Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Safety in America: A Haiku

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Safety in America: A Haiku

    More tha 300 million guns in America.
    1 in 5 adults age 18+ have a hand gun
    often in their possession or in their vehicle.




    Where are you safe? Not
    In church or at a country
    Music festival


    Addendum:The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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."



    WHAT THIS REALLY MEANS

    This amendment was written to ensure that towns had 1.well regulated Militia
    2. for the security of the town and the state, made up of townsfolk who 3. kept guns as part of the Militia so when required, they would be called up to fight and defend the country.
    1. Well regulated Militia is part of the Government
    2. Militia exists to protect the Security of towns & the Government
    3. People have the right to have guns as part of the Militia
    1. Private gun ownership for the sake of having guns was never the intention of the founding Fathers. Remember, the Founding Fathers had such a poor opinion of the general populace that they would not even let people elect their own President, that was the responsibility of the Electoral College. The FF certainly did not intent th general population to have weapons for personal use. Unfortunately, modern history has shown the enduring wisdom of the Founding Fathers.

    Last edited by Tanner; 11-07-2017, 02:01 PM.

  • #2
    Guns, like money, are
    tools or traitors. Answer lies
    in heart of each man.

    Comment


    • grant hayes
      grant hayes commented
      Editing a comment
      The sole function of a gun is to wound and kill, unlike a shovel, a knife, or a hammer. Its work is to destroy. It is not a neutral tool.

      If an unbalanced angry man who goes off the deep end has access to a machine gun, there is a far higher chance that he will go kill a whole bunch of people with it than if he doesn't have access to such a weapon.

      Yes, it is people who kill people, but guns, by their very nature - especially military grade weapons - suggest and enable a far higher kill rate than any other means.

      America has a problem with GUNS.
      Last edited by grant hayes; 11-07-2017, 01:42 PM.

    • RhymeLovingWriter
      RhymeLovingWriter commented
      Editing a comment
      Because I grew up in a time and place where guns where owned and respected as a tool, I hold a different opinion. Did (and do) some individuals misuse this privilege or right? Yes - their guns should be taken away or they should be prevented from such ownership. As far as I know (and I've not delved into every detail of every case) if existing gun ownership laws had been properly enforced, none of the tragedies of the past decades or days could have come to pass. It was not lack of laws or control or even too many guns - it is that existing law was not properly enforced. I'd go further to say that instead of focusing on teaching virtue and self-control in a positive manner (from a sound moral platform, even the kind found in many religions), gun violence has been promoted, glorified, and enhanced by the consumerist mentality pushed at every turn.
      As for usage of guns when I was growing up - was the end result of usage sometimes death? Yes, of game or predators - not innocents. Mostly men, but also women, were taught proper use, respect, and storage which alleviated the type of carnage seen in today's mass murder or terrorist incidents. They considered a fireman as one more 'tool' in their ability to put food on the table. My dad was just telling me a story of a friend who grew up very poor, the family, whose mother died young, leaving behind many children, subsisted of whatever wild game they could catch or shoot. While those exact circumstances are few and far between today, I know many homesteaders who want to return to the land, using proper management techniques which include thinning wildlife which is overpopulated. Guns can be used effectively in this management.
      Of the military friends I've known who served and sacrificed honorably, there is the utmost caution with firearms. Some use them for sport, some for protection against and for those who do not respect the rights of other innocents. Again, the heart of the person wielding the gun makes all the difference.
      Having said all of that - I am not a gun lover by any means. I wish there were no need for people to protect themselves or others from predatory behavior. I also believe, as was codified by the second amendment, when a government is out of control and usurps authorities never granted it by the governed (some would say the US is at or past this point), self-defense could become a necessary option - made largely impossible if viable means of defense have been confiscated. Try holding a single shot rifle up against a machine gun and see how far you get.

      America has a problem with a lot of things. So does every country, in its own unique ways.

      My point was, and is, that if we train our hearts for virtue - love of God, others, and self - it would go a long way to alleviate instances of gun violence.

      It might just be a both/and situation - if anyone would care to consider that.

    • grant hayes
      grant hayes commented
      Editing a comment
      My father grew up in rural towns where guns were commonly owned and used. He was a crack shot. I know what it means to use guns as a tool. Farmers here are allowed to keep them. But most people in our modern societies are not farmers or gamekeepers.

      My brother is ex-police and military, rank of major. He is also a crack shot. He knows how to handle all manner of firearms. It's essential for nations to train people like him for domestic law and order and for territorial defense, and of course that involves proficiency with weapons. I am no naive peacenik. But allowing a profusion of guns to circulate amongst the population at large is a recipe for mass murder, and makes ordinary policing fraught with deadly potential.

      Guns are not a neutral tool.

  • #3
    The world is not a safe place to be. But it never has been. Ask Able.

    Comment


    • grant hayes
      grant hayes commented
      Editing a comment
      Half of the victims of the latest selfish asshole with a gun (an ASSAULT weapon for godsake) were children.

      Simply shrugging that the world is 'not a safe place' is a huge cop out. Children deserve better than to live in a country where some angry man can wipe them out in church with a military grade firearm.

      For shame.

    • rhymetime
      rhymetime commented
      Editing a comment
      Abel, right. Never could spell

    • rhymetime
      rhymetime commented
      Editing a comment
      Grant,
      I have read and considered your comment many times.
      I appreciate your anger at my apparent flippancy. Although I did not intend it to be so I can appreciate that the remark appeared as such.
      Perhaps I have become weary and discouraged. Weary of the same story told with different characters in different places. Weary of temporary indignation. Discouraged because we fail to address the cause. Weary because we cannot agree on the problem.
      Everyone has an opinion. All opinions have merit. While we focus on our opinions, innocents continue to be slaughtered. I do believe that it has always been so and shall continue to be as long as humans collectively continue to be the dominant species.
      Concerning my spelling, I suppose I should be more attentive, especially if I seek to present myself as a writer. Having been plagued with dyslexia, spelling and typing have always been a challenge. My late wife typed all my college papers and reviewed my correspondence. As that is no longer an option, I am on my own.
      I write to express my regret for having caused you angst and to thank you for your patience and kindness herein.
      John

  • #4
    This all makes me rethink "safe" -- eroded rights and ignorance of laws and actuality handicap us, believing anything without confirmation, spreading sensationalism. America, you're famous for all the wrong things.

    Safe as in not preyed upon, either: invincible or vulnerable... Thanks for sharing.

    We do have a problem

    Comment


    • #5
      And now for the prayers and thoughts ....

      Five weeks apart: scores of folks killed and hundreds wounded - in 'peacetime' - by just two men with guns. At a concert and in church.

      Looks like it will soon be a monthly thing. At the current rate there will be another by Christmas.

      Price of 'freedom', eh.

      So why is America experiencing more mass casualty gun crimes per capita than most other countries that aren't war zones?

      Australia has tough restrictions on gun ownership. Sure, criminal elements may attempt to obtain guns here - illegally - but the citizenry in general isn't awash with firearms like in the US. Here, it's simply not straightforward for some angry, bitter male to pick up the nearest assault rifle and start gunning down folks. We have plenty such men; they just have no readily available weapon to use in the event that they go apeshit.

      You remove the means - as much as possible - you reduce the incidence of shooting massacres.

      I realize that removing such means is a nigh on impossible goal in the US, basically because there the ownership of firearms is a symbol and 'proof' of freedom. It's too deeply ingrained in the national psyche to be dealt with sensibly. The gun is worshiped in the US.
      Last edited by grant hayes; 11-07-2017, 10:44 PM.

      Comment


      • RhymeLovingWriter
        RhymeLovingWriter commented
        Editing a comment
        I would agree with you that it symbolizes freedom to a large extent. Again, if the heart of man is rightly trained, that presents no problem, does it?

      • grant hayes
        grant hayes commented
        Editing a comment
        The proliferation of guns in the US directly correlates with the frequency and severity of gun massacres.

        The 'heart of man' in the US is not a special case. There are violent, unstable, angry men everywhere. But in the US they have easy access to firearms, most problematically those of a military grade.

        So there is a problem, specifically with the easy availability of (and glorification of) guns.
        Last edited by grant hayes; 11-07-2017, 12:00 PM.

    • #6
      Such visceral response
      to seventeen syllables.

      Comment


      • #7
        The glorification of violence as an expression of strength and heroism, perpetuates violent aggression as a means of resolving conflict.

        We see it on film, we hear it in the bravado of our leaders when they threaten military action against our foes.

        There is an unmistakable cowboy braggadocio to our discourse.

        As a matter of fact, most of the guns on the market are intended to hunt people, not wild game.

        The proliferation of guns, allows homicidal people access to an efficient weapon of mass murder.

        To be frank, countries with strict gun laws, do not have even a modicum of deaths due to gun violence, that America has.

        The misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment, by the gun lobby-a rather effective marketing tool-along with the millions they spend on legally bribing legislators, does not help.

        The 2nd Amendment was intended to facilitate "A well regulated militia", at a time when the country did not have a full time armed force to defend her.

        It was NEVER intended to allow unfettered gun ownership en masse.

        Comment


        • #8
          Some statistical considerations
          https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/0....facebook.com/


          Comment


          • RhymeLovingWriter
            RhymeLovingWriter commented
            Editing a comment
            Well, from my reading, the Catholics who came here (and continued to be persecuted even on these shores) were motivated by the love expressed by a trinitarian God. The FF used the term 'creator' - which I equated with God.

            As for Roman persecution, the greatest revolutionary ever was Jesus Christ, it just so happens that His 'weapon' of choice was love.

          • grant hayes
            grant hayes commented
            Editing a comment
            If Jesus is the Way, Truth, and Life, and his movement so resolutely eschewed armed insurrection, even under conditions of severe persecution (they did not join the Jewish revolt against Rome. for instance), how can there be any warrant for His followers to participate in or endorse rebellions like that on which the independent US was founded? What has the war of independence to do with the way of Christ? Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, not take up arms against Caesar when his imposts get too onerous. Would Jesus approve of his followers sniping at redcoats? Would he not expect them instead to pay their taxes, pray for their enemies, and prepare to suffer patiently to the death, in the hope of the life to come?

            Tell me again how you reconcile armed insurrection and the attendant idolatry of weapons with the way of the cross? Where is the trust in God in all that armed-to-the-teeth militancy?

            Could it be that expediency, pragmatism, worldly advantage, and all-too-human fear are the actual values of the 'Christian', and that Jesus is just the get-out-of-hell-free card?

          • RhymeLovingWriter
            RhymeLovingWriter commented
            Editing a comment
            Throughout these comments I've tried to call attention to better measures, stronger measures to be considered as the debate around guns goes forward.

            I tried, unsuccessfully, to point out that it is precisely because Jesus' teachings have been ignored that we are in the mess we are in, and perhaps a return to those lessons, and application, funding, and understanding of them could aid in reversing the alarming trends we are seeing.

        • #9
          I turned down a one way street a few years back and all most caused an accident. I pulled into a drive to turn around and was confronted by three young men who blocked my path. I apologized to them for my mistake, they didn’t seem to satisfied with that until they noticed the 357 revolver I was carrying. I for one won’t put my trust in some law a Politian passes.

          Comment


          • #10
            A homicidal man, uses the tools at his disposal, and if that tool is an efficient killing machine, he will use it.

            Being a member of society, with freedom for both the diligent and dim-witted, involves inherent risk. This is unavoidable.

            However, even as we take measures-reasonable, state imposed, legal impediments to unfettered freedom- to mitigate those risks, in numerous facets of our daily lives, we refuse to do so when it comes to guns, despite the UNDENIABLE empirical evidence, such as the facts in the article, Mr. Hayes posted.

            True, people with guns kill people.
            People with less guns, kill less people!
            Last edited by DWAYNE; 11-07-2017, 02:02 PM.

            Comment


            • #11
              What’s always left out of the gun debate, the trigger, I.E. the person that pulls it. My father once told me to get something out of something you have to put some work into it, that includes your children. When I grew up my parents always knew and cared what I was doing, we didn’t see much violence on the small or big screen. (John Wayne never killed as many people as Bruce Willis) Never played violent video games, if I’d of had time for that my father would of found better things for me to do. Please and thank you were expected, has was respect for my elders. I carried a pocket knife to school, everyday and so did everyone else. Where did we go wrong as a society?

              Comment


              • #12
                I agree with much of what has been said here, and RLW, I share your moral code.

                You are right. If people were kind to one another there would be no murder, or any other kind of sin.

                However, I lock my door at night, because I know I live in a world fraught with danger, and while some maniac may still kick the thing off its hinges, I take all the precautions I can, to mitigate the danger.

                Which is why Mr. Hayes point, is right on the mark. Since we KNOW that an abundance of guns puts us at SUBSTANTIALLY higher risk for the kinds of mass murders that we are experiencing, why are we unwilling to MITIGATE THE DAMAGE?

                Constitutional rights are important, but no right is unlimited. The same people who lobby for the ultimate infringement of your right to life, the death penalty, insist that the 2nd Amendment should prevail, virtually unrestricted.



                ​​​​​​​

                Comment


                • RhymeLovingWriter
                  RhymeLovingWriter commented
                  Editing a comment
                  laugh then, at feeblest poor attempt
                  to rise above or tread each stream
                  of mired contempt for simple hope
                  that morrow’s fate mends fast the seam
                  of lost suppose or faith asides
                  held close by simpletons who dream
                  all is not lost; man’s lot not stained
                  beyond what Christ Himself redeems

                  pity me then, as laughs subside - the fool with faith - and hope besides

                • grant hayes
                  grant hayes commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Rhymist, I see no 'simple hope' in countenancing America's gun proliferation as some guarantee against a rogue government. Christ gave no mandate for armed struggle against such regimes, and the one he faced was harsh indeed. Your position here looks to me more like resignation to the idolatry of the weapon, and bespeaks a lack of faith in the one who said 'take up your cross and follow me' and 'put away your sword'. I, for one, find his teachings impossible to follow, and accept the condemnation that goes with that; but you have no such recourse, if you would own his name.

                • RhymeLovingWriter
                  RhymeLovingWriter commented
                  Editing a comment
                  I've communicated poorly if my words implied that Jesus mandated indiscriminate armed struggle. Righteous indignation was about as far as He went, as I recall. In fact, when I talk about change in the hearts of man as answer to be considered at least as seriously as further gun control legislation (or many other kinds of governmental overreach), it is with His teachings in mind. With a law of love fixed firmly in all areas of governance, self-control is a needed and worthy first step. It is almost never mentioned, supported, or advocated outside of religious circles (and poorly practiced even there).

                  I do not countenance or advocate gun proliferation. However, I can tolerate the airing of the reasoning and fear of those who do, even if I disagree with them. Then, if they are willing to listen to me, I advocate for something I believe is also a necessary ingredient for success in ending these kind of events - self-control based on the premise of loving God first and your neighbor as yourself. Poetically, I tried to imply that with my 'heart of man' phrasing. Apparently, that failed as well.

                  I'm still trying. I may be a poor example, but by His grace I will always own His name.
              Working...
              X