web analytics
April 19, 2014 / 19 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘NRA’

The Shadow of the Gun

Sunday, March 17th, 2013

Every day another one of the stories comes in. A teacher panicked by a plastic gun, an army man on a cupcake, a t-shirt, a pop tart chewed into the shape of a gun or a finger gun hits the panic button. Suspensions and lectures quickly follow as the latest threat to the gun-free zone, usually in the form of a little boy, is tackled to the ground and lectured to within an inch of his life.

Tellingly these incidents rarely take place in the inner city schools where teenage gang members walk through metal detectors at the start of the day. The safety officers in those schools, big weary men with eyes that look everywhere at once, don’t waste their time on toys. Not unless those toys are full-size, painted black and filed down to look like real guns.

It’s usually the schools where a shooting is wholly unlikely; where gun violence is not a daily reality, but an unlikely convergence of horror, that institutional vigilance hits an irrational peak as every school imagines that it could be the next Columbine or the next Sandy Hook.

The NRA’s initial proposal of armed school guards was met with an irrational chorus of protests. More guns aren’t the answer, was the cry. And the leading crier was the White House’s expert skeet shooter. In a country where law enforcement is heavily armed and gunmen are stopped by gunmen in uniforms, a strange Swedenization had set in. The problem was not the man, it was the gun. Get rid of the guns and you stop the killing. Schools across the country are banning not the gun, but the idea of the gun. It is a conceptual prohibition that is meant to push away the threat of gun violence by eliminating any mention of the G word. Gun-free zones mean places where guns cannot be mentioned, depicted or even symbolized as if the refusal to concede the existence of a firearm will eliminate the threat of it being used on the premises.

This isn’t a precautionary attitude, but a pacifist one. Gun horror is not a productive emotion, but learned helplessness disguised as moral superiority. Rather than teaching children to hate killers, schools are instead teaching them to hate guns. And reducing murders to instruments rather than morals, children are left with no sense of right and wrong, only an instinctive horror of violence.

Pacifists have always demonized armies rather than invaders. During WWI they obsessed over gas. During WWII, it was the bomber and the tank. During the Cold War they demonized nuclear weapons. In the War on Terror, they target the drone. By dealing with the object rather than the subject, they are able to avoid the question of moral responsibility. Rather than hold the Nazis, Communists or Islamists accountable for their actions, they extended a blanket condemnation over the weapons-wielders.

The American G.I. was just as bad as the S.S. man or the Kamikaze pilot or the Political Commissar. The only difference was in who had the bigger guns. And the one with the bigger guns, was also the most to blame.

That same attitude can be seen today when Israel is blamed for every battle with Islamic terrorists because it has the bigger guns. Rather than evaluating the nature of a conflict and the values of both sides, the pacifists score every war based on firepower.

While the left likes to indulge in stereotypes of gun-toting rednecks and bomb-brandishing generals, the only people who judge the worth of a man by his weapon are the pacifists, the gun-fearers and gun-hiders who mythologize weapons as black agents of evil.

To believe that there is no such thing as constructive violence is to reject free will. Without accepting the necessity of constructive violence, there is no good and evil, only armed men and unarmed men. Without constructive violence, two boys playing cops and robbers in the schoolyard are not acting out a childish morality play, they are becoming desensitized to murder, and without it a child with a pop tart chewed into the shape of a gun is on the way to being a school shooter.

If there is no such thing as constructive violence, then the police officer is not the solution to crime, he is part of the cycle of violence. And if that cycle of violence does not begin with a man choosing to use a gun for good or evil, then it must begin with the gun. The man becomes the object and the gun becomes the subject. American ICBMs become just as bad as Russian ballistic missiles. An Israeli soldier killing a suicide bomber is just as bad as the terrorist. There are no good guys with guns. To have a gun is to be the bad guy.

For decades the gun-control lobby has brandished assault rifles at press conferences and spent more time describing their killing power than their manufacturers have. The rifle has been upgraded to the assault rifle and now, in the latest Orwellian vernacular used by the White House and the entire media pyramid beneath it, weapons of war.

The dreaded assault rifle or weapon of war or killing machine of mass death actually kills rather few Americans. The average shooter doesn’t bring an AR-15 to a Chicago gangland dispute. Despite the number of these weapons in private hands, most of the killing takes place with handguns in the same parts of the country where large amounts of illegal drugs are sold, women trafficked and stores robbed.

Shootings in America are not caused by guns, they are caused by crime. Guns really do not walk off store shelves and go on killing sprees. That’s what criminals are for. But the trouble with that discussion is that it takes us into moral territory. Talking about guns is easy, talking about souls is not. If guns don’t kill people, then we have to ask the difficult question of what does kill people.

It’s a bigger question than just Adam Lanza pulling the trigger in a classroom full of children. It is a big question that encompasses the Nazi gas chambers and the Soviet gulags, the Rape of Nanking and September 11. It is a question as big as all of human history.

Pacifists once used to be able to address such questions, but they have become obsessed with the technology of violence, rather than the spiritual origin of violence. And the technology of violence is largely beside the point. Guns do not motivate people to kill. Nor do they represent that much of a quantum increase in death.

Some of history’s worst massacres happened long before firearms became useful for more than scaring off peasants. The heavily armed Americans of the 50s had lower per capita murder rates than medieval London. It isn’t the gun that makes the killer. It’s not the hand that kills, but the mind.

The gun-free society has little interest in individuals. Its technocratic philosopher-kings want big and comprehensive solutions. Their answer to gun violence is to feed a horror of guns. Their answer to obesity is to ban sodas. Their solutions invariably miss the point by treating people like objects and objects like people.

In the Middle Ages, rats were put on trial for eating crops. Today we put guns on trial for killing people. The left has tried to reduce people to economics, to class and then race, gender and sexual orientation. It has done its best to reduce people to the sum of their parts and then to tinker with those parts and it has failed badly. The best testimony of its profound spiritual failure is that the worst pockets of gun violence are in urban areas that have been under the influence of their sociologists, urban planners, psychologists, social justice activists, community organizers and political rope-pullers for generations. And what have those areas brought forth except malaise, despair, blight and murder?

Banning guns will do as much for those areas as banning drugs did. It is not the shadow of the gun that has fallen over Chicago, but an occlusion of the spirit. Social services have had generations to save the city and they have failed because the technocracy can reach the body, but it cannot reach the soul.

The gun-control activists drew the wrong lesson from Newtown as they drew the wrong lessons from WWII and September 11. The lesson is not that weapons are bad, the lesson is that people in the grip of evil ideas are capable of unimaginable horrors regardless of the tools at their disposal. A single man can kill a classroom full of children with a gun and a few men can kill thousands with a few box cutters. It isn’t the tool that matters. It’s the man.

Unwishing the gun brings us back to the sword. Unwishing the sword brings us back to the spear. Unwishing the spear brings us back to the stone club. And what then? When every weapon that ever existed or will exist is undone, all that remains is the deadliest weapon of all. The mind of man.

The gun, the sword, the spear and the club took countless lives and saved countless lives. Civilization has always balanced on a future made possible by little boys playing cops and robbers and playing with little green army men. They can either grow up to be the protectors of the future or the frightened men who will stand aside and do nothing when they hear the screams begin to come because they have been told that all violence is evil.

Originally published at Sultan Knish.

NY Times’ Kristof: AIPAC and NRA Are Like Pigs

Thursday, January 17th, 2013

Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times columnist for more than a dozen years, has made a name for himself as a defender of social justice causes such as poverty, gender injustice and, in particular, the brutal mass murders that have taken place in Sudan.

Kristof is also well known among strong pro-Israel supporters as a Blame Israel Firster, who rarely misses an opportunity to bash Israel for all problems in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In June, 2010, Kristof wrote a column in the New York Times, “Saving Israel From Itself.”  In 2011 he penned “Is Israel its own Worst Enemy?”  In the latter, he claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s “hard lines on settlements” was like a “national suicide policy.”  According to Kristof, nothing – not terrorism, not suicide bombing, not the slaughter of Jewish babies in their beds – “is more corrosive than Israel’s growth of settlements because they erode hope of a peace agreement in the future.”

M.J. Rosenberg is a former centrist who, over time, become increasingly obsessive and offensive regarding Israel.  At one time Rosenberg worked for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.  After his four year stint at AIPAC, Rosenberg bounced around Washington, D.C. working for various Democratic politicians and later worked as the policy director for the leftist think tank the Israel Policy Forum. Eventually, Rosenberg was hired by the radical left Media Matters for America, a George Soros-funded media attack-dog group whose snout is trained firmly on conservative media.

In early 2012, various writers for Media Matters were criticized for using such offensive terms as “Israel Firster” to describe strongly pro-Israel members of Congress.  The “Israel Firster” appellation implied that those American politicians care more about Israel than they do about the U.S.  Rosenberg was a repeat offender, using the Israel Firster term to attack pro-Israel politicians.

Media Matters came under increasing attack for what some saw as anti-Semitism.  In particular, liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz came out after Media Matters and M.J. Rosenberg with guns ablazing.  Last spring he warned that Media Matters might cost President Obama this election, and urged the president to distance himself from the group.

“Rosenberg was an extremist,” Dershowitz told The Daily Caller. “He didn’t engage in careful, nuanced critiques of Israel, which is fine. He engaged in hyperbole, name-calling. He just hated, hated, hated, with a passion, almost an eroticized passion of anything associated with Israel. He was like a spurned lover — irrational.”

Many agreed Rosenberg had gone too far and he left Media Matters in April, 2012.

But Rosenberg hasn’t learned his lesson.  He is still making remarkably provocative and offensive statements about Israel, and he is still capable of entangling President Obama in his escapades.  As first reported in the Washington Free Beacon on Wednesday, January 16, Kristof re-tweeted one of Rosenberg’s more juvenile and offensive – and there is already quite a low bar – tweet messages:

Rosenberg, who nurses a pathological grudge against the Jewish State, refers to AIPAC as being like a pig, and is crowing about what he sees as well-deserved insults by the president to AIPAC as well as to the National Rifle Association.

Most people understand that Rosenberg is unhinged when it comes to Israel and AIPAC.  Most people – at least those with a public persona – would steer clear of embracing Rosenberg’s effluvia.  But not Nick Kristof.  Oh no, Kristof takes Rosenberg’s “Pig Lobbies” tweet and sends it out to his 1,373,272 Twitter followers, thereby dramatically amplifying the audience for the message. Rosenberg has only 14,918 followers.

Unlike most Twitter users, Kristof does not have the phrase, “retweets do not constitute endorsements” on his profile page. Of course, it’s hard to come to anything but the opposite conclusion in this case.

Gun Appreciation Day Is Coming – Do your Shopping Early

Wednesday, January 16th, 2013

I received an email from the folks at Gun Appreciation Day – which takes place January 19, unless there’s a massacre.

“We’re marching towards Gun Appreciation Day full steam ahead, and already the liberal gun control crowd is using every trick in the book to try and stop us.”

Ah, the liberal gun control crowd, those conniving bastards refusing to be shot on sight by a good old American armed militia, as it is specifically being commanded in the Second Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Supreme Court and I differ on what the above statement means in reality. In my opinion, this is the foundation for a citizen’s army, which is ready to stand up to an invader from overseas or from Canada and Mexico. Should those red coats dare come down into these United States once more, thousands of citizens would swiftly pull their muskets off the wall, grab the bags of fire powder and iron balls, as well as their trusted muzzle loader, and rush off to defend our farms and plantations.

The Supreme Court, on the other hand, decided the same Second Amendment means you can sling an AKA 47 on one shoulder and a bazooka on the other, as long as you can show a library card with your name on it at the counter.

The Gun Appreciation folks are circulating their email around because they need your financial support in the war against liberal haters: “No matter if you can afford $5 or $500, anything and everything will make a difference.”

I don’t appreciate guns. Secure in my masculinity, I have never seen a need for either a sports car or a gun. In boot camp I schlepped around a Belgian FM rifle that had to be cleaned daily, whether I had used it or not. I nicknamed my rifle Ginger—it failed so many inspections, I started to believe those red spots were the result of shame as much as rust.

Ginger weighed a ton and fired a huge caliber bullet, with the recoil of an elephant gun. She was more like those patriotic muskets than the rapid fire monsters lonely American young adults are using these days to reduce our student population.

Yesterday, I also received an email from the National Rifle Association (why am I on all those email lists I have no idea), reacting—quite furiously, by the way—to the passage of a bill titled S. 2230 in New York

Apparently, what bugs the NRA are the undemocratic aspects of the way NY State passes its bills.

Join the club… In NY State we’re not so much a democracy as a plutocracy. The only way you can get rid of a NY State politician is if they become president of the United States, or gets caught doing something unspeakable on Twitter. Otherwise they’re there forever – because we, the majority of the folks in their districts, keep voting them in.

Anyway, the NRA is upset that S. 2230 was “hammered out in a backroom in Albany, was quickly drafted and released 20 minutes prior to the Senate vote. It passed as the clock ticked toward midnight.”

So? Over here we call it standard legislative process…

And what is it that S. 2230 actually does?

It lowers New York’s magazine capacity limit from ten rounds to seven.

That means that after a kid living in his mom’s basement has finished shooting into a crowd of students seven times, he has to pause and reload.

Ah, the humanity…

“It also greatly expands the state’s existing ban on commonly owned semi-automatic firearms, and will require New York gun owners to undergo background checks on ammunition purchases,” bewails the NRA.

If you ask me, this will actually mean great relief for UPS drivers, who won’t have to schlep quite as many cases of “ammo” to Joe’s hut in the woods, right above the high school building.

“These gun control schemes have failed in the past and will have no impact on public safety and crime,” argues the NRA.

According to data from The Violence Policy Center, these are the states with the highest death rates in the nation:

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/yoris-news-clips/gun-appreciation-day-is-coming-do-your-shopping-early/2013/01/16/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: