In the aftermath of the shooting in Tuscon the irony looms: those who tout the 2nd Amendment usually insist that ready access to handguns, possibly concealed, will limit the probability of gun violence. A Second Amendment "solution" yesterday would have meant a crowd armed and hair-triggered enough to be ready to 
defend the Congresswoman when her assailant aimed at her - as the pro-gun pundits vociferously insisted might have prevented deaths in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, for example. One could only hope they'd all have the talent to aim very carefully in such crowded conditions that even a trained sharp-shooter might feel tested, since the deaths and injuries at a grocery store in Tuscon were arguably incited by the implied acceptability of such "2nd Amendment solutions."
I'd surely hate to be Jesse Kelly, Gifford's opponent in the recent election who tied defeating her to coming to shoot a "fully automatic M-16" to remove her from office, or Sarah Palin (who used a gun-sight rendering to target 20 candidates she wanted defeated, including Giffords) right now. It must be distracting for them both to work out ways to not feel guilty about this travesty.
So, while it's true that guns don't kill people, (people kill people) it does behoove us to consider culpability for incitement; there's more to being an American patriot than whipping up media ratings in support of your particular political agenda - or at the very least, we should agree that their ought to be. If we can agree that yelling fire in a crowded, darkened theater is unacceptable, then surely we can agree that inciting to violence is not responsible public discourse, much less a valid means to attain elected office.
This was an assault on the best system of government the world has ever brought to life. With all due respect to the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, violence is not a solution - it's a symptom. If you don't like how our system works, that's fine with me - feel free to move to Somalia, or anywhere else that doesn't use elections to determine what the government can do and who represents us. If you're staying, though, buy in.
Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, former Democratic Campaign Manager, journalist, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.
defend the Congresswoman when her assailant aimed at her - as the pro-gun pundits vociferously insisted might have prevented deaths in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, for example. One could only hope they'd all have the talent to aim very carefully in such crowded conditions that even a trained sharp-shooter might feel tested, since the deaths and injuries at a grocery store in Tuscon were arguably incited by the implied acceptability of such "2nd Amendment solutions."
I'd surely hate to be Jesse Kelly, Gifford's opponent in the recent election who tied defeating her to coming to shoot a "fully automatic M-16" to remove her from office, or Sarah Palin (who used a gun-sight rendering to target 20 candidates she wanted defeated, including Giffords) right now. It must be distracting for them both to work out ways to not feel guilty about this travesty.So, while it's true that guns don't kill people, (people kill people) it does behoove us to consider culpability for incitement; there's more to being an American patriot than whipping up media ratings in support of your particular political agenda - or at the very least, we should agree that their ought to be. If we can agree that yelling fire in a crowded, darkened theater is unacceptable, then surely we can agree that inciting to violence is not responsible public discourse, much less a valid means to attain elected office.
This was an assault on the best system of government the world has ever brought to life. With all due respect to the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, violence is not a solution - it's a symptom. If you don't like how our system works, that's fine with me - feel free to move to Somalia, or anywhere else that doesn't use elections to determine what the government can do and who represents us. If you're staying, though, buy in.
Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, former Democratic Campaign Manager, journalist, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.
No comments:
Post a Comment