Guns Don't Kill People...
But religion does?
It has been over twenty four hours since another mass murder in the US involving a lone gunman. However, there has barely been any mention of gun control. And there are some would have us bring back the Japanese internment camps of WW2, but this time fill them with Muslim US citizens. I just don't understand what is wrong with the US. Guns, especially handguns, are designed to kill people. Religion, while responsible for many deaths throughout history, was essentially designed to save people. Why do we fear religion, but not guns?
I shared a bit of my experience in the military with my last post, but I have another memory I wish to share. Even though I was commissioned in the military many years before 9/11, my first week of extended active duty was actually the first week of September, 2001. I was in a large group of doctors undergoing training before we headed off to our first duty assignment. We watched 9/11 on the television in our classrooms while our base was on lockdown. During the next few days we didn't do much, we were on a training base and couldn't go anywhere. After a few days, when we knew the Taliban and Al Queda were responsible, one of the members of our group stood up to make an announcement. He was a radiologist who was born in Pakistan, and he was a muslim. He was a US citizen. His wife was also going through training with us, and she was also a muslim. He asked to address the class and he did so in a pained voice full of anguish. He tried to explain to this group of military doctors that Islam was not violent. The terrorists who attacked us were not representative of his religion. I admired this man for his courage, but I fear he probably had a difficult time in the military.
When I got to my first base, my commanding officer was a very devout christian of a traditional sect. He regularly sent out emails about Christianity. As the war in Afghanistan grinded on and the Iraq invasion started, many people I worked with made discouraging remarks about muslims openly. We had prayers before informal meetings. As a long-time agnostic this environment made me profoundly uncomfortable.
This latest incident has really gotten under my skin, but I feel powerless to do anything. I also feel a lot of anger that a person can purchase a weapon which allows them to kill and injure so many people.
It has been over twenty four hours since another mass murder in the US involving a lone gunman. However, there has barely been any mention of gun control. And there are some would have us bring back the Japanese internment camps of WW2, but this time fill them with Muslim US citizens. I just don't understand what is wrong with the US. Guns, especially handguns, are designed to kill people. Religion, while responsible for many deaths throughout history, was essentially designed to save people. Why do we fear religion, but not guns?
I shared a bit of my experience in the military with my last post, but I have another memory I wish to share. Even though I was commissioned in the military many years before 9/11, my first week of extended active duty was actually the first week of September, 2001. I was in a large group of doctors undergoing training before we headed off to our first duty assignment. We watched 9/11 on the television in our classrooms while our base was on lockdown. During the next few days we didn't do much, we were on a training base and couldn't go anywhere. After a few days, when we knew the Taliban and Al Queda were responsible, one of the members of our group stood up to make an announcement. He was a radiologist who was born in Pakistan, and he was a muslim. He was a US citizen. His wife was also going through training with us, and she was also a muslim. He asked to address the class and he did so in a pained voice full of anguish. He tried to explain to this group of military doctors that Islam was not violent. The terrorists who attacked us were not representative of his religion. I admired this man for his courage, but I fear he probably had a difficult time in the military.
When I got to my first base, my commanding officer was a very devout christian of a traditional sect. He regularly sent out emails about Christianity. As the war in Afghanistan grinded on and the Iraq invasion started, many people I worked with made discouraging remarks about muslims openly. We had prayers before informal meetings. As a long-time agnostic this environment made me profoundly uncomfortable.
This latest incident has really gotten under my skin, but I feel powerless to do anything. I also feel a lot of anger that a person can purchase a weapon which allows them to kill and injure so many people.
Advertisement
I told you before but I am really captivated by this MASH experience.
I do wish to learn more about the proselytizing of Christianity among the troops.
I gave up on gun control a long time ago. The NRA won. And yet, local urban control of guns is a fascinating subject.
No matter what the NRA says, the cities are sick of it.
The ability to trace guns, from gun shows and such...
That is another subject.
But this Fort Hood incident is really something, amazing to me.
Why would you ever attempt to attack a military base? It makes no sense.
That is why I am sure this is a psychiatric issue.
I mean, if I were a terrorist, I would attack wall street or a bank....
November 7, 2009 3:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/4/21/113553/663
talk2action covers it often, with lots of other links. The most egregious has been the air force academy in C. springs.
November 7, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Religion, while responsible for many deaths throughout history, was essentially designed to save people.
No, my friend, religion was NOT designed to save people. It was designed to provide another effective way for the wealthy and powerful to exert control over the hoi polloi.
November 7, 2009 7:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
November 7, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
...people with guns, however, kill many.
November 7, 2009 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I did a little reading about the pistol(s) he used because I was amazed by how many people he shot in such a short period of time. I am speculating that he was able to shoot each victim multiple times.
The cartridges were smaller and more powerful so a person could carry more ammo, the magazine could hold more bullets, and the bullets were designed to penetrate body armour. They were designed for an assault rifle, but someone later designed a pistol to shoot the same ammunition. Legislation was introduced in the US Senate in 2005 to place a federal ban on this ammunition, but the law failed to pass.
November 7, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec. Just out of curiosity, how's your gun control impetus resolving itself with your "moderate anarchist" tendencies steevo? ;)
November 7, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha, actually my bio is a fictional creation designed to make people laugh. You would be surprised how many people take it seriously...
November 7, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me get this straight. If a bullet can kill an innocent civilian walking down the street, that's O.K., but you think it would be an improvement to ban bullets that can kill through body armor, worn by soldiers, high officials, etc.?
The liberal position is that the state should have a monopoly of violence in order to guarantee the peace. The republican position, (really republican, not to confuse with the GOP) is that the body of the citizens should be armed as a way of securing liberty against a potential tyranny.
The American solution to this dilemma?
The worse of both worlds: Citizens should be armed enough to kill each other, but powerless in relation to the state.
November 7, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Let me get this straight. If a bullet can kill an innocent civilian walking down the street, that's O.K., but you think it would be an improvement to ban bullets that can kill through body armor, worn by soldiers, high officials, etc.?"
That is a nice straw man you created. Yes, I do think banning armor penetrating bullets would be an improvement over not banning armor penetrating bullets. All the other stuff you think I said, well, I didn't say any of that.
November 7, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very clever observation, evildoer.
November 7, 2009 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very clever observation, evildoer.
November 7, 2009 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Much obliged, twice ;-)
November 8, 2009 1:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why the religious right has taken over chaplaincies in the military, I have no idea. But the fact of it is indisputable! I recall there was some static at the Air Force Academy because of pressure to pray and so on. Just another betrayal of the Constitutional protections!
November 7, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
See the links above, thera.
November 7, 2009 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks! sorry I missed it before.
November 7, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because no Christian could ever serve as a chaplain while the religious right, being composed of pagans and idolaters, is more than pleased to do so?
November 7, 2009 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
not sure what that's supposed to mean... your usual cryptic comments confuse me!
November 7, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ellen likes to stir the shit. Nothing more, nothing less. Meaning is far too often absent. Much like in the comment immediately above.
November 7, 2009 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
An answer to your expressed want of knowledge concerning the question of how it is that "religious right has taken over chaplaincies in the military" -- nothing more.
Patton is, as the film's scene of his famous prayer makes clear, a pagan through and through -- the ultimate purpose of religion for the pagan being that which supports and defends the nation defined as blut for the German, the geography of birth for the American religious right.
November 7, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Patton might have been a fundamentalist that believed Twain's prayer was a true request to an almighty and just Goid.
November 7, 2009 8:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Why do we fear religion, but not guns?"
Guns don't teach people to kill everyone that doesn't believe as they do for being "infidels." Some religions have teaching that either say that or can be twisted to say such.
November 7, 2009 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steevo writes: “ I just don't understand what is wrong with the US”
The US will never rid Guns, The US Government, wishes to be immoral, guns are what force obedience.
Thou shall not kill, interferes with the grand scheme.
My thoughts, following up on Ellen’s comment.
True Christians have beaten their spears into plowshares. (Micah 4:3-4) 3 ….. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. They will not lift up sword, nation against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.
True Christians.
The United States has created a National Religion; the Fundamental right is the tool of the United States Government. Promoted by the United States Government, a violation of the Constitution
For the Government, by the Government, a National religion
The people granted the power to the wild beast.
(Revelation 13:15-17) . . .And there was granted it to give breath to the image of the wild beast, so that the image of the wild beast should both speak and cause to be killed all those who would not in any way worship the image of the wild beast. 16 And it puts under compulsion all persons, ……
(Revelation 17:13) . . .These have one thought, and so they give their power and authority to the wild beast.
Hasan made the point succinctly enough.
Why is it okay for the United States to say, we must go over and kill Muslims, that’s it’s okay to kill Muslims, As George Bush used to say, “they hate our values”
The moment a Muslim says and acts out against those who hate Muslim values, we demonize Muslims.
Is it, Hasan wanted no part, in meeting up with his maker and explaining how he put the Government of the United States, above his God?
Did he do his deed on a military base, because to Hasan, the US military became the enemy of his convictions?
The military forced his conscription against his conscience?
To Hasan he was as good as dead anyways in the eyes of God if he took up arms against his fellow believers.
Like a trapped animal, did he fight back against his tormentors.
Think of what will happen when the people fear their Government? The Teabaggers are just the beginning. The Beck crowd is already breaking under the strain.
No place to turn for their grievances to be attended.
No redress, only obedience.
More violence?
November 8, 2009 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink