Discussion for article #243375
Wilmore On San Bernardino Shooting: āThis Is Really Unacceptableā
#Republican Party: "NO IT ISNāT! ā¦SPEAK FOR YOURSELF."
How much more unacceptable does it need to get before we think about restricting access to guns?
If twenty grade school kids can be gunned down, there will never be anything that is too unacceptable.
3 Likes
Itās truly breathtaking how effectively the GOP scare and propaganda machine (at the behest of the NRA, FOX Noise, Rightie Baggerland Nutballs and the political tools that operate under that umbrella) has been in turning āā¦a well regulated militiaā into an all out push to put guns and assorted lethal weaponry into the hands of every somewhat sentient creature in this countryās populaceā¦and all in the name of āfreedom.ā Truly American Exceptionalism, huh?
1 Like
I tend to agree. There was a āmass shootingā in Savannah yesterday as well (4 deaths), and it was so passe it didnāt even get coverage. And another one in Milton Florida (2 deaths).
Its disconcerting to me that I would actually argue Wilmoreās statistics in this based on what is considered a āmass shootingā anymore.
But I donāt expect the corner to be turned any time soon.
Iād advise that guy to shift positions VEEERRRYYYY carefully.
1 Like
You know, that really bothered me for a long time. It seems to me that it was way too horrible for most people to really get their head around and digest. So they pushed it off to 1) a horrible anomaly and 2) it could never happen to me. That head in the sand approach, however, will reach saturation.
I think the fact is, and Iām not justifying this at all, itās easier to relate to and fear shootings like what happened yesterday than to try and get your head around the shooting of all those babies. When I was expecting my daughter, I asked my OB how women could give birth and claim to have no idea they were pregnant. Does that really happen, because I couldnāt imagine how that was possible? She told me it truly happens because you cannot underestimate the human capacity for denial. But, as in denying a pregnancy, the saturation point eventually hits and you are forced to face it. Itās coming.
Here is a pretty good read on the evolution of the 2nd Amendment interpretations.
Its hard to realize that Burger, just 25 years ago, called the NRA a fraud upon the American people. And now Scalia has essentially deleted the phrase āwell ordered militiaā out of the Amendment entirely and replaced it with an relatively new concept (and completely unmentioned in the Constitution) āright to self defenseā.
2 Likes
I donāt share your long term optimism on this. The right to bear arms is such a deeply foundational belief for the right wing, and so incredibly well funded, that I just donāt see a saturation point over coming it. I mean, consider that nearly every modern day action hero in the movies, TV and literature uses guns. Even relatively, benign humorous shows like āChuckā had gun worship as a major plank of the show.
My guess is we are probably a good 50+ years from serious, relevant gun control legislation being upheld by the SCOTUS. The āright to self defenseā has become accepted, āStand Your Groundā laws are proliferatingā¦both of these are moving in precisely the opposite direction of meaningful restrictions on gun ownership and use.
But itās really not. Itās only been that way over the last few decades or so (if that long). Iām not sure the argument is over the right to bear arms at all, itās the regulation of those arms. We have only just recently gone off the deep end about this in the last twenty years or so.
Congress folks are people with families. The vast majority arenāt acquiring arsenals and safe houses at home. Theyāll also get sick of living this way. The gun safety movement is getting backers with cash to fight the NRA and gun ownership is the lowest in decades (even if they are owning more guns). Itās coming because we are now having the conversation. The trick is to keep pushing as we are pushing. The atrocity, however, is how many will die until we get there.
As for 50 years away, even Scalia believes the right to bear arms can be regulated.
By taking away the ability of the government to control violence, second amendment worshipers support anarchy and trivialize mass murder while promoting prayer and condolences for the victims.
Iād like to believe that your are right, but we suffer roughly 10,000 gun homicides a year in America. 2977 people were killed on 9/11, and since then 140,000 have been killed with guns in America. There is no saturation pointāif there were, we would have reached it by now. A first mass shooting is horrific, the 10th is tragic, the 100th is sad but by now, normal. Itās expected, and not especially shocking anymore. In a few days it will be forgotten by all save those directly affected.
The only event that might, might shock people enough would be a mass shooting of people that arenāt anonymous. A celebrity awards gala or some such thing. Even then, people might already be too jaded to react in a strong enough way to that.
Indeed. We past the point of where sanity turns to insanity, at that point.
Follow the 2nd amendment, as written. You may possess a weapon as a member of a well attended militia, say, the National Guard. I would like an exception for hunters, but, no assault rifles.
1 Like
I think we are getting out of that denial stage, though. Itās easy to say, not my community, not my family, not my kidsā school, but that excuse is getting harder and harder to hide behind. Unfortunately most only care when it impacts them personally and we are, with the predominance of gun violence, getting to that point. Thatās the saturation point I mean.