Just Because Disturbed Teens Can Stockpile Arsenals Is No Reason To Infringe On Our Rights To Bear Arms.
By Jeff Smith
THE NIGHT OF THE killings at the Littleton high school
I got an email from a woman who is both aware of my Second Amendment
advocacy and firm in her own beliefs on the merits of an armed
citizenry.
She said I need a history lesson. She said I should review the
Bill of Rights and the Constitution and consider what the founding
fathers would have done in light of the violence. She said I should
consider the dead children.
She said:
"Private citizens should not have access to guns. Period."
That night, in the glow of my laptop, I was puzzled but filled
with dread. Twenty-five children, the email mentioned. I had been
in Bisbee all day and out of reach of television and newspapers.
The car radio was off and conversation with my traveling companion
was on. Something bad had happened in the world while Bisbee went
its way that Tuesday. I turned on CNN to learn that two twisted
children who got too little attention at home, and the wrong sort
of attention at school, had gone medieval on a world they saw
as their oppressor. I had a sick feeling that we were in for more
heartaches and headaches than the toll of dead and wounded at
Columbine High School.
Symptomatic of prevailing attitudes in media and politics, televised
reports all that night--even banner headlines in newspapers the
following morning--put the death-toll at 25, with strong warnings
that it likely would go higher. The following day that number
had been corrected to 15, including the two killers, who ended
their orgy of retribution by committing suicide. I have not found
any explanation, nor even admission of error, regarding the first,
exaggerated statistics, but my own prejudice regarding the dominant
voices of my fellow news reporters and analysts is that they were
over-eager to run with whatever fragmentary count of wounded bodies--dead
or alive--made for the most lurid and emotional indictment of
the gun.
We are a society surrounded by seeming chaos and confusion, most
of it of our own making and the method of that making being our
frenetic scurrying to support a top-heavy existence of material
acquisition and constant diversion. We don't have time to ponder
the myriad questions that bedevil us, so we turn to the talking
heads for easy answers. "What is to blame?" we demand
to know, in 60 seconds or 10 column-inches or less.
And the answer comes back: guns.
Thank God for that. It's not us. We can go right on with our
three jobs to pay for the speedboat and the motorhome and the
psychotherapy and the wall-size TV. At least the kids have something
to occupy their minds until the folks get home at 7 or 8 o'clock.
And if Aaron and Nicole want a purple spiked 'doo, pierced nipples
and dog-collars tatooed around their necks, well, a few weeks'
overtime is worth avoiding another screaming match about their
repressed individuality.
But there I go down that same slippery slope the anti-gun crowd
is sledding over: it's not really about bad hair or fashion victimization
either. And it's not about the need to pass another law.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: everything that ought
to be against the law already is. Passing more laws in response
to the latest shocking manifestation of human nature being its
old, immutable animal self merely lulls us into thinking we've
actually done something to fix a problem which cannot be fixed,
and can only be held in some semblance of check by constant attention
to, and engagement with, our children, our neighbors, each other.
It's simple, really. But do not confuse simple with easy. The
simplest things are most often the hardest to do well, and the
easiest to put off or ignore.
I watched Headline News on the tube for half an hour and saw
Janet Reno lurching down the steps of an airliner to reach a microphone
and say that kids should not have guns--as if until now the gun-runners
and the NRA had managed to keep firearms as universally available
to pre-adolescents as milk money. I saw Bill Clinton in his most
baggy-eyed sincerity asserting that children must be taught that
violence is no answer to violence--and then excuse himself to
go order another air-strike against the Serbs. I scanned the newspapers
and read a dozen sidebars listing the signs of a kid about to
open fire on a school library:
Dark clothing.
German stuff.
Marilyn Manson music.
Bad hair daily.
I expect we'll be seeing a lot of new laws, local ordinances,
or public policies and dress codes applied to rid society of these
threats to the commonweal, thus making America safe once more
to doze off in front of the telly.
And you could safely hold your breath until a whole bunch of
school districts enforce a whole lot of new rules about what kids
can say to each other about their clothes, their hair, their politics,
religion, culture, intellect. We are becoming a society in which
political correctness is translating into: "If you can't
say something nice, don't say anything at all, and if you do say
something nice, you'd better not leave anyone out or we'll sue
you for malign neglect."
After contemplating all these media manifestations I decided
to call my man Jones, who has remarkable common sense.
"I think it's a bad thing," he said, apropos the murder
of 13 children. "But you know, Slobodan Milosevic murders
20 times that many children every day, before breakfast, and that's
a bad thing too--but the folks here at home aren't nearly as worked
up about it."
We dialogued along those lines for a time and concluded that
Americans don't get very worked up about much of anything that
does not affect them up close and personal. For instance, when
the first American is killed in Kosovo, you can bet your ass that
the nation will squeal like a stuck pig.
As a people we Americans are living in denial. We have fallen
into believing that wars can be fought and won without shedding
actual (which is to say, American) blood. We expect it to last
no longer than Titanic.
We used to be a nation that would fight for its freedom and pay
the price to maintain it. Now we do not want to be bothered. We
are not willing to pay blood for freedom so long as we can pay
cash for the illusion of security.
Too many of us believe in immortality along the lines of,
"If we take away everybody's guns, then skinhead kids and
survivalist grownups won't be able to shoot us at random, and
we'll be safe."
Hey, you're going to die anyway. Take away everything anybody
else has, that might conceivably be misused to cause injury or
death to you and yours, and all that you and yours are going to
do, ultimately, is die of something else. After a life spent on
your knees, with your nose in the dirt and your hands over your
head. Maybe you'll get lucky and die of testicular cancer.
"If they're sincere about making this country a safer place,"
Jones concluded, excusing himself to go back to his macaroni and
cheese, "they'll outlaw swimming pools, automobiles and alcohol.
Until they do these things I refuse to take any of this seriously."
|