Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Guns, Birkenstocks, and Beer
I’ll admit this much up front: I’m not a gun person. I’ve tried to like guns. Some of my favorite people are gun nuts, so I’ve been treated to long disquisitions on the virtues of different kinds and calibers and sat through long debates on the merits of the Glock this and the Winchester that.
I attend firearms training with new recruits to our agency and fire a few rounds with a 9mm SIG Sauer and a patrol assault rifle (AR-15). As long as I’ve got my tongue poking out of the corner of my mouth, I can put a hurtin’ on a paper bowling pin at three yards (CQB). I really enjoyed watching the recruits learning, and love watching the instructors who are so expert at something that (having tried it) I know is difficult.
I liked stripping and cleaning the guns afterward, like the smell of gun oil, but the shooting itself? I’m sorry: it’s loud and dangerous — and so far — at least, just not my thing.
You know what is my thing? Knitting. My yarn homies and I talk about knitting needles and gauges and debate cashmere vs. alpaca happily for hours while we stitch away… and I’ve tried to get some of my law enforcement officer buddies interested (“It’s meditative! It reduces blood pressure!”) but so far no takers. So fine: I knit, they shoot, everybody’s happy. What’s the problem?
Here was the problem as Officer Pepsi saw it: The Liberals wanted to take away his guns.
I met Officer Pepsi (not his real name) in a bar in Boston, and we got into a conversation about guns in America.
“Liberals like you just don’t like guns. You don’t understand guns, and you sneer at gun nuts like me.”
Here was the problem as I saw it: holes in people. I see more of them than I want to. I see actual holes in the heads and bodies of teens and tweens and mothers and fathers and children, and I envision holes in Officer Pepsi and my other, beloved brothers and sisters in law enforcement.
“I have no problem whatsoever with you having a gun,” I told him. “I want you to have a gun. But it is too easy for a crazy person to get a gun and kill innocent people with it. It is too easy for a crazy person to get a gun, point a gun and make a hole in you.”
“Well, okay,” said Officer Pepsi. “But if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them…”
I’ve never seen a hole in a person that was put there by an outlaw. Let me repeat: I’ve seen a lot of gunshot wounds in 14 years, even though I live in a relatively peaceful state. I have never seen one that was inflicted by a criminal, if by “criminal” we mean someone who has committed and been convicted of a prior crime.
If your definition doesn’t include conviction, well then sure: the guy who murdered his whole family one morning with a shotgun became, in that moment, a criminal but by then it was a little late to refuse to sell him the gun.
In virtually all the cases I see — the suicides, homicides, infanticides — the weapon involved was purchased legally. Occasionally, it turns out that the shooter borrowed the gun from someone else, maybe without that person’s explicit permission, so there might technically be a “theft” involved, though not one that would have been reported as such had no murder been committed.
Adam Lanza “borrowed” a gun from his mother, for instance, but this is an act that we can only define as “theft” because he used it to kill her, before proceeding to the Sandy Hook Elementary School and opening fire on little kids.
“Adam Lanza was nuts,” Officer Pepsi points out.
Definitely. And on those occasions in which someone has pointed a gun at one of my guys and threatened to kill him, it hasn’t been a “criminal,” but someone with severe mental health issues.
“There are laws to prevent mentally ill people from buying guns,” Officer Pepsi points out.
No. There are laws to prevent people who have been adjudicated as mentally ill from buying guns. I have lots of mentally-ill friends and relatives including a few who have been hospitalized for psychosis, but they all retain the legal right to purchase a firearm because they — like the vast majority of patients — consent to treatment.
Let’s say that, tomorrow morning I awaken with some condition — paranoid schizophrenia, a glioblastoma — that causes the voices in my head to advocate mass murder. I’ve got no criminal record, no court-ordered hospitalizations. I could go to my local gun store and buy a gun and ammo and be blasting away from the church tower by lunchtime (although unless my targets looked like bowling pins and were no more than nine feet away, I would not be able to actually hit them).
Let’s say my local gun dealer was particularly conscientious and discerning. “Jeez. Kate is acting strange. I’d better not sell her a firearm.”
What would I do then? “Buy an illegal gun?” suggested Officer Pepsi.
Please.
Okay, actual criminals — gang-bangers and mafiosi — will continue to have access to guns no matter what the laws say, because their criminal activities put them in touch with the black market where guns, drugs, stolen goods, and other contraband are traded. But I wouldn’t have the faintest idea how to find an illegal gun. I’m not a criminal, just a crazy person.
As are the majority — by far — of the shooters I see.
“I don’t want guns to be outlawed,” Officer Pepsi insists. “I want to be able to keep and bear arms, and I have the right to do so under the 2nd Amendment.”
“Well,” I said. “How about we go with Originalism on this? Every American Citizen can freely keep and bear arms… provided the arms are those that would have been available to the Founding Fathers. If Thomas Jefferson could keep and bear it, you can too. Muzzle loaders, a saber, an iron cannon in your front yard…”
“You’re a liberal and you want to take away my guns,” Officer Pepsi said. “Would you like another beer?”
“Sure.” I said. “But let me get this round.”
I’m not allowed to have a .50 caliber mounted on the top of my Subaru for personal protection while I’m driving around the neighborhood. I’m not allowed to salt my front lawn with Bouncing Bettys. Why does the Second Amendment not guarantee me the right to keep and bear my own personal nuke? I asked Officer Pepsi when I got back to our table with the drinks.
“Well, because that’s not reasonable…”
“Ahah! So the debate isn’t about absolutes: arms/no arms? It’s about reasonable limitations. It’s deciding what’s the 2nd Amendment equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded movie theater?”
“Rights always have to get balanced against the burden that the exercise of those rights impose on others.”
“And to me, twenty dead kids at Newtown, and forty-seven police officers shot and killed in 2014 is too great a burden.”
“But I want to keep my guns,” said Officer Pepsi. “And I have a right to keep them.”
“Yes! And I want you to keep your guns, too! You know why? You’re trained.”
And trained.
And trained.
As a police officer for the City of Boston, Officer Pepsi is a very different case from the guy who wanders into a gun store on some macho whim. Does that guy know what he’s doing? Has he been trained by qualified instructors, has he done Simunition training, shoot-don’t-shoot, does he have non-lethal tools he can use before escalating to deadly force? No? Then he’s just a yahoo wannabe, and a menace.
“He still has the right to buy a gun,” said Officer Pepsi.
Fine. But no fantasies, here: Officer Pepsi is not safer and his job is not made easier by Citizen Yahoo’s guns. My children are not safer because Yahoo is pseudo-patrolling the neighborhood and Yahoo’s own children are not safer with his gun in their home. In fact, statistically speaking, his children are a lot less safe with the gun in their home… but I’m not just talking statistics.
I’ve seen the holes. So has Officer Pepsi.
“Here’s the solution as I see it,” I said. “Gun owners should be trained, licensed and insured.”
Guns could be grouped into classes — Class A, Class B, Class C — and a gun owner would be thoroughly trained in the safe handling and use of any class of firearm he or she wishes to purchase. When purchasing a firearm, the customer will show the dealer his or her license and proof of insurance. As with auto insurance, the insurance policy can be comprehensive, covering damage, destruction and theft, but liability insurance would be mandatory. This would serve to provide compensation to victims and survivors in the event that injuries or deaths are inflicted upon the innocent through the use of the firearm by the owner or by others.
“Who will do the training, licensing and insuring?” Officer Pepsi inquired skeptically.
I shrugged. “The state?”
Officer Pepsi recoiled. “No!”
“No?”
“Absolutely not! The government can’t … oh wait a sec. I’ve got it. The NRA.”
“The National Rifle Association?”
He explained: the NRA already has the expertise, the training programs and the proven capability for creating a data base. More importantly, the organization already commands the trust of gun owners. “Let the NRA do the training and licensing.”
“Fine,” I said promptly. “Agreed. But don’t forget the insurance piece.”
“But what’s the point of the insurance piece?” Officer Pepsi asked. “Other than to compensate victims?”
“Because once you get the actuaries in on the act, they’ll take care of the big safety issues.” I said. “Insurers won’t want to be on the hook for those unfortunate bullet holes.”
Take Adam Lanza’s mother. Let’s say she wants to buy an Bushmaster XM-15 because she’s a gun nut. Her son is a plain old nut, but they’ve been doing some mother-son bonding over lethal weapons. So she goes to her insurance agent to enquire about a policy.
“Have you had the NRA training for this weapon?” the agent will inquire. “Do you have a gun safe? Who has access to that safe? Do you have any young people living in your home? A twenty year old son… really? I see… And he has mental health issues, and you’ve taught him how to shoot ? Okayyyy…” (Sound of typing) “I should have an estimate for you in just…. a…. sec…”
Had she been faced with an insurance premium that makes the GNP of Denmark look like chump change, Adam Lanza’s mother might have re-think her parenting style, or at least spend the money she was going to use for the Bushmaster on a really good safe for the guns she already has.
And Adam — thwarted by the combination his mother refuses to give him — will wander down to the local WalMart to purchase an alternative, only to find that they won’t sell him a Bushmaster without a Class C license and proof of insurance…
“I’ve got it,” Officer Pepsi interrupted. “The NRA could create a stand-alone, for-profit insurance company and sell gun-owners the necessary insurance. “
“And cops like you can ask a gun owner to show a license and proof of insurance when its necessary. Or get a subpoena for specific records from the NRA, the way you subpoena records from Verizon when you need them…”
“But the state doesn’t issue the license, and the state doesn’t keep the records.”
“Agreed?”
“Agreed.”
But might Adam Lanza — foiled in the attempt to legally acquire a gun — seek entrance into whatever passes for the criminal underworld of Newtown, Connecticut? Or drive to Hartford and make inquiries among the more obvious corner drug dealers as to whether they knew of someone willing to sell a skinny, crazy white boy a gun?
Sure. Could happen. But it would be more difficult. It doesn’t seem a bad idea for there to be a few more obstacles — or any obstacles at all, for that matter — between the Adam Lanzas of this world, and defenseless kindergarteners. Or between the suicidal teen, the four year old playing cowboy or the rummaging burglar… and that loaded gun in Dad’s bedside table…
Of course, at the same time this plan would put a few tiresome obstacles in the way of the ordinary, law-abiding gun-lovers like Officer Pepsi.
But if gun owners in America could retain the right to keep and bear arms, yet be trained, licensed and insured… and if all three of these requirements would be met through a trusted, non-governmental entity with proven expertise in the field… like the NRA… well, it took us an hour and four glasses of beer, but in the end Officer Pepsi and I agreed that we could live with that.
“So,” I said. “Would you like me to teach you to knit?”
Published in General
No they don’t—and I read the best, concise explanation I’ve ever come across for why they occur in black American communities in this book (that I keep citing!) called GHETTOCIDE, by Jill Leovy.
They require no conviction, no more than anyone captured on the battlefield. This is not a criminal matter, but one dealt with under the laws of Armed Conflict.
I may read it – depending on my blood pressure.
I think it is a matter of culture. See my comment re: Acting Black note my link goes to The Daily Beast.
This is where culture change occurs.
and then
I would point out, the second video is by CL Bryant, who has a movie out called Runaway Slave.
Tell you what Kate – you watch the two videos and I will buy/read the book, provided it is available on Kindle. (I am not asking you to buy CL Bryant’s DVD.)
Let me know if you do—I don’t think it will raise your blood pressure, and I’d love to know what you think.
Okay!
Costing me money already – 11.95 for a book whose marginal cost to produce is as close to zero as can be achieved in human systems.
Happily purchased – because I took the OK as “I will watch”. Love ya Kate.
U2, Instugator!
Back to the original topic.
I am perfectly willing to allow the current laws as promulgated in Louisiana (as opposed to Great Britain where self defense is NOT a defense for the use of a gun) to control open carry laws.
Concealed carry, I also defer to Louisiana.
Because I live here – but I want civil rights (re the 2nd amendment) to be exported to the rest of the country.
Liked the videos, Instugator! and I think the message of the anti-Liberal Lady one, and of the young woman lecturing passers-by, in particular, is a powerful one. Basically: “Here’s the Liberal welfare system. How’s it working for ya’ so far?”
I wasn’t as convinced by the notion that the Liberals deliberately set up the welfare system to make people weak and miserable… since I tend not to believe that most human beings are organized enough for conspiracies, I’m more inclined to attribute failures and disasters to vague good intentions combined with inaccurate information, bad theories and bureaucratic inertia … along with, of course, political self-interest and all the usual, cruddy little human sins that, added together, make so many of the world’s messes.
That being said, the effect of the welfare system on people whose history has rendered them particularly vulnerable is worth being examined under a bright, hot, glaring spot-light…and named “failure” and “disaster” loudly and persistently.
I think of “institutional racism” somewhat differently… it’s not that institutions are racist now. It’s that the effects of the severe, violent racism of the past are still being felt.
I read a study that showed that African American babies have lower birth-weights than white babies, even when other factors like nutrition, education, income and so on are controlled-for. The authors of the study theorized that, since stress is known to affect the health of a developing fetus in many ways, including low-birth-weight, and that the effect is known to persist into the next generation(s), it is possible that even babies born into wealthy black families are still subject to the residual effects of their severely-stressed grandmothers and great-grandmothers.
A similar phenomenon was noted in Holland after the war—babies born after liberation tended to be lower birth weight and have other health effects…and when they grew up and had their own children, they also demonstrated higher rates of various problems known to be associated with stress.
My guess would be that elements of a sub-culture could also be formed under conditions of extreme stress, and persist even after the stressor has been removed. (PTSD works this way in individuals, and a culture with a large number of people who have PTSD would tend to create a PTSD-based culture, for example).
Or it is merely yet another difference between the races.
It could be, I guess. But then it should show up in all black people, rather than only American ones, right? Especially since black Americans generally have a pretty good dollop of white American in them. (And, as I said, similar things happen in very stressed white populations too, which would argue against it being race-specific.
I did a little digging, and it is not simple.
For example:
Also see
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/103/1/e5.full
and
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3940304
Here’s the thing – that very same welfare/food stamp/ medicaid (well, maybe not medicaid) has contributed to the eradication of poverty in America.
Yes. Poverty is a condition characterized by death due to: Malnutrition, Exposure, and Infectious disease. (Not, by the way, by a meaningless income statistic) Poverty no longer exists in the US.
I say declare victory in the war on poverty and move on.
Low birth weight was significantly less frequent among whites than among blacks. However, this overall finding masked substantial variation among blacks, determined by maternal nativity and the income level of the community in which they lived. In fact, Caribbean- and African-born black mothers had birth outcomes generally similar to and, in poor communities, even more favorable than those for whites.
In the article I read (which of course, I’ll never be able to find, but anyway) the fact that Caribbean and African-born black mothers had similar birth outcomes to whites, even when they lived in poor communities, was taken as an indicator that black American babies are, for some reason other than just “blackness” vulnerable to a poor start in life. Again, there could be lots of reasons for this. I think the long term effects of chronic stress might be one of them.
I spend a lot of time informally studying the effects of stress on human beings (since trying to mitigate those effects is part of my function as a chaplain) and the list of illnesses known to be associated with, even caused by, chronic stress are the same list of illnesses that are endemic in black communities. Now, this could be due to “racism” in the sense that present-day white racists’ behaviors directly creates stress for black people…or it could be due to the various unpleasant aspects of life in the ghetto…except that they show up at higher rates in Af-Am folk who aren’t living in the ghetto. (Statistically speaking, Michelle Obama is at higher risk for contracting diabetes than I am, despite being wealthier and more educated not to mention a lot more interested in good nutrition!).
Instead, I think that the undoubted, explicit racism of the past created extraordinarily stressful situations in which generations of black people were forced to live. It would be very strange if a human culture—that amalgam of stories, ideas, points of view, ways of explaining the world and meeting its sufferings—were not affected by such an awful history and I think it would be strange if the human bodies weren’t affected too—with the two effects interacting. Hence, “PTSD Culture.”
The altered neurochemistry of stress can change the way the mother’s body processes and passes along nutrients to her developing fetus (low birth weight?) . The rush of adrenaline, cortisol and other neurotransmitters/hormones associated with stress can pass across a traumatized mother’s placenta and alter the way the baby’s body then responds to those neurotransmitters when independently stressed. Run that same scenario over multiple generations, and the high incidence of diabetes, hypertension, heart disease and so on aren’t so surprising. And maybe not low birthweight, either?
But I’m definitely theorizing well above my pay-grade here.
Here’s the thing – that very same welfare/food stamp/ medicaid (well, maybe not medicaid) has contributed to the eradication of poverty in America.
Yes. Poverty is a condition characterized by death due to: Malnutrition, Exposure, and Infectious disease. (Not, by the way, by a meaningless income statistic) Poverty no longer exists in the US.
I say declare victory in the war on poverty and move on.
Poverty certainly aint what it used to be. I think we’re due for a re-think and a re-do. Or, if not now, when? I remember John McWhorter saying “Affirmative action was a good thing. Necessary. But at some point, it will surely become unnecessary…so, um, when is that going to happen?” One of those “a-hah” moments in my life as a young liberal…