How to say this with out sounding ’snarky’? Don’t know so I’ll just say it right out. To help motivate the Red-hats of Texas to start thinking about gun control why don’t we start encouraging people to start forming their own local militia(s). An by people I mean, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, etc?
I suggest this because I remember back in the late 60’s and early 70’s the rise the ”Black Panthers”. I was living in California, as I am now, and I remember just how upset/worried/frightened people (mostly white people) became when the Black Panthers started showing up armed to the teeth to political events and protests. It wasn’t soon after that California, under Gov. Reagan, pass some very strict gun control laws. I’m not sure if anyone has ever done a cause and effect study (I’d love to see them) but it is highly sugestive.
So, why don’t the gun control advocates start encouraging the creation of local Militia(s). We can even encourage them to be well trained with gun safety drills and regular monthly field drills so the members know what to do, how to do it, when the ’tyrannical’ government, or even an unorganized mob, tries to oppress them. I’m sure all of the right and far right white nationalists will welcome them with open arms.
I can see it now. Armed, uniformed, local militia units patrolling the streets to keep us all safe from the overreaching of the tyrants police power. A Red-Hats dream come true. The ’people’ taking back their streets and homes.
First let me be clear, I disagree with the current SCOTUS holding on just what the 2nd amendment means and how it is interpreted. That said, until we have a Court willing and able to change the current law, we are stuck with it. So I’d like to put some of my thoughts out there are some of the current proposed solutions to the Mass Shootings Pandemic in the USA.
The first idea I’d like to address is the absolutely bad idea of arming teachers. First point should be obvious, like most Americans, the average teacher is not a combat veteran, shoot, they aren’t even veterans. So lets say we do ’allow’ teachers to have guns in the class room. Which guns should they have? A pistol, long rifle, an AR? What? Next who is going to pay for arming the teachers? With how stingy states like Texas is when funding education do you really think they are going to fork out $500+ (A cheep 9mm pistol) to several thousand for a good AR15, do you really see them spending that kind of money?
So now we have the teacher who has a gun. Picture this, someone in the hall way starts shooting, the kid assume the ’position’ under their desks. Is the teacher a good enough shot to miss the students he/she is shooting over? (Most class’ I was in the teacher was on the opposite side of the room from the doors.) Has the school given any live fire training to the teacher? How much and what was their rating?
Next what about hardening our schools. Lets not even begin to talk about just how much that will cost, lets just see about the problems of implementing it. First just how many entry/exit points will a school have? One, two, 10? Each will have to have at lest two full-time guards. One to check the ’Passes’ of the people trying to come in while the other watches the person(s) trying to enter the school. Ridiculous you say? When was the last time you tried to go into a Federal court? Or even a classified work place? An lets not forget places like Texas, where you have an unfettered right to carry a ’gun’ anytime any where? Will such States be willing to declare schools a ”No Carry” area? An lets not forget all of the trouble of getting the appropriate ’pass’. How long does it take, a day? a week? what? An lets not forget about emergencies, when some one other than the ’parent’ (like a Grandparent) is sent to get the student. Maybe we can build all the schools so the only egress points are thru the school offices. Just imagine what the madhouse in the morning and afternoon with all of the students coming in and going out.
So in closing, I just want to say it is easy to come up with a simple sentence fix for out Gun Pandemic. It is not so easy to implement them, much less make them work.
Strangely enough this is not going to be a rant. It will be logical so it will be brutal. You have been warned.
Ever since Mc Donald v. City of Chicago where the right of an individual to ‘keep and bear arms’ became an individual right this country has been faced with an issue it refuses to deal with. This is what is know as Civilian Acceptable Casutly Rate by students of military action. Traditionally this issue only needed to be dealt with during times of war and usually dealt with the number of non-combatants killed or injured. Since 2010, in the United States, this is no longer the case.
Once owning any kind of arms (be it small hand ax or a WMD) became an individual right any and all laws seeking to restrict the ownership, much less the use, must pass what is known as the Strict Scutiny test. Basically this means the State has to show why an individual should not be allowed to possess a particular kind of arms. Usually, but not always this test must be applied very narrowly so you could have a law dealing with the possession of 9mm pistols with barrel length of x mm and 11 round clips but not a law dealing with all arms of 9 mm caliber. One of the more challenging legal questions we face is just how we draw depictions between unique types of arms. To my knowledge there is now test yet for this in law.
Next we have the postulate that anything can be misused, or used in a manner not acceptable. Example a car: I can use a car to go from one place to another or I can use it to run people over. The former is acceptable and the later is not. Therefor we can say any arms an individual has a right to possess can be used or misused. Another fundamental postulate is that all individual rights end where they come into conflict with other individual rights. The classic law class example of the is “My right to swing my fist ends at your nose.”
In the case we are dealing with here an individuals right to bear arms, to live, and/or to happiness. When a law restricts, any anyway, an individuals possession of an gun (arm) it comes into conflict with his/her right to keep and bear arms and, possibly happyness. When a gun is misused, like shooting up a school, the right of the people in the school to life and/or happiness has come into conflict with the right of someone(s) else to keep and bear arms. This is where exceptable Civilain casually rate come in.
We need to decide just how many innocent bystanders being casualties is too many. Right now we seem to accept the NRA’s position, any number is acceptable. That the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms trumps all other individul rights the people of America have. That the right of an individual to have any kind of gun, be it pistol, rifle, or what ever, is so important that another’s right to life must be sacrificed.
I, for one, do not accept the NRA’s position. Ever since I started studying Constitutional Law I have excepted the fundamental postulate that now individual right is superior in any way to any other individual right. They are all equal. So I say to you, what is your Acceptable Casualty Rate so that you can exercise your 2nd amendment right(s)?
It has been over a week since Las Vegas so it is, in my opinion, time to start talking about how we can prevent an occurrence. As has become habitual we basically have two sides, the pro gun control side and the pro gun side. Today I am going to address just the pro gun side. What I’m not going to do is say you are wrong, nor am I going to challenge any of your arguments favoring gun ownership. What I am going to do is issue you a specific challenge and wait and see if you are willing to take it up.
What and/or How do you propose to take action to prevent the kind of mass murder that took place in Las Vegas? There are some conditions
1) No changes to the laws in regards to guns. None.
2) No change in how we inforce the current gun laws on the books. Not Federal, not State, not Local.
That’s it. Guns are off the table. Ammunition is off the table. Anything doing with pistols, or long arms is off the table.
I really do want to hear from you and see your ideas. I’m sick and tired of people talking past each other on this issue. Now is a great time for the pro gun lobby to step up and show what they are made of and put forth good solid ideas on what we are going to do mass murder that uses firearms. Can you do it?
WARNING: If I don’t hear anything, if no suggestions or ideas are put forward I will take that as tacit agreement that the pro gun lobby holds that we just have to accept these casualties. More on this later if I hear nothing.