Plausible distractor: gun control, contemporary culture, and school shootings

Screen Shot 2018-02-16 at 10.49.51 PM

Many or most, if not all, of my readers will be aware that there was a mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on Wednesday, February 14, 2018, which resulted in 17 deaths and wounded 14 others. I shall not here identify the perpetrator, who appears to be a deeply disturbed and sinister young male – I certainly will not dignify him with the title “man.”

It has not taken long for the left-wing media – following Rahm Emanuel’s infamous dictum “never let a good crisis go to waste” – to politicize this latest tragedy, and use it as the latest argument in favor of stripping Americans of our God-given and Constitutionally-guaranteed right to defend ourselves. The irony in that will not be lost on those who have not succumbed to leftist ideological indoctrination.

Fortunately, not everyone has, and a good friend of mine posted the above on Facebook. I shared it, with a few added points which I reproduce here:

  1. Automatic weapons were available to civilians for a brief period following the First World War, and prior to the National Firearms Act of 1934, after which they were and are NOT available to anyone who is not the holder of a Class III Firearms License – which is very hard to get, and requires extensive background checks and monitoring (and expense). When they WERE available, use of them in crime was limited to gangsters, which in those days meant organized crime families (which is why they were limited). So “automatic weapons” or “assault weapons” are a non-issue: as regards the civilian population, they do not exist.
  2. And lest you say, “b-b-b-but large-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles…!” let me remind you that the Texas Tower shooting, the first “mass shooting” by modern standards, which occurred in 1966, was committed largely with bolt-action and pump-action firearms.
  3. Let me remind you further that mass shooters are highly motivated individuals, who are unlikely to be deterred by such minor details as lack of availability of their preferred (or any) firearms. The Oklahoma City bomber did not need guns to kill 168 people and injure 680 more. The 9/11 hijackers did not need guns to kill nearly 3,000 people and terrorize a nation, scarring its psyche in ways that still linger. Terrorists in various locations, including New York City last year, have not needed guns to kill large numbers of people by ramming them with vehicles. Someone who is sufficiently determined to cause a massacre will find a way of doing so. And while banning guns may make them think a little harder for a little longer, it’s not going to prevent it; it is going to make things more difficult for law-abiding citizens who want to defend themselves and their families, or use firearms for sporting purposes.
  4. And that “18 school shootings in 45 days” meme that’s making the rounds? That includes eight incidents with no injuries or fatalities, two attempted suicides, one shot fired during the course of a fight, and two others that resulted in a single student being slightly wounded. And that is according to records found at “Everytown for Gun Safety,” Michael Bloomburg’s anti-gun advocacy group, which uses a very lenient (one could argue, highly misleading) standard: “any time a firearm discharges a live round inside a school building or on a school campus or grounds,” it counts as a school shooting, regardless of whether or not the shooting results in injury or death. While any and all of these are regrettable, placing them in the same category as what happened in Florida is disingenuous, to put it mildly.

It is very easy to place the blame for tragic incidents like the recent Florida shooting on firearms. But – although the military is working on autonomous (AI) weapons (a concerning development, but tangential to this) – no firearm currently available to civilians is capable of engaging a target on its own. It requires a human being to make that decision and act on it.

modal-4_heritage_rifle_club
The 1931 girls’ rifle team outside Huntington High School, Huntington, New York.

In the 1950s and 60s, it was commonplace for students to bring firearms to school, for hunting purposes, often leaving them plainly visible in gun-racks in their pickups on the parking lot, or sometimes keeping them in their lockers. Yet there were no school shootings. During the same period (and for decades prior), high-school shooting teams were common. Again, no school shootings. Teenaged students even carried firearms on public buses and trolleys, on their way from their homes (or schools!) to the outskirts of town to hunt. Again, no shootings resulted.

The issue is not a gun issue. That’s an obvious but a misleading target – a “plausible distractor,” in testing terms. The issue is a societal and cultural issue, and a moral issue. It is a whole lot easier to say “ban guns” than it is to wrestle seriously with where we, as a culture, might have been going wrong – might be continuing to go wrong. And there is no single answer to that question, either; it is almost certainly a multiplicity of wrong steps, in a variety of areas.

These include, but are not limited to, the failures of parenting Sandy mentions, plus breakdown of stable family units in general, the rise of media and recreational opportunities (including music, videos or other visual media, the video gaming Sandy mentioned, etc.) that glorify amoral or immoral violence while minimizing its consequences, the breakdown of traditional religious observances and the moral guidelines religion has traditionally provided (see Washington’s Farewell Address), and the breakdown of cultural cohesion – and the stability that provides – in a variety of ways. There are probably many others that I have missed.

And until we seriously and constructively address these issues, the problem will continue. Banning or limiting (any more than they are already limited, which is severely) firearms will not solve it, it will only make things more difficult for law-abiding citizens, and chip further away at our freedom.

P.S. I have seen a number of worthwhile comments come across my newsfeed today. Here is one:

“We have to understand that even if we secure every school to were a mouse couldn’t get entry with a pea-shooter, it’s a band-aid. What then: shopping malls, fast-food restaurants, hospitals? We have a much more fundamental, philosophical and spiritual problem. When was the last time the great works of western philosophy and ethics were taught in our schools? When did we last focus our children on the big questions of the human condition, questions addressed by the great thinkers of Western Civilization? Could it be back in the last days when we had no mass school shootings? Do we really believe we could turn our back on the great projects of Western Civilization and not loose a hold on civil society itself?”

Indeed. To tear a plant up from its roots and not expect it to whither is the height of insanity. And of course, the diminution and marginalization of traditional religious faith – particularly the Judeo-Christian religious tradition – and the moral standards which come from it has played a major role in stripping our society of its moral compass.

And then there was this comment, from a Washington sheriff, interviewed today:

Screen Shot 2018-02-16 at 10.57.05 PM

Here is the video clip, in which he reinforces a lot of what I’ve said, above – only a lot more succinctly:

We have viewed abandoning traditional social and cultural norms, traditional moral values, traditional religious faith, traditional child-rearing practices, and much more, as being “progressive,” and trumpeted this abandonment as great advances in the human experience. But as C.S. Lewis presciently put it,

“We all want progress. But progress means getting nearer to the place where you want to be. And if you have taken a wrong turning then to go forward does not get you any nearer. If you are on the wrong road progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man. There is nothing progressive about being pig-headed and refusing to admit a mistake. And I think if you look at the present state of the world it’s pretty plain that humanity has been making some big mistakes. We’re on the wrong road. And if that is so we must go back. Going back is the quickest way on.”

C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity

Amen.

Advertisements

Men Without Conviction, Churches Without People | George Weigel | First Things

https://d2ipgh48lxx565.cloudfront.net/uploads/article_5a7a50e65befd.jpg?Expires=1520574144&Signature=gQKuuu6oMS5fde28IxsnZ8OyJMprSjALwxtjYlvHWsQX5vP6AngucE-J0I9szUrEceNOxcXner1So-4oMeLAan3c3ktyivLFyoUOr~bodnMFZTlCzKyYcyeMDvex4JF1wRKQikda3lElDk-62g9k0cF1sOeVt5W1W~ZJ-P5XsftkBm-F0Y4~PI2RFQkVZxuXbcfuW04GHB2Dun8Tt4GhsiHCUoQTQSjqmcLK02J1yl6uWCo8qdx8FkiE6bKhryX1dbiLxWMSPyPztPrlwGuD2RXlLwtXXpSbCjuxyyAOYbU6Fhgk~xHMMvjDIHW05L44DYmhFnB8VeASVtOCJunyNg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIN7SVXNLPAOVDKZQ

Source: Men Without Conviction, Churches Without People | George Weigel | First Things

“Christianity is dying in western Europe. There are many reasons for that, including the complicity of many churchmen in the ideological awfulness that turned mid-twentieth-century Europe into a slaughterhouse. But the gospel has power, and those who believe that, and preach it in the conviction that it can transform and ennoble lives, can still get a hearing. Indeed, as post-modernity decomposes into ever more bizarre forms of irrationality, the cleansing, liberating truth of the gospel and the vision of life well lived found in the Beatitudes ought to be a compelling offer. “

“Tips to look after your husband” – hints and suggestions from the 1950s

Tips to look after your husband – 1950

This came across my newsfeed today, to the usual mix of ironic laughter and disparaging comments. I’ve seen it a number of times, and it is invariably greeted by either outrage or guffaws.

But the thing that is lost in both reactions is the fact that most men would treat a woman who was this kind to her husband as an absolute jewel to be cherished, cared for, and loved with passionate devotion. The few who would not, are jerks who would continue to be jerks no matter what the woman did.

Just sayin’…!

(Of course, the sad economic reality, now, is that this sort of a situation is often simply not possible in today’s world – in which both partners must usually work outside the home in order to financially support the household – even if both parties wanted it. But that is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish………)

“It’s too late for Germany”: German activist admits she got it wrong on immigration

RebeccaSommer

“It’s too late for Germany”: German activist and advocate admits she got it wrong on immigration, plans to emigrate to Poland

Source: “It’s too late for Germany” | Diversity Macht Frei

This young German woman, Rebecca Sommer, founded an NGO dedicated to promoting, encouraging, and assisting Angela Merkel’s “open borders” policy that let literally hundreds of thousands of supposed “refugees,” most of them from Middle Eastern and African nations, into Germany.

Now – rather belatedly! – she has seen the error of her ways… and plans to relocate to Poland, which is staunch in its opposition to open borders, noting, “If Poland and Hungary do not give in on this question, you could become countries that some Germans and French will flee to. You could become islands of stability in Europe.”

She writes,

“At that time [2012-2015] I wanted to help everyone and truly believed that all these people were fleeing hell and were in a state of complete distress,” the German activist explained in an article published by the conservative Polish weekly Do Rzeczy on 15 January, discussing how she woke up to reality…

”I thought their medieval view was going to change with time…but after having seen these situations occur repeatedly and observing what was happening around me, as a volunteer, I have had to recognise that the Muslim refugees have grown up with values that are totally different, they have undergone brainwashing from childhood on and are indoctrinated by Islam and absolutely do not intend to adopt our values. Worse, they regard we infidels with disdain and arrogance.

“It was a jarring perception when I noticed that these people I had helped, who were eating, drinking, dancing and laughing with me, who didn’t pray, who didn’t go to the mosque, who didn’t respect Ramadan, who made fun of religion and deeply religious people, called me ‘the stupid German whore’ when they were eating my food and were in my garden.”

Furthermore,

Rebecca Sommer says she is not an isolated case, that many other volunteers also came ultimately to have the same perception and that there are now far fewer volunteers ready to work with the new arrivals today in Germany. She also acknowledges that, through their numbers, these Muslim immigrants pose a threat to the German way of life, and that this will get worse with family reunification.

Whether or not it is truly “too late” for Germany remains to be seen. But it is indeed very late! And I hope and pray that the rest of the West, including the United States, will listen and learn from this individual’s account of the situation there, so that we do not repeat the same mistakes.

NYC School Cancels Father-Daughter Dance to Comply With New Gender Guidelines | Fox News Insider

https://i2.wp.com/media.breitbart.com/media/2017/03/Father-Daughter-Dance-AP-640x480.jpg

Source: NYC School Cancels Father-Daughter Dance to Comply With New Gender Guidelines | Fox News Insider

This came across my newsfeed, with the following excellent comment from one of my friends on Facebook, Lutheran (Missouri Synod) pastor, Pater Larry Beane:

“This is where ‘cultural secession’ comes in. Parents can opt out of the school’s and state’s approach to this and organize their own event. Communities used to do this kind of thing all the time. This is an example of what Tony Esolen calls for in “Out of the Ashes.” This is a golden opportunity to pioneer a new cultural paradigm.

Don’t just complain; fight back by ignoring the school and doing what you want. We’ve surrendered too much of our lives and sense of community to the government out of convenience. [emphasis added] Since when do DOE bureaucrats tell us all how to live? We don’t need them, and speaking of education, they need to learn that reality.

And there is always #homeschool as the ultimate act of defiance.”

And yes, I know not every daughter has a father available. That could be easily allowed for by including “grandfathers or other ‘father figures,'” rather than canceling the dance entirely. This is pandering to the concerns of a small slice of society by disrespecting one of the most key elements in human culture and society, the father-daughter bond. Unacceptable!

And Pater Beane is right: communities – by which I mean not just or even primarily geographical, but cultural – need to combat this by setting up parallel structures and events, not simply meekly acceding to the currently-dominant paradigm, which despite trumpeting “diversity” and “inclusion” is in fact deeply and intrinsically limiting, coercive, and enforcing of sameness.

Remember the words often attributed to Edmund Burke, that

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

John Stuart Mills on free institutions in a multicultural society | Wrath of Gnon

“Free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow-feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion, necessary to the working of representative government, cannot exist.”

Source: WrathOfGnon : Photo

Somewhat ironic, in light of current events, that a philosopher known as “one of the most influential thinkers in the history of liberalism” would say something like this! The full text that this is taken from follows:

“Where the sentiment of nationality exists in any force, there is a primâ facie case for uniting all the members of the nationality under the same government, and a government to themselves apart. This is merely saying that the question of government ought to be decided by the governed. One hardly knows what any division of the human race should be free to do, if not to determine, with which of the various collective bodies of human beings they choose to associate themselves.”

I agree with him, and that is precisely the cause that both our Founders, and our Confederate forebears (for those of us in the U.S.), fought so bravely and nobly to defend! But Mills goes on:

“But, when a people are ripe for free institutions, there is a still more vital consideration. Free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow-feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion, necessary to the working of representative government, cannot exist. The influences which form opinions and decide political acts, are different in the different sections of the country. An altogether different set of leaders have the confidence of one part of the country and of another. The same books, newspapers, pamphlets, speeches, do not reach them. One section does not know what opinions, or what instigations, are circulating in another.”

Or, in this “information age,” one may have the opportunity to know, but instead tends to gravitate – understandably – toward those sources with whom one is in sympathy, or vice-versa: it is becoming increasingly rare for the same people to, say, watch Fox News and listen to NPR, still less read both HuffPost and Breitbart! And I have a great deal of empathy for this; some “news” sources are becoming increasingly difficult for me to stomach, myself. The problem, of course, is that this increases the fragmentation and polarization:

“The same incidents, the same acts, the same system of government, affect them in different ways; and each fears more injury to itself from the other nationalities, than from the common arbiter, the state. Their mutual antipathies are generally much stronger than jealousy of the government. That any one of them feels aggrieved by the policy of the common ruler, is sufficient to determine another to support that policy. Even if all are aggrieved, none feel that they can rely on the others for fidelity in a joint resistance; the strength of none is sufficient to resist alone, and each may reasonably think that it consults its own advantage most by bidding for the favour of the government against the rest.”

— John Stuart Mill, 1861

Methinks our contemporary “liberals” ought, perhaps, to read a bit more Mills! Or maybe they’ve read too much, and took this (like Orwell’s 1984) not as a warning, but a blueprint.

In any case, if that’s not a good (if disheartening) description of our present situation, I don’t know what is. But of course, the break-up of society into a people apart, isolated, entirely lacking in “fellow-feeling,” seems to be part of the Leftist agenda, leaving us isolated and vulnerable, precisely as Mills suggests. If so, importing large numbers of disparate peoples from disparate nations, regions, and cultures seems like a very effective way to disrupt and destabilize the host culture… 😡