Posted on 08/05/2019 3:00:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
As the funerals for victims of the El Paso and Dayton shootings unfold this week, we will plunge into the usual noise of finger-pointing, scapegoating and posturing. When invitations to pray are mocked, you know there is little reason for hope toward constructive debate.
Unity was never going to happen, and that’s fine. We are a nation of differing views on every issue, and guns are no exception. Millions of Americans see these mass killings and lunge toward blaming the weapon and not the person. They are met in the arena by people who don’t want to hear one syllable that smacks of gun control. This is not a landscape for progress.
Interestingly, there has been focus across political lines on the mindset of the El Paso shooter in particular, dwelling with fervent emphasis on his white supremacist instincts. Liberals have done this with heightened volume, often in an attempt to blame President Trump, but in their misdirected aggression they have stumbled onto a basic truth: shootings are first and foremost a human problem, not a gun problem.
But if the left focuses more on the hardware than the hard work of repairing society, conservatives view any gun-based legislative ideas as an instant Second Amendment abrogation. This is not without basis. Many Democrats tout “common-sense” gun reforms while demonizing and even targeting for extinction weapons which are functionally indistinguishable from those owned by hunters, sport shooters and countless other law-abiding Americans.
Some will then mock prayerful reactions as “doing nothing,” when those wishes actually reflect the only path toward fixing what needs to be fixed, and that is people.
Our social fabric is torn to bits, its pieces falling among fractured families weighted down by inattentive or absent parenting. Relationships are shattered by political tensions we used to navigate with basic goodwill. We have tossed aside concepts of personal responsibility and even shared values. The morally vacant hallways of social media stoke the darker instincts of tortured and unbalanced people who used to be reined in by the mitigating effects of real, meaningful relationships.
The God we once called on in great numbers for guidance and comfort is now just as often mocked. We are left to rely on our own wavering instincts, which has given us a nation filled with self-absorbed children and adults, bereft of coping skills and constantly primed for the next perceived outrage.
No legislation can fix those lapses. There will be no back-slapping news conference featuring members of Congress announcing they have magically healed the nation’s soul. But here’s the thing: there will also never be some stupendous piece of legislation that ensures that guns are held only by responsible people. A society is either free or it is not. If it is, there will always be examples of citizens misusing those freedoms.
So is there no measure to consider, no ideas to ponder involving the role that laws might play in addressing these tragedies? There may be, in the form of laws that pay attention to problematic people without hindering the liberties of others.
An idea percolating from liberal California to purple Arizona involves a temporary court order prohibiting guns in the hands of people who have displayed demonstrable red flags of the types that have preceded many mass shootings. From postings and proclamations suggesting terrorist intent to words and behaviors that indicate severe mental imbalance, relevant witnesses would provide solid evidence that judges could use to issue a temporary gun ownership restraining order.
These have been called Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GRVOs) or STOP orders (for Severe Threat Order of Protection), but the idea is the same: to do what we always say should have been done when these stories break. It rarely fails: the shooting happens, and then we learn of multiple disturbing factors that suggested that trouble was close at hand. We can’t jail people for expressing offensive views or commit them for every erratic behavior; but we can sure hit the pause button on their gun ownership if the evidentiary bar is met.
That bar should be high. The evidence should be solid, not ripe for abuse or mischief. And any suspended gun rights should feature a generous opportunity for the subject of such restraint to petition for revisiting the issues that led to the order.
Our system is human. This would not work perfectly. But nor does it involve snatching legal weapons from the hands of countless Americans who pose no threat. If liberals can lose their fixation on the firearms themselves, and conservatives are willing to give this path an experimental run, we may see a rare example of common ground.
No problem with Red Flag laws as long as the person making the call is the one that has to go to the door and ring the bell and is given 5 minutes to “explain the situation”.
I have no idea where the solution lies, except in trying to repair the social ties, but I do disagree with the author’s last paragraph.
There is no experimenting with a new law, once on a the books, the law is there forever. Even if it does not work. Those who obey laws will follow this law. Those who wish to, will ignore it.
Due process strictly observed?. ( who can trust the bureaucracy that would carry out such orders? That’s why we have the 2nd amendment)
We are always one law away from perfection.
Yep...well said.
“We are always one law away from perfection.”
And then we add another layer of perfection, ad infinitum...
One problem we face is that we simply can’t come to grips with the fact that there are a lot of losers and misfits among us who are incapable of functioning as normal human beings. It’s not a new problem. Human societies have been dealing with it since the dawn of civilization. The only difference is that we think we are too “civilized” to crucify them alongside the major roads or toss them into volcanoes as sacrifices to the gods.
When the invitation to pray is mocked, you can see clearly why there is a problem with mass shootings now.
That is all.....
And will it encompass Muslims, for instance, who belong to a group which, as a group, is more likely to commit violence than many other groups? Who will get to decide which people are more likely to be “at risk” of committing violence, and upon what basis will they make the determination? Surely not statistics, because that would lead to some highly politically incorrect decisions.
The fundamental problem is that the Rats are not interested in solving any of these issues. They have spent decades destroying the nuclear family, diminishing Christianity and fostering domestic hatred of America. They want absolute power and control and will gleefully dance in the blood of each massacre until they have a totalitarian dictatorship.
Don’t take the guns.
Detain the crazy person instead.
Look, we have lost the ability to unite against domestic mass murders because they are being committed by alienated young men affiliated with the Democrat Party or the extreme Left and are willing to be martyred for the cause of trying to oust Trump. We already know many hate crimes are perpetrated by people trying to create a victimhood class. This is not a conspiracy where the conspirators plot and collaborate. The way they are induced to act is by signaling, the same as birds or other animals do. Nancy Pelosi called for some sort of vague action to commence in August and lo and behold in the first week there were several willing to martyr themselves for the cause without any support or financial support for their efforts. Of course the media distorts public perception to what is happening by propagating a narrative of white extremism. Look, the Left is desperate and will kill their own to oust Trump. The first murderer killed Mexican near the border in a Walmart and the second in a nightclub full of minorities in Ohio.
The fundamental problem here is that our legal system — by design — does not function from a “preventive” position. Since we are innocent until proven guilty as a matter of constitutional law, everyone is treated as a law-abiding person until the first time they break the law. That’s why it’s so hard to detain a “crazy person” no matter how well intentioned we may be.
Here lies the problem.
God has been effectively removed from the public square of ideas and conversation in this country.
His laws are (have) been replaced, those that haven't have been mocked.
The Left gets all fired up about life....except for the 50+ million who have been murdered "legally" via abortion in this country.
The Left has done everything it can to destroy the traditional man/woman monogamous relationship. Boys are being raised without dads in their lives and we're told it's ok.
The Left has told us there are no moral absolutes.
Sadly though, conservatives shoulder a lot of this blame for we have not effectively spoken out against these and other critical issues. For too long we've adopted a "live and let live" attitude.
What has that gotten us? The mess we're in right now.
What we need is a real come, or come back to, Jesus moment.
This country needs to repent. Christians in this country need to be in serious earnest prayer for this nation.
Only through a revival of Christianity will this country be able to heal.
“You won’t need the second amendment until they try to take it away from you”
Thomas Jefferson
It’s a sign, take heed.
We have never had the ability, so we can’t have lost it.
And that is actually probably a good thing.
IMHO, the answers and problems are so obvious that nobody wants to touch them, fearing they will expose hidden / occultic ties.
FBI and State LEOs are aware of ANTIFA. Everybody is aware of HC and the open corruption of the DNC. Everybody is aware of Fake News.
Most people are willing to accept witchcraft on the same level as Christianity.
There may not be a “solution.” We live in a free society. That entails the risk that some will abuse that freedom. You can mitigate the risk to a degree, but you cannot eliminate it without eliminating the freedom.
All countries have mass murder. We may experience it more or less than others in the first world. We may have more mass shootings, but that is because this is the only place where citizens have the freedom to be armed, which is the only real freedom. That is a risk I am willing to accept as part of having that freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.