The Gun Control Discussion

 

I don’t have any answers for this for this. You don’t have any answers for this. My parents don’t have any answers for this. My friends don’t have any answers for this. The Bible doesn’t have any answers for this. Nietzsche doesn’t have any answers for this. My schizophrenic neighbor Steve claims to have answers for everything, but not for this. Democrats don’t have any answers for this. Neither do the Republicans. We have the answer, though. We might have the answer for this. But we, the collective, the group, the inclusive entirety of a mass of individuals striving for a common goal, might be able to solve this problem.

Because it’s a problem. It’s one hell of a problem.

***

The human brain is quite the computer. The primary similarity between our thought-organ and the hunk of machine with which you’re reading this is their communal penchant for binary. Computers only operate in a binary system. Everything on a computer – every color, every letter, every number, every keystroke, every click of the mouse – is converted into a one or a zero, an on or an off. From this initial separation, the computer can operate.

The human brain looks at the world, no matter what its eyes tell it to see, everything is aligned around the arbitrary line separating good and evil. Every idea, before it is process by the brain, gets stuck, by pure instinct alone, with a blaring label: liberal or conservative, cynical or optimistic, right or wrong, light or dark, happy or sad. Every thought is subconsciously biased. “This idea” the brain says, “comes from an Other. Be wary.” “Clearly this person is an Other,” it whispers. Disregard everything he says.” “Oh here’s someone on my side. Let’s listen in…”

Obviously this is the problem with the United States political system. The line is already drawn. I am in the right side and you are in the wrong. All bills written in blue ink I shall be support, while all those in red I shall oppose. We make ourselves comfortable because we know what to believe based solely on the color of the tie worn by the man speaking. Never again will an idea be able sneak up on us, startle us or challenge us.

“How many fingers, Winston?” We’re just as brainwashed as anyone in 1984.

***

In the past few days, I’ve heard, seen and said many dismissive things about the “other” side, the “wrong” side of the gun control debate. A lot of people are saying “you’re only saying that because…” and claiming their rival in the debate is brainwashed by lies. Because there’s no chance that they themselves are just as misinformed as they claim their opponent to be. Worse, there are attacks on “politicizing a tragedy” and using the Newtown murders to advance a particular agenda. Of course these are the conversations (if you can call these shouting matches based entirely off party propaganda conversations) that fill public discourse after the killings in the Aurora movie theater, the killings at Virginia Tech and the massacre at Columbine.

With any hotly contested, heavily political and dangerously ambiguous issue, we all start acting like Danny DeVito in Matilda. We start sentences with rolled eyes, we sneer and snort. Sometimes we chuckle softly to ourselves. We are on the right side and you are on the wrong. And we walk away proudly. We like winning and these debates are just another way to assert our dominance. We don’t realize that the person we just debated feels the same way.

Rarely do we get opportunities to see how horribly this attitude is destroying society. The United States, currently careening towards the edge of a fiscal cliff because of this hopeless braggadocio, has had quite a few recently, at least regarding the gun control discussion.

The shockingly frequent public shooting sprees do not even tell the entire story of how much of a problem gun violence is in the United States, which far and away leads its industrialized peers in gun related killings per capita. I don’t care what you think the answer is. I don’t care if you think you know. You want the complete ban the civilian use of firearms? And you think the only answer is to arm every capable American with a concealed pistol? Good luck. Both of you can enjoy your political self-righteousness while innocent people continue to die for no goddamn good reason.

It’s kindergarten all over again. Share, compromise and don’t be a selfish, narcissistic asshole. Realize that the line dividing right and wrong, good and evil exist only because we see it there, only because we want it there. Otherwise kids will keep bleeding to death in gutters, dying from a gunshot wound. Otherwise Sandy Hook will happen again. And it will happen again, not because we have guns, not because of the nation’s mental health system, not because of the politicians, not because of the Democrats and not because of the Republicans. It will happen because we failed to have a single sincere discussion about the issue.

But it’s easier to just keep shouting.

Party Politics

It’s the June of 2011. Andrew Breibart has spent the past few days touring the country, touting photos of a shirtless man, claiming the photos to be of New York’s Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner. Soon enough, the photos would circulate throughout the American media, and it would be confirmed that the photos were indeed of Mr. Weiner and that they were used in an attempt to solicit women over Twitter. The photos started a political firestorm, with members of both of America’s two political parties denouncing Weiner’s immature, inappropriate actions and the embarrassing shadow they cast upon the state of American political discourse. Although the initial criticism was nearly entirely from the Right, within a week, the top Democrat partiers all made statements denouncing Weiner’s behavior and calling for him to resign.

Of course, the hesitation on the part of the Democrats to throw one of their own from the train (albeit deservedly) only increased the criticism from Republicans, some of whom challenged House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to answer whether they “believe[d] members of Congress are held to a different set of ethical standards.”[1] Of course, in due time, the Democratic party made their denunciations, Weiner apologized for his idiocy and resigned in an attempt to make up for his stupid behavior.

Not perfect, but this might be the closest example to a group of contemporary politicians properly handling a party scandal. The leading Democrats, from Congress to the White House, all distanced themselves from the actions of their fellow party member. They made it clear that they, both as individuals and as an entire party, do not in any way condone or associate with what Anthony Weiner did and said.

Shifting focus to the other side of the aisle, we see an entirely separate slew of idiocy. Following Todd Akin’s dissertation regarding the distinction between illegitimate and legitimate rape, a Senate hopeful from Indiana, Richard Mourdock made this statement during a campaign debate:

“…even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen…”

Perhaps he misspoke, in claiming, through some twisted logic, that rape-pregnancies should be considered some kind of gift from god. We can only hope so. However, his comments in the aftermath of this debate were rather ambiguous. Instead of making an effort to rescind his offensive comments, Mourdock merely said that he “cannot unring the bell” and he “cannot put the toothpaste back in the tube.”[2] So, his regret lies not in the fact that he said something horrible and stupid, but that voters found out he believes something horrible and stupid.

Of course Democrats reacted to these remarks like a coyote pouncing upon a defenseless field mouse, as did anyone who is even slightly hesitant about categorizing one of the most heinous human actions as just another thing God intended.

And of course Republicans saw through the bloodlust obscuring their vision now that Election Day is in sight. Of course even the comrades of Mourdock could understand how downright stupid his comments were, how blatantly offensive and archaic they were. One can at least dream.

And one must continue to dream, at least if one would like to treat the above scenario as reality. Take Mitt Romney, just as an example. Unfortunate timing caused a television commercial, in which Romney endorses and urges fellow Republicans to support Mourdock, to air just about the same time as Mourdock made his gift-rape comments. Romney’s reaction was, the day after the debate, have a spokeswoman make a statement that Romney “disagrees with Richard Mourdock, and Mr.Mourdock's comments do not reflect Gov. Romney's views,”[3] which is a statement that amounts to nothing more than lip service to the actual issue. The Presidential-hopeful has made no effort to retract his endorsement of Mr. Gift-Rape.

This all raises the question of what the Republicans actually believe. Clearly, the party’s social policy has been hijacked by a bunch of religious fundamentalists who believe the Christian Bible should be treated as the basis for all Western law. And these recent statements only seem to reinforce the misogynist and otherwise bigoted views being adopted by the Republican Party, views that are not in the slightest being challenged by the more moderate conservatives. And people are still voting Republican?

A little less than two weeks ago, mere days before Mourdock enlightened the American public, Ben Stein made an appearance on Fox News. During his segment on the air, Mr. Stein made a shocking comment: "Taxes are too low." He said this amidst a thousand apologies. Before he finished speaking, Stein was apologizing. He was well aware, unlike Mourdock and Akin, of how truly offensive this statement could be. He wondered whether he would be “allowed to leave here alive,” even while daring to suggest that the best period of economic growth in the United States was when taxes were highest. His comments left the Fox & Friends crew, and conservatives nationwide, stunned.

The Republican Party, where misogyny, bigotry and racism are accepted, but calling for higher taxes is an offense deserving of exile.

---

[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304474804576372001239007900.html

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/29/richard-mourdock-rape-remark_n_2041827.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012

[3] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/richard-mourdock-rape-comment-puts-romney-defense/story?id=17552263#.UJBBk8W2u3g