Iraq vet: Newtown changed my mind on gun control

[babylonsister]

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/28/iraq_vet_newtown_changed_my_mind_on_gun_control/

Iraq vet: Newtown changed my mind on gun control
I'm a hunter and a vet, and I revere the Second Amendment. But I used bankrupt logic: It's time for gun control
By Liam Madden


Like many people I know and public figures I’ve seen recently, the killings in Newtown’s elementary school have made me reconsider my position on gun control. As a hunter, a veteran, and a dyed-in-the-wool radical, I write this to show fellow gun owners and, more important, my fellow Americans who are distrustful of an armed government with an unarmed populace that the logic I espoused for most of my life is bankrupt.

Until last week my stance on the Second Amendment was essentially, “Our government can’t be trusted with a monopoly on lethal power.As such, the right to resist tyranny embedded in our constitution justified the tragic deaths that would inevitably result from the proliferation of these incredibly deadly weapons.”

snip//

As I reconsidered my logic and let go of my previous rationale, the only remaining argument in my mind was the old standby,”Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” That is undeniable. But given the fact that the UK, France, Germany, Japan and Australia collectively have more people than the U.S. and only 0.05% the gun deaths, it is now obvious to me that the complete story veiled behind the “guns don’t kill people” half-truth is: “Guns don’t kill people, but when people have access to guns, they kill a lot more innocent people than they otherwise could.”

The right to defend ourselves, whether from home intruders or tyrants, is a right I understand and cherish. Through the risk of tragedy, I want to trust my fellow human to exercise their rights responsibly. However, I am also willing to accept that our culture is in need of healing, and we may well heal faster and deeper with less access to our guns, or even no guns at all. The vast majority of us are smart and trustworthy people; if we can lift people into the stars above, why couldn’t we establish systems in which both we and the government are less armed while maintaining contingencies for each to have access to appropriate weapons at appropriate times? Denying this potential is denying the arc of humanity: our intelligence, our compassion and our creativity.

Patriots and rebels alike, lovers of freedom, please take a new point of view with me. If your freedom feels vulnerable, I remind you that an ounce of prevention (read “real community”) is worth a pound of emergency room care, which is revolting. We should not dismiss the NRA’s seed of truth that, in fact, people do kill people. I admit it speaks to the root of the problem. But we would be foolish to allow a treatable symptom like gun violence to run amok before we devote our attention to curing our disease: whether you see it as untreated mental illness, cultural glorification of violence or, as I see it, the worldview that we are separated individuals, alone in our struggles, and that our power to create a more beautiful world is limited by anything but our imagination, our courage and our love.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

1. The Iraq War illustrated Groucho Marx's statement, "Politics is the art of looking for trouble ...

diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

To the Iraq vet:

If anyone should understand that a wrong, feel-good remedy should not be adopted, it should be an Iraq vet. If anyone who had some skin in the game understood that Iraqis did not attack the twin towers and did not have the alleged weapons of mass destruction, it should be an Iraq vet.

You say,

"The right to defend ourselves, whether from home intruders ..., is a right I understand and cherish."

I agree with you. People have an inherent right to defend themselves. In many communities, too many communities, law abiding people are finding it necessary to be prepared to do so. As one example, the City of Oakland recently dismissed one-fourth of its police force, more than 200 officers. And it wasn't because of a decrease in crime such as the profitable home invasions.
(See, e.g., Fifth-Most Crime Ridden City in America Dismisses a Fourth of its Police Force. 911 Still in Service
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117297556 )

There are those, however, who are going to read your post and conclude that - as they do - that you want firearms to be taken away from law-abiding citizens. They don't want to start with the criminals on the streets and put more effort into doing so, but they want to start with the soft targets: the law-abiding, leave-me-alone citizens. Some are living in a pipe-dream world and refuse to recognize that a significant number of Democrats as well as Independents can be peeled away by the Republican Party, as the Republican Party did in the 1994 elections, if they refuse to obtain the consent of the governed and adopt feel-good laws which are not related to the problem.

I assume that is not your purpose for posting the OP. It may be necessary to further speak up to minimize confusion and to rein in those who do not mind losing more Congressional seats by advocating for wrong remedies which will not get past the Republican-controlled Congress. Whether you do so is your choice.

[bongbong]

2. This guy should visit the gungeon

Where he would be spat upon.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Here on GD he will

[malz]

4. DURec

[Thinkingabout]

5. Thank you for wonderful insight, it has been in the past women and children first.

You have provided me with thought, at such time I still have a hard time wrapping my thought around such horrid events. It is not about denying the right to bear arms as it is about the safety of others. No one has the right to kill for the short joy of doing so, it has become necessary to protect our nation, especially our young ones from destruction. God bless this nation and keep us safe in the New Year.

[politicasista]

6. Kick

Check for mail.

[cantbeserious]

7. Agree With This Vet And I Would Go Farther - Repeal The 2nd Amendment And Outlaw Firearms

20 innocent dead children is 20 too many!

[Cha]

8. thank you, babylonsistah!

Guns do kill the people.. if the people who would use them to kill didn't have easy access to guns they couldn't hide behind the killing tools.

Gun Violence isn't cured with a soundbyte.

[sanatanadharma]

9. Six steps to easy understanding

Guns are for killing.
Hunting is killing.
Target shooting is practice to be ready to use the gun for its purpose.
Self-defense is being ready to kill or threaten to kill.
Collecting is fascination with the "cool tool that kills".
2nd amendment is for state sponsored killing because they 'gots lots' of guns (sic)

Appreciations for your post, babylonsister

[Dems to Win]

10. Wow. Thanks for sharing. Gives me hope.

In Australia, after the Port Arthur massacre, they enacted drastic gun control, very quickly. No one objected, because everyone was 100% unified that these gun massacres must stop.

The response in our country has been quite different, time after time. Makes me sad.

Nice to see a forceful voice calling for change.

[babylonsister]

11. Thanks and spread the word! nt