Contributors

Saturday, December 15, 2012

The Greatest Nation, Impotent Before Madmen

Last month Senate Republicans dragged Susan Rice before a committee, tearing her a new one because Al Qaeda-linked terrorists killed four Americans in a foreign country still rebuilding after civil war. The Republicans were demanding answers because Rice didn't immediately blame terrorists for those murders. She said what she did on advice of the CIA, who was still ascertaining the details and didn't want to alert the bad guys.

For years Republicans have reacted pretty much this same way every time there's been a terrorist attack on Americans. They get irate when suicidal Muslim maniacs murder Americans, and demand immediate retributive action. They have cast aside the rule of law, eliminated habeas corpus, tortured suspects to get information, tapped phones without court-issued warrants, and detained indefinitely anyone they suspect of terrorist intentions, be they foreigners or Americans citizens.

But when suicidal American maniacs commit terroristic acts and kill hundreds of children, movie-goers, shoppers, worshippers, congressional constituents, office workers, and on and on, these same Republicans throw up their hands impotently. They say we are completely powerless to deter suicidal crazy Americans, while at the same time are willing to stop at nothing to deter suicidal crazy Muslims.

Are we, the most powerful nation on earth, completely powerless to stop ourselves from killing each other senselessly? We have spent literally trillions of dollars trying to foil the plans of madmen hiding in mountains and deserts on the other side of the planet, but we can't do a single thing to stop people like Adam Lanza?

Sometimes Republicans do propose solutions, but they are, as they themselves love to say, laughable. If only those teachers had guns, they insist, this tragedy could have been averted. The facts of the incident show what a pale fantasy this is. The shooter's first victim, his mother, was killed with her own gun. Imagine how arming schoolteachers would work, with millions of guns squirreled away in the desk drawers of harried and distracted little old ladies and young women who have zero experience with firearms. Nothing could possibly go wrong there, could it?

And then they trot out that guy in China who just hacked up a bunch of kids at a school. Are we going to outlaw knives too, they demand inquisitorially? But details matter. Technology matters. The death toll from the Chinese knife-wielding maniac: 0. The death toll from the American gun-toting maniac: 26. America wins!

At the time of Revolutionary War weapons technology had evolved very slowly over centuries: the weapons were little different 90 years later during the Civil War. The Brown Bess flintlock musket of the Revolution was not very accurate and had a time-consuming, error-prone, dozen-plus-step reloading process. Misfires were common, powder got wet or slid out of the pan, balls rolled back out of barrels, and musketeers dropped their ramrods and powder horns while fumbling to reload. Even the best infantryman would be hard-pressed to get off more than a couple of shots per minute. The semiautomatic pistols used in Connecticut fire as fast as you can pull the trigger, perhaps two, three or even four rounds per second. You can switch clips that hold 10, 17 or even 33 rounds in seconds.

We already have laws that keep fully automatic weapons out of civilian hands. NRA gun apologists who quote Franklin about safety and freedom and talk about the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution also have to acknowledge that population density and technology have changed drastically in the last 221 years since the Well-Regulated Militia Amendment passed. The semiautomatic weapons the shooter used in Sandy Hook have more carnage potential relative to flintlock muskets than full-auto AK47s have relative to Glock pistols.

Does the president of the NRA, the greatest enabler of on-demand gun purchases in this country, really think Ben Franklin and George Washington would advocate doing absolutely nothing while madmen gun down children in our schools, movie theaters and malls?

The Senate should drag him before a committee and demand some answers.

11 comments:

Larry said...

Nikto, you ignorant slut. Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter, and yet he didn't shoot dozens of innocents. Sometimes I think the only reason Markadelphia keeps your incredibly over-wrought ass around here is to make him look reasonable. Face it, Nikto, you're the Ugly Chick, and you don't even have brains or a nice personality to make up for it.

Anonymous said...

We already have laws that keep fully automatic weapons out of civilian hands.

Nope. Wrong. You through out an assumption that is incorrect without even the awareness that you could be wrong. What else have you thrown out here that is wrong?

Anonymous said...

technology have changed drastically in the last 221 years since the Well-Regulated Militia Amendment passed

That didn't take long...

Puckle gun 1718. Multi-shot revolving cylinder rifle. Three times the firepower of contemporary designs. The founders weren't limited to expecting flintlocks would remain the limit of weapon technology.

Anonymous said...

Imagine how arming schoolteachers would work, with millions of guns squirreled away in the desk drawer

Funny how tens of thousands of police officers aren't leaving their guns in their cruisers glove box or under the seats daily.....

Perhaps you are judging all teachers off of your knowledge of Mark....

harried and distracted little old ladies and young women who have zero experience with firearms.


Oh, I see. You just couldn't imagine that a woman would have the capacity to learn how to safely handle a firearm. How very misogynous of you.

Mark Ward said...

None of you have answered Nikto's question...why the great lengths to stop Al Qaeda but complete impotence to stop school shootings?

Larry said...

Okay, Mr. Professional Fuckwit, I'll play. There's not much we can do and remain a semi-free nation except to undo some of the idiotic restrictions on mental health care and involuntary commitment. Gun banners like Nikto will be about as successful as drug warriors have been at keeping weed, meth, crack, and heroin out of the hands of addicts; or as Prohibition was at banning sales of alcohol. He might succeed at taking guns away from the sane, law-abiding people who are the overwhelming majority, and accomplish nothing at keeping them out of the hands of criminals or madmen (who could just buy them from criminals, duh). Check out the roaring success of Canada's registration system.

Basically, Nikto's question is so fucking stupid it doesn't really deserve an answer, and you know and I know that he is impervious to argument on this as well as many other issues. I would be greatly surprised if he even reads this. As the saying goes, he's a shit-and-run poster, and a highly emotional bitch, to boot.

Mark Ward said...

I think your comment here, Larry, illustrates how out of touch this attitude is after Friday. Things are going to change now and it's time to start thinking outside of the box on all the issues that play into this horrible event. Hurling insults because you don't have any easy solutions and think the government is now going to come and take away your guns isn't helpful.

Now, it may be that you are like juris and think that the things the government does to protect us from terrorism are also wrong (at least he's not a hypocrite) but if you aren't, how can you justify the billions spent on keeping weapons out of the hands of violent extremists abroad but cry impotence here at home?

Anonymous said...

Jesus Mark,

We aren't spending billions to disarm people abroad, we are spending billions to kill them.

Now are you suggesting we should be using predator drones to strike gun stores domestically?

Otherwise both you and N are talking nonsense.

Mark Ward said...

No, I'm suggesting that we spend billions on stopping acts of domestic terrorism. You're assuming that means going after guns and gun store owners. Imagine if Lanza had been a Muslim. What would your response have been?

Anonymous said...

No, N is suggesting going after guns. I'm not assuming anything.

What's the organisational difference between a lone nut and a lone Islamic terrorist?

My response? We don't need to imagine, the Fort Hood shooter is an actual example. You can look back on what my response was then. Of course we'd have to assume that your hero would actually classify any Muslim terrorist as an actual terrorist first.

Gosh, maybe Lanza watched a movie he didn't like and we can excuse his actions based upon that...

Larry said...

Nikto is a gun-banner, period. He has no clue of what he's talking about when it comes to guns and armed citizens, as my first comment addressed. Besides which, killings in schools aren't increasing, nor are spree killings. His "question" was really an ill-informed rant with a question tacked on the end. I gave him exactly as much credit as he deserved.