Showing posts with label Charlottesville. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlottesville. Show all posts

Friday, 6 October 2017

Guns are the Problem

courtesy @cagle.com
President Trump doesn’t think that this is the time to talk about gun control. If not following the worst gun massacre in America’s history I wonder when is. It may not be clear to Donald Trump but the National Rifle Association is not as interested in the welfare of American citizens as its lobbyists would like us to believe. The over thirty thousand people killed by guns in the last year suggests that something isn’t right. And it is possible that gun possession might be at the heart of the problem.

The American people have come to believe that constitutionally guaranteed rights are inalienable. I think the continued espousal of the second amendment rights means it’s time to challenge that notion. The second amendment was meant for a time when America was made up of isolated and unprotected settlements. The Wild West was a desperate time, it was every man for himself, and clearly gender equality was inconceivable. However, in the 21st century there is no rational reason to bear arms routinely. There might be a rational to take up arms in self defence but then one would have to be under threat. To be under that kind of threat one would have to be living in a failed state or a complete collapse of law and order.

There remain serious questions about the justification for not having more rigorous control of gun ownership. However, the real issue that is probably even more concerning is the mentality that drives Americans to believe individual gun ownership is required to ensure their personal safety and overall wellbeing. The idea that guns are needed to protect a way of life seems so completely out of step with modern day sensibilities. There is little or no evidence to suggest that even a significant number of people have required a gun for any form of self defence. Nor can it be said that open carry policies create anything other than an atmosphere of heightened fear and anxiety. It does appear that at this point in time gun ownership has created a less safe and more dangerous environment for all law abiding citizens.

Relaxed gun control regulation has led to the adoption of related policies  that have created an unsafe environment. ‘Open carry’ policies seem a clear provocation to aggression and intimidation. ‘Stand your ground’ policies certainly hark back to lawless frontier times. It almost appeals to some sort of wild eyed savagery that is reminiscent of prehistoric times. Access to semi automatic weapons is hardly a proportional response to a desire for self protection. It all comes down to a circular argument justifying gun ownership by citing protection against criminal entities. However, criminals are so well armed because of the free access to guns, legal or otherwise. This means it’s harder for law enforcement to contain criminal violence therefore making it necessary for individuals to own weapons to protect themselves.

An inalienable right should be one that is required for sustaining individual life and dignity; as well as protecting social order. Gun ownership in modern times cannot be said to meet that standard. The mentality that puts gun ownership above a right to life is one which suggests a slide towards stateless lawlessness. The onus for law enforcement and protection of liberty cannot be solely down to individual perception of safety. For as long as it isn’t possible to guarantee that owners of guns will use them responsibly there is a need to change the mindset that everyone should be entitled to own a gun. The enjoyment of shooting cannot override the threat of innocent people being shot and murdered without provocation.

Wednesday, 30 August 2017

Nothing Right About Race Hate

Courtesy New York Times
The pursuit of racial purity didn't work out for the nazis in 20th century Germany, even at a time when the most liberal nations advocated it. So why do some people imagine it can work now in the 21st century? Given that most nations' origins involve quite a pool of nationalities the idea of racial purity is really just jingoistic pandering to a disaffected underclass. Unfortunately it has set out to target disadvantaged minorities and is becoming successful in further marginalising them. 

Neither Christian dogma nor scientific evidence support the idea of racial purity. Jesus Christ advocated loving your neighbour as much as yourself and turning other cheek to provocation. So there is no basis for subjugation of other races or religions based on Christianity. Targeting other religions is distinctly unchristian. In science social genetics demands that for survival a gene pool must be diversified. This is an essential element to the survival of all species. Continuous interbreeding will lead to weakness, mutations and extinction.

It is not possible to enjoy harmony in personal relationships whilst wishing for a society that will thrive on exclusion and separation. It takes a particularly warped mentality to want to see others undermine and subjugate others. Denying some groups their rightful place in society only serves to create a more unstable and unsafe society for all. It also removes any moral legitimacy to calls for groups to integrate or be more patriotic.

Encouraging free speech is an important part of maintaining personal and social freedoms. However, society cannot continue to be Finding tolerant of hate speech and racially motivated aggression. Demonstrations intended to intimidate and denigrate other people will inevitably spawn resistance movements. On such emotionally charged issues it is just a matter of time before they provoke violence. Prejudiced and racist speech don't advance the development of new perspectives on dealing with inequality and improving social safety or harmony.

The true essence of national pride is creating a nation and consciousness where all citizens have a place irrespective of colour, creed or capability. Ensuring that there is an acceptable place for them and making sure they are accepted as partners in progress. That requires recognising and acknowledging historical and current inequalities. It also involves making reparations and accommodations in each case.