Light/Breezes

Light/Breezes
SUNRISE AT DEATH VALLEY-Photo by Tom Cochrun

Monday, December 17, 2012

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO?

BUT FIRST, THESE ITEMS
    Television news producers called it a false lead-that headline in yellow gold above, a case in point. Get your attention with it, but do another story or two first.  Sometimes because the headline story wasn't ready, perhaps a technical issue, or simply to make you wait through earlier info.
     HISTORY TELLS US THIS IS A GREAT DAY
  This photo and an accompanying letter has been passed down through our family since the 1940's.  More than once it was a topic of a school essay or report.
    Orville Wright, who with his brother Wilbur created the age of air travel, is a cousin. It was on this day at Kill Devil Hill, North Carolina the Ohio brothers alternated flying for the first time, as captured in the photo.  Orville's letter of May 2, 1945, to a relative genealogist verified her research that our family lines joined with Edmund Freeman, born in 1590 in England.  He came to Boston in 1635. His research and hers were consistent. The Freemans, Booths and Jones-part of the English line were my father's mother's lineage.
     I remember the night my father and I drove to cousin Rhea's home to see her massive genealogical charts and I can still remember her great excitement at making the Wright Brothers connection, some ten years prior to our visit.  It was a big deal in the family.  
DICKEN'S BIG HIT
    The Charles Dicken's classic A Christmas Carol made its first appearance on this day in 1843.  I loved it from the first telling by an English uncle and in my later first reading from an old English illustrated copy.  I've seen it staged more times than I can remember and assume by now it has become part of my bones.
     The best Scrooge I've seen, and in fact some of the best staging ever, was the Tom Haas adaptation performed for years at the IRT in Indianapolis.  I'm drawing a blank, if you can remember the fine Rep actor who played Scrooge several times at IRT, let me know, please.  


WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO?
    That was the best question to come from the hours of coverage and reportage on the Newtown tragedy. America has been through this too many times.  As always we resolve to something.  We do nothing and politics always intrudes.
      As I have posted previously I've covered this sort of violence and wrote and directed a documentary which dealt with the topic.
     I am a firm advocate of the Bill of Rights, but I wonder if there isn't some way to develop a standard that closely approximates the type of fire arm the writers of the Second Amendment would approve.  
    I think a good case is made the Second is focused on the right of people to keep and bear arms only as a means to organize a regulated militia for their defense. It is not about keeping specific firepower.
   Clearly the firearms of 1791 were less sophisticated, but couldn't there be a way to equate what was available and in use in those days, and bring the standard forward to include modern technology, but draw the line some place? If self defense is an operating principle then some of the weapons available today clearly go beyond that.  Automatic weapons are meant to kill, rapidly, efficiently.  Anyone who tells you otherwise is a fool and or apologist.  Assault rifles are meant to be used as tools of war and to kill.  
    I wonder what James Madison, George Mason, Patrick Henry and Alexander Hamilton would think.  How would those writers of the Second Amendment react to Newtown, or Aurora, or Columbine, or etc, etc, etc.?
    Can't we find a way to define classes of weapons, or ways to categorize what is consistent with being able to mount a militia?  Though I confess those who are overly obsessed with being able to create a militia seem a little shaky themselves.
    I don't profess an answer, but the question needs to be
answered.  What are we going to do about it?
See you down the trail.

8 comments:

  1. An ad for the Bushmaster .223 has a picture of the rifle,the copy line:

    CONSIDER YOUR MAN CARD REISSUED!

    I think that aswers your question.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Which Question, Jager?

    Go to today's (Mon) TheView.com and view the guest psychiatrist explaining it is not so much the guns [tho they are central] but the understandings in our society. Let Dr. Walner explain it best. It was enlightening. -w-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question of assault style weapons, huge magazines for ammo, the selling of weapons designed for tactical situations. The Bushmaster ad is all aout fantasies and that's the way they are marketed.

      The thought that if people in the theater in Aroura were armed they could have killed the gunman or that arming teachers is a good idea is nuts. The father of one of my students is an FBI agent and spent part of his career on the SWAT and rapid response teams, he thinks the fact weapons like this are available is insane.

      A few weeks after the Colorado killings a "concealed carry" doofus in Nevada dropped his gun in a movie theater and shot himself in the ass. Didn't have the safety on...a responsible gun owner, uh huh.

      The Bushmaster and all assault weapons are designed to do one thing, kill people and they are very effective as we learned on Friday. If Lanza's "gun enthusiast" mother was smart enough to keep her collection of high powered weapons where her disturbed son couldn't get his hands on them, she'd still be alive as well of the rest his the victims.

      Delete
  3. Dale and I watched A Christmas Carol last night and Scrooge was played by George C. Scott of Patton fame. We thought he did a good job.
    I am in favor of reasonable gun control. That is to say, registration, background checks and limiting magazine capacities etc but I still say it is people who murder other people not guns. Over restriction will mean that only criminals will get guns. Don't forget I am a retired cop with a few six shooters and a couple of nine shooters around. If push comes to shove I will still stand up against the forces of evil if the situation presents itself. In the meantime I will depend on God to protect us from the evil one.

    ReplyDelete
  4. While there is a need for additional gun control regulations, the greater need is for strict and consistent enforcement of existing gun control laws. Still, even then, guns and other weapons will find their way into the hands of individuals whom should not have them. The real issue is how do we fix the desperate broken souls whom are driven to commit these horrendous, heinous acts. A friend of mine expressed his belief that these events are the work of the devil, preying on the dead souls of individuals alienated from their families and mankind, desensitized by the violence and depravity surrounding their lives. The real question is how do we redeem these lost souls and bring them and ourselves back towards the Light.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why in hell does everybody forget the opening clauses of the 2nd 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."

    Individuals purchasing, and in some cases hoarding, firearms of any kind HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A WELL-REGULATED MILITIA. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY KIND OF MILITIA. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE. WHY IS THIS NOT A PART OF THE DISCUSSION AMONG OUR ELECTED POLITICIANS?

    The discussion about the legality of guns should BEGIN there.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That poster for the Brady campaign is so powerful. Like Obama said we must do better.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I own no guns; haven't even had a hunting weapon for over 20 years. Gun control is easy to call for. The root problem is mental illness. Tighter regulations on guns is fine. That is a first step. Diagnosing and properly treating the mentally ill is so very, very important. Take away assault weapons and a mentally ill person will find another way to harm innocent people. Do we next outlaw knives, tire irons and tree branches fashioned into clubs?

    On to A Christmas Carol -

    The other evening I watched A Carol For Another Time, an adaptation of the Dickens classic. Written by Rod Serling and directed by Joseph Mancowitz, it was a masterful presentation. Sterling Hayden, Robert Shaw and Peter Sellers were at the top of their game. A Carol for Another Time aired on TV in 1964. It was not seen on TV again until the other evening on TCM. Part Orwell and part Twilight Zone, it held my attention so much that I did not move one inch as I watched it. If it re-appears on TCM, I highly recommend it.

    Foster

    ReplyDelete