The latest ugliness of assault and murder against a group of people–the attack at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino CA–results in more calls for reasonable gun control by many.
But here’s the deal. No one in the Republican leadership–Congress or the Presidential candidates–is saying anything about control. They express sympathy for the community, and those who grieve the loss of loved ones, but not a word about doing something to stem the tide.
And you know what is really outrageous? Congress has not even given terror-fighting agencies the authority to deny guns to those on the nation’s no-fly list. What’s more, they have refused for decades to put any funding into research on gun violence.
That’s the power of the gun lobby, particularly the NRA (National Rifle Association). They claim to represent gun owners and hunters. I have known a lot of hunters in my lifetime, and I feel certain that most of them would agree that denying guns to people our government, for security reasons, doesn’t let fly around the country is a reasonable measure. And I believe most of them would think that research into ways to deal with, and respond to, gun violence is a reasonable measure.
But the NRA and others have terrorized the GOP, and some Democrats, into thinking that any departure from gun lobby orthodoxy is political suicide. I want to blame the NRA because they bear great responsibility.
But the ones I really blame are the spineless legislators and leaders who refuse to act, again and again, in the face of rising violence through the ready availability of hand guns and assault rifles. There are so many different types of people who commit these horrific acts–mentally unstable, angry religious extremists, sullen former spouses and employees, abortion haters–but they all have one thing in common.They can easily get their hands on guns. Guns are the common denominator. In the case of San Bernardino, these included assault weapons.
Why can anyone other than police and soldiers get access to assault rifles? Why is everyone who wants to buy a gun not subject to a background check? Such checks will not prevent law-abiding people from getting guns, but they can help make sure others do not.
I don’t like to call people names, and certainly not whole groups of people. So I won’t use a label on these leaders who fail to lead, but I will name their behavior: cowardice.
I don’t know how many of them actually own guns, or use them, but what I see are people who are supposed to be out front leading who are, instead, standing behind cover provided by the political guns of the NRA.
In my book, that’s cowardice.
How many more of these horrific situations–how many more school children, college students, public employees (including police of course), people with developmental disabilities (as in San Bernardino), ordinary citizens, mothers and fathers, will we have to lose before they find their spines?
I am praying that one of them, just one, breaks ranks and moves from cowardice into bravery–maybe even acting with courage and conviction like the police officers and emergency personnel, and many civilians who reach out to help, who have to respond when yet another gun-toting killer strikes.
That’s called leadership.
The Naked Theologian--open heart, open mind, open body 
A four year old boy was mauled to death by four dogs in Detroit Wednesday December and., and a 22 year old woman in Port Huron Michigan dies today after being mauled by a dog. I’m waiting for Obama to announce a dog control Executive order to kill all dogs.
Every country that has instated gun control ( Germany under Hitler the most outstanding) has succumbed to a dictator. Compare the crime and murder rate in Huston Texas with little or no gun control to Chicago with strong gun control. The bad guys live in fear of an armed populace. Guns don’t kill people kill.
We have gun control here in Canada and have never succumbed to a dictator. Another example is Great Britain, whose Police Officers do not even carry guns. They have not succumbed to a dictator either. Dogs are not meant to kill – although unfortunately they do sometimes. Electric lines are not meant to kill – although they do sometimes. Cars are not made to kill – although they do sometimes. Guns on the other hand ARE meant to kill – and they do so more often than not! People need to get a drivers licence to drive a car. And they need to register their car as well. Nobody complains about that. So clearly guns could be better controlled just like cars and drivers are controlled 😉
Well put, Jade. Better than my response. Thank you.
Canada, England, France are not dicatatorships, and never have been and show no signs of going that way any time soon. But they do have gun control. Canada may show us the way best, because of the large expanses of open land and wilderness and lots of hunting.
And the analogy with dogs does not work. First, because the number of people who die from dog bites is very different. Second, we do hold the owner of the dog responsible and dog licenses can be denied to owners who are irresponsible and their dogs taken away.
I am not suggesting that all guns be outlawed or only allowed to police and soldiers. But there can be limits. And certainly to run a background check is no harm to a responsible citizen.
Third,
Good Read! We do not have these types of incidents up here in Canada precisely because we have seen leadership from our politicians on gun control. People can still hunt and people can still defend themselves from the King or Queen of England without everybody needing to have a semi-automatic gun! Again, this was an excellent read!
Thank you for writing, and for mentioning Canada. An excellent example of how reasonable regulation works.
And thank you for your blog, which I follow and enjoy. I will soon be starting another blog on sex and spirit, and part of that will deal with nudity and naturism and its value. Thank you for your witness (and your pictures, too!).