Political Assassination in Arizona - 2nd Amendment revisited

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.

WikiLeaks controversy... (two, or more sides of the same coin...)

Since it's inception in the late 2006 the WikiLeaks and it's director Julian Assange were a subject of a great and sometimes disgusting to witness controversy.  The controversy was not only on the grounds of releasing potentially damaging (to a leak subjects) information, but by the way of obtaining the data, association with the international (in big degree Chinese) hackers community. 
I am not going to bore you by repeating the info available on Wikipedia.org and other sources about the organization itself and it's activities.  Everybody can do it at will.

I am going to focus on the latest indiscretion - the release of the Diplomatic Cables, and the preceding spill - the release of the 400,000 classified documents relating the the Iraq War, and the Afghan War.  And again, not about the particular details of this act, but the issue surrounding it.

At first when I learned about The Leak - it infuriated me extremely.  I couldn't understand how anybody with a conscience could commit such an act of treason.  Yes, treason, even though Julian Assange is an Australian self-proclaimed whistle-blower, not an American.  No matter how anti-war in general and how much anti-this-particular-war I am, releasing these documents didn't bring us closer to the end of this struggle.
It's not the Viet-Nam War, unpopular and despised to the point of redirecting the nation's hatred toward the participants of the conflict - soldiers themselves.  It's a different war.  Although the soldiers of the Viet-Nam War shouldn't have been deprived from a compassion and support of the Nation - this time around - these soldiers are not.  We have hundreds of thousands of troops coming to all 4 branches of the Army from all parts of the population.  In general, brave and doing well their job.  The job which was given to them by the President of the United States.
We can discuss the factors which brought us to this (Iraq) war... Oh, no, no point discussing it.  We all agreed already that we entered the Iraq War (last one) on the false pretenses.  Again, I am not going to dwell on a subject of real reasons for this war.  Maybe some other time...
As stated before: there are hundreds of thousands of personnel (both the active duty and the support) who risk their lives on daily basis.  There are thousands of Special Forces operators, Intelligence Community members (both the operators and the assets), who risk their life in this conflict every day.  It doesn't take much to jeopardize their existence even in greater degree.  It's enough to make certain classified information available publicly.  Published indiscriminately by WikiLeaks may have become the ultimate weapon against our troops - their nooses.
Of course some of these documents brought to the day light the abuses and the irregularities of the War Machine.  No one can deny that, but in the general account the results of The Leak produce more danger than it's all worth.
Most of the leaked Diplomatic Cables are probably completely benign (if they weren't heavily encrypted), but if they get published in such a manner, they may bring harm to the Diplomats and in the long run the Country.

Assange is the name we all know and associate with this leak.  My fury as the fury of all who felt betrayed and vulnerable was directed toward him instantly.  But, was it rightfully so?
After a moment (I admit: a long-few-days moment) it dawned on me.  Besides his anterior motifs to harm the America, to harm the Modern Society (I am not going to speculate farther what was his real anterior motif), he did only what a JOURNALIST (no matter if self-proclaimed or not) could and should do.  Freedom of the PRESS is one of the most important rules of our Democracy (almost democracy as I noted before).  The First Amendment to The Constitution is the most important part of the Law Of The Land.  It should be protected, and it should be implemented no matter if your personal feelings say the contrary.  It should be obeyed even if you are revolted by perpetrator who wishes you and us very badly. 

If Julian Assange published the materials provided to him (or his staff) and not coerced or actively stolen by him or his staff - then he shouldn't suffer any legal consequences of his act (otherwise repulsive and wrong).  This protection by the 1st Amendment is conditional - provided that he didn't have anything to do with the act of obtaining this documents at the first place.  And for his safety and the future I sure hope that he hasn't have.
It's a bit suspicious that right after the Leak become public Assange was charged (sorry, wasn't charged, just indicated as a 'person of interest') with the sexual crime in one of our allied countries, Sweden?  How convenient. 
Michael Moore offered his own $20,000 to post a bail for Assange.  Again I was infuriated (but it was before I came to the Reason) by this act.  But, if this is a 'smear campaign' (which J.A.  claims to be, and from the perspective it resembles), one should not be punished for 'speaking out'.  Again we come around to the same Constitutional dilemma.

It brings us to the last issue inter-weaved with this affair - the act of stealing of these classified documents.  I am not going even to mention the name of the low rank military archivist who perpetrated this crime.  Was it his idea, or he was 'inspired' by Assange? Or by anybody else? 
He is directly responsible for putting great number of people at risk.  No matter what his motifs were, there is no justification in my mind for this act of treason.  He should be prosecuted and answer for this crime to the fullest of the available law. 

But Assange... If he hasn't been involved in the theft of the documents - he walks...  And that's better than making a dangerous precedence persecuting a member of the Press for publishing anything.

I am sure the Saga will continue...

NEW YEAR 2011 came with the new hopes for the State of The Union.

During the last 10 years we haven't been pampered by the Fate, to say the least.  The political Reality kept exceeding the worst nightmarish expectations.  I am not going to list all the calamities which forced us to rethink ourselves.  Let me throw just a few:
George W took the Oval Office.
The Markets proved that the Gravity is an undeniable force - much stronger than artificially blown Internet Stock Bubble.
911.
Afghanistan War started.
Another proof for the proverb: 'if you want to hit the dog, you will find the stick..." - even if you can't find the WMDs.  And the Iraq War (second) started.
More than 4000 of our troops killed - and for what?.
More than a million of Iraqis perished.
Sub-Prime mortgages.
Someone has to pay for the War expenditures - welcome to the Worst (yet) Recession of Our Lives.
A sudden breath of the fresh air (although not too long lasting euphoria) - Obama elected the President of the USA (definitely the most Positive Fact of the Decade)
'Birthers'
Tea Party, and 'I am no witch' promise...
Sara Palin (yes - a calamity).
Democrats lost the Majority in the Congress - the elections which only proofed that 'deeply frustrated people' lose the perspective view on politics.  In such an emotional stage the differences between 'a friend and a foe'  are completely blurred.
Tax compromise.
-------------
Of course there were a few bright moments in this past decade.  It's almost ironic that some of them we may associate with the 'Lame Duck Session' of the US Congress,
like 'Repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy'. 

Coincidentally the last decade was also the period when I tried to run a new, established in 1999 business (after quitting a full time job at Sotheby's).  Perfect timing.
-------------

I wanted to start this blog right after the Presidential Inauguration in 2008 - on a positive note.  I procrastinated to the moment when I couldn't calmly take it anymore.  So, the blog is officially started.  Not on such a positive note, but with the HOPE for the improvement of our economical and political situation in the new Decade which has just started.  The blog started also with the HOPE for improving of our American perception in the World.  Putting aside any extreme Anti-Americanism in the Middle East, or Far East - we are not any more the most 'welcome' nation in the World.  Hopefully we can change it.  Let's try.