Island Richards

In the wake of the horrible tragedy in Littleton, Colorado that claimed the lives of thirteen innocents, many old issues have crept back to the surface of political and social debate. The first and foremost of these, and one that was all to obvious and inevitable in its return, is the gun control debate. It’s all too common, in the aftermath of any tragedy, for gun control advocates to once again come crawling out of their surrealistic existences and demand that the citizens of these United States give up their constitutional right to bear arms.

Why? Because, they believe, an unarmed society is a peaceful society. Why? Because, without guns, peaceful citizens could walk the streets of the inner city and not fear for their safety. Why? Because, without guns, people could pull over to help a stranded motorist without fearing for their safety. Why? Because, without guns, people could stay in the city park until after dark without fearing for their safety. Why? Because, without guns, our children could go to school without the fear that they could get killed by a couple of obviously deranged and off balanced teenagers who had a hard time coping with the real world.

But wait! Would asking the citizens of this country to give up their second amendment rights really make our country safer? Hmm, interesting question. To answer it, I think we need to explain it from a few different directions.

First, does the possession of weapons by citizens cause people to be more violent? Does having weapons in our homes make our children more violent? I live in a community where nearly every adult owns a gun, and thereby, almost every child’s parent has a gun in their home. Ever since I can remember, I have known how to load, unload, clean and shoot a gun. Almost everyone I know, personally, was raised in the same manner. My Dad, and my friends’ Dads, always had guns in our homes. Handgun, rifles, shotguns, assault rifles, black-powder rifles, and any other type of gun you can think of, I have seen in my or my friends homes. And do you know what? I’m pushing thirty now and, as far as I can remember, I haven’t killed anyone. And no, it’s not because I missed. In fact, none of my friends have shot at anyone either. Even with all of the guns that are in my community, I can walk the streets at night. I can pull over and help a stranded motorist. I can stay in the park until after dark, and most importantly I can send my kids to school everyday. All without fear.

Second, is a community where guns are illegal safer? Well, I think two examples come to mind. In both Los Angeles and New York City, it is pretty mush illegal to own a gun. Tell, would you walk New York Streets at night? Would you pull over to help a stranded motorist in Los Angeles? Would you stay at a park till after dark in either city? Are children safe in their schools in these two metropolises? Obviously, gun control has done its job in these two cities.

Finally, do crime rates have anything at all to do with the reason we have a right to bear arms? Rosie O’Donnell, before commenting that she wishes she could get rid of the second amendment, said she just didn’t understand why people need to have guns. Well, to answer this one, we have to go right to the source. As it reads, the second amendment tells us: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” When asked to explain what a well regulated militia consisted of, Thomas Jefferson answered, “All free men, except a few politicians.” Our forefathers, who had lived under the oppressive thumb of an uncontrolled government, knew that two things were true. The first truth, one that someone like Rosie O’Donnell, someone who makes her living talking to the public, should understand, is that freedom of speech is imperative to a free state. The second truth, which she obviously doesn’t understand, is that the only way to guarantee freedom of speech, is to have and armed citizenry. They believed, as I do, that a time could come when our government will become too powerful, and will no longer be of the people, by the people, and for the people. They believed that a time could come when the citizens of the United States would be forced to take up arms, once again, against an oppressive uncontrolled government. They also knew that it would be impossible if the citizenry was not armed. We would be like fish in a barrel.

What happened in Littleton was no less than a grave tragedy, but it was not a tragedy that gun control could have averted. Gun control does not make safer streets. Guns do not cause violence. And most importantly, an unarmed society is an enslaved society. Simple truths. If we are to make our country a safer place, maybe we need to find out why our children are killing each other. That’s a problem taking guns away from law abiding citizens won’t solve. If we do solve it, we don’t need to take away any guns.

Peace.

Wisdom

Three newspapers at the local newsstand this morning reported the same thing, “Russell Henderson Pleads Guilty In Matthew Shepard’s Death.” In one fell swoop, Cal Rerucha made deal with the defense that will put a savage murderer behind bars for the rest of his natural life, saved Albany County a fortune that it did not have to prosecute the case and, hopefully, provided some small sense of justice to the family of Matthew Shepard.

At the same time, it proves a point I made previously: That hate crimes legislation is not needed to provide justice. (see Hates Me, Hates Me Not!) Regardless of the fact that Wyoming does not consider hate crimes any differently than otherwise motivated crimes, Henderson will die in prison. Justice was served without the addition of new laws that would ultimately bog down our judicial system and serve no other purpose than to pacify a few people who are dismayed with their own lack of control over the world around them. His alleged accomplice, Aaron McKinney, will go on trial beginning August 9. I have no doubt that justice will persevere in his case also.

For the last couple paragraphs and the last article I wrote on the subject of this gruesome murder I have primarily focused on my opinions of hate crimes legislation. Now it’s time to refocus and take a look at those on the other side of the fence. Let’s concentrate on the idiots who are making hate crimes legislation more and more acceptable to the general public. Let’s talk about the bigots and hypocrits who continue to preach the hate and intolerance.

On the Casper Star Tribune (April 6,1999) there is a picture of a half dozen or so people, including children, holding signs that say things such as, “God Hates Fags”, “AIDS Cures “Fags”, “No Special Laws For Fags”, “Fags Doom Nations”, and the most belligerent, “Matt In Hell”. The kicker though was in the caption below the picture that tells who the ‘protesters’ are. Members of the Topeka, Kansas, Westboro Baptist Church. It’s sad that anyone could hate so much that they could spew that kind trash. It’s even more unfortunate that people, especially ones who claim to carry God’s message, would teach their children to spew that kind of trash.

What is wrong with these people?! Have they become so blinded by their own hate that they truly believe that God shares their same inadequate emotional shortcomings? Are they so insecure in their own little worlds that they would protest the trial of a murderer because the victim did not pass their moral litmus test? Are they so uneducated that they don’t realize that AIDS kills thousands of people who would pass their moral litmus tests? As usual, stupidity and hate go hand in hand.

The statement that contains the most irony is the one that claims “Fags Doom Nations”. I’ve yet to learn of a nation that has fallen due to sexual orientation. I do, however, know for a fact that there have been many in our history that have fallen due to religious intolerance. As many have also fallen due to hate.

The world is full of dogmatists who can’t accept what they don’t understand. It’s also full of zealots who continuously seek to twist the world around them so they can get it under their control. Put the two together and you have the one thing that I can’t tolerate. A bigot.

There is enough hate in the world without organized religion becoming a harbinger of more. There is enough hate in the world, period. Let’s not let the death of one innocent man be used as an impetus to create more.

Peace.

Wisdom