Jared Lee Loughner (22) killed 6 people and wounded 14 in an act of political terrorism, nearly killing a Congress Woman, killing a Federal Judge, and a few other federal employees and bystanders on Saturday, January 08, 2011.
It is an unspeakable act of violence, perpetrated by a 22 years old, evidently disturbed person. We can discuss his affiliation with the extremely conservative, anti-Jewish, anti-immigration organizations. We can discuss his twisted reality and anti-government sentiments. But again, it's not what interests me the most at the moment.
Let's talk about one of the pillars of the American Democracy - the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
It reads: "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."
This Amendment was ratified by most of the States in 1789, a few years after the Revolutionary War ended. I do not need to emphasize the structural and social differences between the America of the late 1700 and the America of 2011. It's not the same country by any means. One of the differences is a well oiled Military Machine, as well as all forms of organized on Federal and Local levels law enforcement organizations (FBI and Police). What was necessary more than 200 years ago in order just to survive - is not necessarily required, nor needed now.
Now and then we hear an argument about some of the Religions of the World - that they do not change in time, do not evolve (as most of the societies evolve) becoming more and more conservative and actually impeding progress. At the same time we do not even give a second thought to the very 'dated' 2nd Amendment which although traditionally correct, in the modern society seems a bit archaic - just like fasting on Friday.
I like guns myself (for the record: I do not own any). Their absolutely pragmatic design and function, simplicity and effectiveness of both... Modern pistols like Gluck (used by J.L. Loughner) and Beretta are minimalistically beautiful. The same applies to the hunting rifles and shotguns, and other military issue weapons.
All members of the Military, Law Enforcement and Security Forces are subject to the long and tedious process of getting familiar with them, and being able to understand and keep in check not the mechanics of the guns they use, but the psychological aspect of having a gun in their hands. I stress here the feeling of empowerment while holding a loaded gun. There is no exception, it's an unavoidable sensation working on the enzyme (chemical) level of our brains. Everybody is a subject to it, like everybody is a subject to a 'cultural shock' and all the stages of it. All the Operators are trained to be aware of it and think beyond the effect of the adrenaline and endorphin produced at that moment.
But what happens to the 'common', untrained people. The effect of holding a loaded gun makes them lose the proper perspective on reality. Quite common are the confessions of the accidental shooters referring to a feeling of invincibility while having a gun in their hands. We are all conditioned by the culture in general (followed by the law) to respect the human life. To a certain degree this conditioning has been extended to all the mammals - even those who are otherwise considered 'game'. There is also a just and proper fear before pulling the trigger when the gun is aimed at another human being (and rightfully so). But this fear may be diminished by a mechanical proficiency, if the training didn't address the psychological aspect associated with it.
We (the USA) are probably the only civilized country in the World, who's citizens are free to buy a fire arm (after some, sometimes rudimentary, background check and the waiting period), and in many States carry it (last time I checked 17 States of the USA issue the 'concealed weapon' permits).
I am a New Yorker, but I travel sometimes. I remember to this day my trip to Houston, TX shortly after they approved the 'concealed weapon' in that State. After taking a rental car from the airport (with almost empty tank) I stopped by at a Gas Station on my way to the City. While waiting for the tank to be filled, I noticed a car pulling to the neighboring distributor (a shiny red Mustang convertible with a vanity plates and a roof down). The guy who climbed out had on him pair of jeans and cowboy boots, gold chain and rings, white tea-shirt... and 2 - 9mm pistols in the mesh holsters under his arms. He wasn't a law-enforcement officer...
What if I (or anybody else) accidentally smashed his priced possession in a traffic accident. How well could he control his urge to use 'a second amendment solution' (as called by Sharron Angle in her campaign against the Senate majority leader).
Advocates of the 'concealed weapon' permits claim that the violent crime rate in the states who introduced these permits plummeted dramatically right after their implementation - in the laymen's terms: criminals have to think twice before pulling a gun on a innocent looking victim - since that person may react by pulling the trigger of his/her gun hidden in a purse or a pocket.
Is it really a solution?
We are getting more and more insensitive to the 'normal', 'quiet' 'polite'. It doesn't impress us, it doesn't leave a long lasting impression. We need stronger and stronger stimuli, to even pay a bit of attention. The advertisers know it and use it in their campaigns. Also politicians know it. The chase after more attractive and 'head turning' wording of the politicians speeches brings the speech writers to the usage of previously (a few decades ago) unused language - with it's roots in the military 'lingo'. No one selects the people groups any more - they are 'targeted'. No one backs off from the wrong position, wrong statements - they are 'forced to retreat'. We do not have any more the peaceful and democratic 'exchanges of ideas', 'discussions' and even 'quarrels'. We have the constant 'battles' and 'wars'. The politicians on the 'opposite sides of the isle' are not representatives who want GOOD for the Country any more, they are adversaries and most often foes.
I do not want to be too partisan blaming this escalation of the Republican side. It happens on both sides of the isle. Even the President on the 6/14/2008 used this kind of rhetoric: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser.
But most of this sort of unnecessarily violent references we can hear in the speeches of the Conservative politicians, radio talk-show host etc. Mentioned beforehand Sharron Angle said openly that if they lose the elections - there is always 'a second amendment solution' (she said that in her campaign against the Senate majority leader in 2010). Sarah Palin compiled a map of the USA with the congressional districts - where more progressive, democratic districts were indicated by a 'cross hair' - like in a gun sight. One of this districts with the 'cross hair' painted over it was a district in Arizona - to which the brutally targeted Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford belonged.
We can't take the politicians words literally - I am sure they do not mean when they refer to 'Wild West' way of solving problems. These are metaphors only. I understand it, and most of the logically thinking people in the US know it as well.
But what about those not exactly stable, not exactly balanced psychologically. As I heard yesterday - there is about 45,000 of sick or very unstable individuals in the USA at any given moment. They are usually barely tolerated by the society at large. They are frustrated and isolated. Being rejected over and over they develop hatred to all the people surrounding them. They respond overwhelmingly 'well' to the 'conspiracy theories' propagated by talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. They do respond and they react upon it.
It's not at all surprising (or at least it shouldn't be) that the empowering effect (experienced by normal people) of the gun becomes the solution of all their problems. The gun gives them the power and unlimited control over their lives an all the control over lives of the people around them. It gives them finally the control over something...
It's not that difficult to indoctrinate such a person(s) to do the unspeakable acts of violence in the name of somebody else's agenda - we have witnessed that over and over during last 2 decades.
---------------------
I understand that the criminals will find their way to the possession of the fire-arm, no matter how hard the system tries to prevent them from it. It is 'a war' which can't be won. The weapons used by them are often smuggled or stolen (even from the law enforcement). And this is a subject to a different discussion. What is a problem which I see, is the easiness of obtaining the weapon license, or buying the weapon parts from the mail order catalogs, only to assemble it at home. It is a federal offense to transport the weapon across a State line, but some individuals may not see it as a restraining factor. And the parts I am talking about are not a hand-gun parts but the parts to build an assault rifle, like AK-47. Can anybody explain to me why any law abiding citizen may want an assault rifle? The name itself reveals it's true purpose, it's not a protection, it's an aggression - assault. They are not legal for hunting game, so the only explanation would be to hunt... people?
Suddenly, after the Arizona Saturday tragedy someone raised the issue of extended clips to the hand-guns. The perpetrator of the Saturday massacre had an extended (30 bullet) clip which he purchased separately. Again, why a law abiding citizen would like to have an extended (double capacity) magazine for his hand-gun? Is the 'paper target' at he shooting range going to escape while he reloads the gun? I doubt.
Why are these assault rifles and 'assault accessories' legally available in the States? If the main legal purposes of the gun ownership are protection, hunting, target practicing (I am talking about artificial, paper or clay targets...), what are the reasons preventing the legislature from banning them once and for all?
Why in some States one can obtain a gun license and buy a gun - all the same day? How thorough can the background check be if performed in such a hurry? Apparently not very thorough in Arizona, since Jared Lee Loughner, had some brushes with the authorities prior to the gun purchase.
If every driver is obligated to pass at least an eye test every few years, why doesn't anybody have to pass a psychological evaluation before obtaining a gun license and then every few years just to prove that they are still capable to tell the reality from paranoid illusions? Who is afraid of such tests?
Well, I may answer this question right away - gun manufacturers and dealers - since probably half of the people applying for the license wouldn't pas such a test (I don't even want to think about the current owners).
We hear all the time the argument saying that 'Government control is depriving the people of their freedoms'. We hear it from the 'Wall Street', we hear from all the lobbyists of the 'big business (like the Gun Manufacturers).
But what is apparent, is that the lack of the strong and decisive Gun Control regulation is one of the main reasons why this tragedy (and many previous ones) have taken place.
---------------------
The Constitution of the United States is a profound and powerful document. I am not in the position to even suggest revoking the Second Amendment. Although I myself can't see the wisdom in it now - I understand that it was very important to the process of forging of the New Country of ours. I also hope that the Arizona Saturday tragedy is not going to be forgotten without a proper action. I hope that it will spawn the new, comprehensive approach to the Gun Control issue preventing the events like that in the Future.
