April 20, 2007
-
Not so fast there.
Some Korean political cartoons that got me thinking…
Hangyeorae Newspaper, 4/19/2007
[The specifics of the VT shooting]
Criminal: Korean
Problem: Freedom to bear arms
[NRA guy types]
Isn’t the citizenship more of the problem?
GyeongHyang Newspaper 4/19/2007
“There mustn’t be this kind of tragedy ever again…”
[bullet shells:] the cruel murders at Virginia Tech
[loading bullets:] constitutional [amendment] to bear arms———————————————————————————–
There have been plenty of blame-game accusations made regarding the Seung-hui Cho Virginia Tech massacre, and each time I hear someone blaming America’s gun culture or weak gun laws, I cringe. Not because I don’t understand it, I do, but because this type of thinking is so wrong, devoid of any logic or rationale. But that’s exactly the point. People who say this are reacting emotionally and have no significant thought on this matter… no ability to separate the emotions that cloud their judgement in order to discern the reality of the situation.
And those who so quickly brandish the “we must have the right to bear arms” motto don’t always reach out to those who have been emotionally scarred by the event to help them understand what is meant by this phrase. But the key words that unlock this tangle is what NBC accurately used to describe the students and faculty of VT, “defenseless people“. Exactly so. The point of the 2nd Amendment is for the people of the USA to be able to defend themselves. Against what? Perhaps against lunatics or seriously-deranged-spiritual-problem-ridden-murderers-on-the-loose? maaaybe. But of course, because media and idealistic romanticists have so effectively demonized guns and vilified those who fight for the right to have them, no one bothers to think any deeper about this issue than to cry and scream “WHY??” and proceed to blaming everything else but the actual problem. Personally, the real problem here is Cho and that he never really came to know Christ or have the true peace that comes from knowing you are God’s child. But that isn’t our problem, it was his and it never got resolved. For the rest of us, that means we have to protect ourselves and face the reality of the situation head-on. OR, we can just talk about the evils of guns and killing and cross our fingers just hoping that no one will go crazy. But banning guns altogether by LAW will only affect the people who actually follow the LAW, and empower those who obtain them to do evil to have all the more defenselessly sitting ducks to tally up on death counts.
I seriously wonder if people who want to ban guns actually think. I mean, ignorance is one thing, but the ability to think is a completely different story. Perhaps it’s the desire to NOT think. Okay, so it’s laziness, then. But the technology is out there, there’s no stopping it. What would happen if the whole world got rid of guns? North Korea would take its million-man army and the 2,000 guns they have that actually work and, SHARING if need be, hold us all up and have the entire world at its knees. My point? Not gonna happen. Now, the ideal would be to have every law-abiding citizen trained and ready at all times to nip these crazy people with death wishes in the bud, but this isn’t an ideal world and not everyone will want to have a gun. As for me, I’d rather pack mace or other non-life-threatening force (b/c in general I would rather not end someone else’s life, unless of course it’s a crazy gunman or rapist. Plus, I consider myself prepared to die and meet my savior, each day is just a blessing and gift) but I would definitely want a gun for the safety of others. We must understand the general principle of the 2nd Amendment, and people who call themselves Americans have an obligation to know the Constitution before opening their mouth on guns.
And this is why I don’t expect Koreans to understand Americans emphasizing the right to bear arms. Firearms are illegal in Korea, not that it has done anything to prevent death or crime (but whatever). But April 19th, 1960 the day of these cartoons, may help people understand. It was a demonstration begun by college students (from Korea University, of course) on April 18th, resulting in the deaths of these students when police opened fire to quell the “disturbance” and the 4.19 Revolution was born. Great stride for democracy, as it’s known in Korea. And I acknowledge it. But I throw out this question to Koreans – do you think this government would be less corrupt and more accountable to its people if it knew that the people had a right to defend themselves and bear arms to keep the government in check?
Our founding fathers were freakin’ geniuses.
Comments (4)
I agree about the right to bear arms issue…
but the thing that bothers me the most is all the opportunists that come out of the woodwork in order to use a tragedy as a vehicle to assert their uninformed opinions. Anti-gun folks vs. the NRA. Racists vs. Koreans. Koreans vs. percieved/actual racism in the media coverage…
The problem isn’t so much the opinions themselves. Actually, I wish people would assert their opinions MORE often. The problem is the time they choose to do it. It’s disrespectful. This is a time to reflect. Not to use the violent death of someone’s son/daughter/father/mother as a platform advance your pet cause.
It also seems to me that this reactionary tendency also ties in somehow with why people don’t think deeply about things, but I’m not sure how…
I think a time such as this, of tragedy or shock etc, is the only time a lot of people care about one thing together, enough to talk about it or pay attention to those who are talking. For instance, no offense, someone’s decision to comment on this article, when I’ve written on many other such opinionated topics. But also, I hope readers do not take my stance as an initiative to use this tragedy as a soapbox for my own, but as a reaction to others who have already used it as a soapbox to argue a point that is misguided. If it were something true/valid and part of the coping process, I’d leave it alone. But it’s something that is WRONG and part of the blame-game process, NOT the coping process, which is why I decided to write on it. I believe that path of mourning should be clear of these misguided opinions and political agendas. And yes, it does seem like the opportunists come out at times like these, but also, at times of tragedy people are looking for answers and there is an audience that demands such.
I sincerely hope that my post hasn’t clouded another’s ability to cope, reflect, and mourn. However, it is worth noting that people cope, reflect, and mourn in different ways and times like these are sometimes the only way people wake up, start thinking, and start caring enough about something to move in the right direction… so maybe it’s not all that bad.
And as for not thinking deeply… well, by nature of the act reactionary tendencies usually have less thought taken in, since pondering and deep consideration take time and discipline to stifle that emotional reaction. But that still doesn’t explain people who just don’t think a lot. For those, I think a lack of deep thinking shows at times of crises b/c they are mentally unprepared to handle it, because they don’t do it deeply in the day to day. In this world, after initial talent, it’s only the trained and untrained.
“…decision to comment on this article, when I’ve written on many other such opinionated topics.”
Guilty as charged. I’m too lazy to type out my opinions on stuff, cos I go on and on. It’s easier in person. I talk WAY faster than I type. I guess I sort of “came out of the woodwork” there, didn’t I? Eep.
…and my comment about “coming out and getting on the soapbox” was an “if the shoe fits, wear it kinda deal”. You write opinionated entries regularly basis so, it wasn’t pointed at you.
Thanks for actually taking the time to write back. Dialogue is a good thing!
Ah, jeez. I forgot to put on my grammar hat today. Sorry.