, as someone who has
> spent a good chunk of my life
> in and around universities,
> the thought of university
> students all packing concealed
> weapons is horrifying. I have no
> problem with the Second Amendment,
> but the American gun culture
> is always puzzling to me coming
> from another culture.
In the case of concealed weapons, please be aware that not everyone in the gun culture supports them, and in fact, in at least one notable instance, these were identified as the preference of criminals and low-lifes (“knaves” in the language of the time).
Missouri State Constitution, 1974 revision, still has the proscription of concealed weapons.
“That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons.”
http://www.harbornet.com/rights/missouri.txt
BUT — a legal technicality …
“(2004) Section does not prohibit the General Assembly from enacting statutes allowing or disallowing the carrying of concealed weapons; the Concealed-Carry Act is therefore constitutional. Brooks v. State, 128 S.W.3d 844 (Mo.banc). ”
http://www.moga.mo.gov/const/A01023.HTM
… explained here (“this shall not justify”):
Read in proper grammatical context, and giving the words their common usage, this clause does not prohibit wearing concealed weapons. Rather, it prohibits a person from invoking the constitutional right to keep and bear arms as a justification for wearing concealed weapons. The general assembly, therefore, retains its plenary power to enact legislation regarding the use and regulation of concealed weapons.
http://www.courts.mo.gov/courts/pubopinions.nsf/0f87ea4ac0ad4c0186256405005d3b8e/d2f53ae5232e7c7f86256e670068ca03?OpenDocument&Click=
Rudi, you assume that if a killer only had access to smaller clips that he would not bring more of them.
8 clips X 18 rounds = 144 rounds
16 clips X 9 rounds = 144 rounds
The benefit from larger clips is pretty low. The military got by with 7 round clips on the .45 acp for over 60 years, and the current M-9 holds 15. There are much larger magazines available for both weapons, yet the military does not use them. Changing a clip takes maybe 1-2 seconds, less if one is trained. The argument that clip size has anything to do with lethality is rather specious.
Shaun,
Your criticism of President Bush for attending is pretty meaningless since you’d criticize him no matter what he did. The argument that he’s attending to divert attention from Iraq or anything else is both specious and unjustifiably mean. You seem to hate him and always ascribe ill motives to him no matter what he does. I don’t like Bush and think he’s a terrible President, but going to VA is the right thing to do.
DLS,
There is no practical way to regulate the amount of ammunition a person can own.
Furthermore, concealed carry laws are the responsibility of individual states. Some states allow them to one degree or another, other States do not, and that’s the way it should be.
Marlowe:
I concede your point on Bush but not the larger one — his vile hypocrisy.
Entropy:
GWB and I have some history and our breakup was difficult. You and I have been dating for only a few months.
I wanted Bush to succeed as president and in fact did not vote for Gore. I wanted him to succeed because there was much worthy in the acceptance speech that he gave at the 2000 RNC and in his inaugural address. It was more important to me that he succeed than having a lefty-liberal hissy fit. Got that?
As it is, Bush arguably is the worst president in history. The story of how he squandered his post-9/11 mandate (the unequivocal support that I and most Americans granted him) is extraordinary.
Bush has gotten my enmity the old fashioned way: He earned it.
Shaun,
I have no doubt he earned it. Does that mean, however, that you can never say anything positive about the man? Does that mean that you have to criticize each and every thing he does? You criticize Bush for going to VA – are you suggesting he stay at the WH? If so, how is that better?
I am curious how Red Lake rated so low a response, in terms of both media and the government. The events at Red Lake saddened me deeply and I was struck by the fact that the media barely covered it, and the US government did not respond until 4 or 5 days later and only after the Native American community began to criticize their lack of response. Any thoughts?
Further, in all sincerity, if stricter gun laws would have no impact on these types of random acts of violence, is there anything that can be done? Are we destined to just accept these occurrences as the way things are?
Komrad Marlow – I live across the river from the Canadians in Windsor. I believe they hunt more per capita than the US. I have to LOL – DLS and I are on the same tract. Limiting the ammo would have lessened the carnage, not prevented it. Also, the recent killing(one) in Montreal was done with a REGISTERED hand gun. The registration didn’t stop the attack, just lessened the carnage and made the ownership and purchace much more difficult. The VT killer wouldn’t have purchased the Glock a few days prior to the attack.
As far as hunting goes here is three versions of US hunters.
1) Dick Cheney – Expensive EU shotgun used at “shoot ducks in barrel” exclusive lodge.
2) Ted Nugent – Wealthy outdoorsman who hunt variety of game with bow. Doesn’t get lost in woods.
3) True outdoorsman travels to Northern Ontario to hunt and fish in REAL wilderness. Can survive in the brush for days at a time, doesn’t shoot friends in face.
Here’s some links to day trips into (mid) Northern Ontario, the wilderness of Hudson Bay is even more extreme.
http://www.agawacanyontourtrain.com/content/tours/lodgesalongline/lodge_list.html
http://www.sonnyboblodge.com/
I wonder if AirForceTwo flies into the Northern Ontario area?
Jeff Why didn’t W go to Red Lake, no potential voters?
Entropy:
I say good things about Bush on the extremely rare occasions that he merits it. One such example is his more benign approach to immigration reform when he’s not pandering to red meat Republicans.
Another is . . . shucks, I’ve run out of examples.
I’m glad this thread didn’t turn into the one yesterday.
Anyway speaking of John Cole his most recent point is right on as well.
Even though it’s coming from a very different source, I think his reaction parallels nicely with the Amish reaction to their tragedy: both accept that senseless tragedies are inevitable, we’re just groping through life, and strength comes from falling back on foundations. For Cole (I assume) it is reason while the Amish have faith, but they both serve the purpose of being able to focus on the things within our control and accept the things out of it.
Like Shaun pointed out, the only Amish response I ever heard about was their statement of forgiveness and their visit to Roberts’ relatives who they believed where as much of victims as they were.
As it is, Bush arguably is the worst president in history.
Very arguable and hes not even close to the worst president in history. Not even close.
[...] While the blogosphere and the mainstream media (MSM) is busy discussing/debating the two tragic incidents at Virginia Tech University, described as the ‘deadliest shooting rampage in US history’, a comment in one of the recent posts in TMV set me thinking. [...]
Rudi said:
[remarks out of order]
> DLS and I are on the same tract.
> Limiting the ammo would have lessened
> the carnage, not prevented it.
Yep. It’s something that could be tried.
> live across the river from the
> Canadians in Windsor
1. Next time I’m on the road and heading through DET, if you can keep your gun under control…
2. You definitely are familiar with the woods around you. Do you ever fly in or out of Kenora?
> There is no practical way to
> regulate the amount of
> ammunition a person can own.
And it’s tricky to regulate how much can be carried (like watching motorists for seat belt use or searching some at random or if suspicious), but my point was that it can reduce the threat, that’s all. I am not in favor of banning ammunition or ridiculous end-run gun-control measures like the Democrats’ 10,000% tax on ammunition (which really has been attempted).
> Furthermore, concealed carry laws
> are the responsibility of individual
> states.
??? I realize this. My point was simply that those who wrote Missouri’s constitution were against concealed weapons and even stated it had nothing with the right to carry arms for self-defense.
In fact, state or even county “local option” laws (similar to Georgia’s nowadays on alcoholic beverages) are the way to go with guns and most things, according to constitutional federalism.
DLS Don’t worry I gave up my firearms, could hit the side of a barn. Also I am as gentle as a bear trampling through the woods, even the squirrels run when they hear me. Don’t pack your heat into Windsor the OPP don’t likey. Haven’t made it that far west(Kenora) Thunderbay, Wawa and SS Marie is it.
Very arguable and hes not even close to the worst president in history. Not even close.
Actually he seems pretty bad to me. He actually started a war on false pretenses and after 4 years appears to be losing it. At least Vietnam there was a Cold War going on as a backdrop, the stakes were as high as they can get and there is some justification for that one. But Iraq was pretty much something the Pres felt in his gut we should do. The greatest authority, and the greatest responsibility, of a superpower is the conduct of their military might. And Bush played with it like a child with tinker toys.
Also, thanks to his brilliant budgetary know-how China, our biggest competitor/threat for future world dominance, holds almost a trillion dollars of US Debt preventing us from making any meaningful economic inroads to protect our interests. Also, they can leverage that to really screw us down the road whenever they choose. They’ll also be screwing themselves, but somehow I don’t think the chinese elite will be missing any meals.
Let’s see, what else. Oh yea, Habeus Corpus is now seen as optional. And Bush sees the Geneva Convention as too restricting these days as well, so we are out of that. And the middle/lower class now bear a larger burden of the taxes despite the median income not keeping pace with the rapid growth in income at the top of the spectrum.
Really, I could go on for about another 15 paragraphs, but this administration is one that shoots from the hip and doesn’t seem to understand how the world works. And we are going to be paying the price for that for many years.
Nobody- Actually I think he is the worst.
> Don’t worry I gave up my
> firearms, could hit the side
> of a barn.
“Why did you shoot DLS?” “I thought he was a charging rhino. Sorry.”
> Also I am as gentle as a
> bear trampling through the
> woods, even the squirrels
> run when they hear me.
OK. Well, if I’m ever in your area, we can meet in person.
(I do lots and lots of looooooooong road trips. Next time I go between the Midwest and the East Coast I may go through DET and Ontario just to zip over to Niagara and Buffalo as a different route than the farther-south more boring route I usually use.)
> Don’t pack your heat into
> Windsor the OPP don’t likey.
I respect Canada’s different laws and want no trouble! I also have experience already on the road with their vehicle searches and Q&A sessions with Immigration if the feel the need.
> Haven’t made it that far
> west(Kenora) Thunderbay,
> Wawa and SS Marie is it.
The latter I’ve been to (a nice clear, warm day on the locks).
Some fool was slamming Fox in the predictable Usual Suspect manner elsewhere on this site and while I was checking a Pew survey there, I saw that another Pew survey is now available on that site, pertaining to gun control.
This was released before the VT shootings, so it will be interesting if Pew revisits this subject promptly and then provides results about opinions and possible changes about gun control, 2 weeks from now, 6 weeks from now, etc.
The NRA’s Image Improves as Support for Gun Control Slips
Public opinion surveys taken before the Virginia Tech shootings, showed that over time Americans had become less disposed to support gun control measures than they were in the years surrounding the Columbine school shootings in 1999.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/443/the-nras-image-improves-as-support-for-gun-control-slips
Feinstein utters typical sound-bite nonsense appealing to the emotions of the childish (while other Dems aren’t so dumb)
“I believe this will reignite the dormant effort to pass commonsense gun regulations in this nation”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-apgunlaws17apr17,1,801774.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo
“It was Helen Thomas, the irrascible veteran of the White House press corps and columnist, who asked Fleischer in May 2002: ‘Is the president happy that the Justice Department now has affirmed the NRA position on gun control, everyone has the right to have a gun?’”
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2007/04/bush_on_gun_con.html
“It is one thing to defend gun rights when the sentimental image of the pioneer still has some truth, if only in the north woods of the Appalachians. It is another when the pioneers have carved up the country into small suburban lots and cannot escape the neighbours.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article1668794.ece
Numerous comments (New Zealand)
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501154&objectid=10434820