.

Newtown, Gun control and a “Culture of Violence”

Now is a time for mourning, for compassion, and for reason.

The loss of precious life in Newtown, CT is a horrible blight on the landscape of our national history.  One cannot exhaust the supply of the most extreme hyperbole in describing the evil befalling that community, and the deep anguish visited upon so many parents, loved ones and friends.  The collective sorrow we all feel will always hold space in our hearts long after the media moves on to the next major story.

Yet, right now, our focus must also be, not simply on the horrific action, but also on the character traits that gave rise to the instantaneous heroism displayed at the Sandy Hook School.

So much attention has been given to the mindset of the assailant, and much has to be done in that regard.  Yes.  Yes.

But we need also to fully explore and examine the motives of those who stepped in front of bullets, knowingly and thoughtfully sacrificing themselves and sparing us all even more despicable damage. 

Yes, we need to see and understand how our culture inculcates incredible bravery as well as how it may encourage inhuman, depersonalized murder.  Our fixation, to be fair and healthy, must be directed at the good immediately stepping up to stop evil.  That is how we survive this tragedy and enable it to be redemptive, for the sake of those who died and those who must now live.

Beyond this, without attacking and castigating, and in effect, dehumanizing those who disagree, now is the time to reason together.  Now is the time to ask if the 2nd Amendment was intended to afford the general population direct access to and ownership of high-power, military grade weaponry.

The people I know who own guns are great individuals.  They’re responsible, upstanding, quality folks.  I do not own a firearm, but I’m a good shot, and my 3 kids are too.

Yet, none of us should be able to possess an assault rifle, suited for a war zone, and not for a Newtown, or Anytown.  I am hard pressed to see how any civilian should be able to have an arsenal one might find in a rack at the FBI.

Personally, I don’t buy into the “culture of violence” philosophy.  It’s too easy. 

My heavens, we in this country killed 600,000 souls in 4 years of the Civil War.  Kids, adults, brother killing brother.

I wouldn’t choose to raise children anywhere else, at any other time, than right here, right now.  I’m not nearly ready to cash in my American chips.

But we must show ourselves to be a culture of common sense.

Weapons will only get more powerful and sophisticated.

Our ability to responsibly reason and debate must rise to the level of our technology or we will run the risk of ruining the gift of personal rights by reducing them into being an expression of mindless irresponsibility.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Bill Fasula December 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM
We should ask if the Constitution really means "Separation of Church and State". The founding fathers, including Jefferson, had the opportunity to add that phrase to the constitution, yet they did not. Instead unelected judges modified the Constitution bypassed the amendment process. We could also ask does the Constitution really give a "Right to Privacy". It does not say it. The Constitution again was amended by judges bypassing the amendment process. So now again you are proposing to modify the Constitution bypassing the amendment process. The greatest danger to our freedom is the usurping of our rights by well meaning people.
Bill Keane December 22, 2012 at 06:17 PM
The poor souls whose lives were taken in Newtown no longer have the freedom they were Constitutionally entitled to. I support the concept and verbiage of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." But we need to define what "arms" we're talking about. Rocket launchers? Missiles? Grenades? Machine guns? High-power assault rifles? And what about the arms that will be developed 50 years from now? Should the average citizen be able to own these? The definition of "arms" has radically changed over 200 years. Our application of the Constitution and Bill of Rights has to be as sophisticated as our development of new technology.
Dave Jenkins January 01, 2013 at 12:25 PM
I agree with both your points, Bill. The heroism of the teachers in protecting those children is an inspiration to all of us who wonder what we would do in a similar situation. And military style weapons, which are designed to kill lots of people quickly, should not be available to average citizens. The argument that citizens need these weapons to defend against a tyrannical government is just plain crazy. Do they really plan to shoot at American soldiers or law enforcement officials?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something