2013-01-15

Righteous fury

I am writing this sitting by the toilet waiting to see if I am going to puke. I just had breakfast, so this may be one of the fastest acting food poisonings in history, or it may just be more of the nausea that accompanied me during my trip. Except that was subtle and this feels somewhat urgent.

I can't imagine what all those gun owners must be feeling like right now. A flurry of poignant, anti gun owner GIFs are making their way around Facebook. Another example of misdirected anger; it's amazing how much of that goes around.

I have no doubt whatsoever that guns would be outlawed, second amendment or no, if gun owners weren't peaceful, law abiding citizens. The amount of other principles, privacy for instance, we're willing to sacrifice makes it clear.

I was going to say "our legislators", but we voted for them, so they are us. Perhaps we're being bamboozled by professional politicians, but that's a thought for another day.

I still find it rather puzzling that people are mad at the Transport Security Administration while complaining that the people behind 9/11 weren't uncovered before checking in to those flights. If the TSA is overstepping itself, who gave it the authority? What do people actually think it means to increase security? Just in case you don't see it as clearly as I, it means more investigations, more investigations of innocent people, and frankly, who better to carry a bomb onto an airplane than grandma in her wheelchair?

I am not saying I like being X-rayed at the airport, but I recognize that my failure to fight the laws that allow it makes me complicit.

So, yeah if you're willing to let strangers stare at your naked bum, then you'd be willing to loose the guns too. The conclusion has to be that people with guns are no more likely to start shooting innocent people than people without. And I can actually say that rather confidently since purchasing guns and ammunition, in at least some of these cases, were done as preparation to the attack. The shooters weren't previously gun owners.

So, attacking guns owners as somehow deficient, morally and intellectually, and to say that their insistence on owning guns is somehow responsible for attacks like these, is just more bullshit shifting of personal responsibility for the actions or inactions of our legislators.

It also serves to make gun owners a marginalized subgroup. That's always great. If anything appears to be a commonality among these attacks it's the impotency and fury felt by the attackers over being marginalized.

I don't much like guns (or having to take my shoes off at the airport), I'd prefer if you needed a reason to own and use a gun, such as being a hunter, farmer or law enforcement person. To be honest, thought, I think there are already too many guns around to make such a requirement meaningful. Although, I suppose it'd create a lot of jobs, and a boost to the economy(!), to hire the folks that would collect the guns people already own; probably a lucrative job if people decide to defend their guns with their guns.

The ability to buy guns, to buy crazy fucking guns and enough ammunition for a small war cannot really be laid at the gun owners's feet. The blame is ours for failing at democracy.

Oh, right, yeah no puking. Stomach seems to have settled now. Who knew ranting one's indignation could be beneficial medically.


No comments:

Post a Comment