There were some worthwhile speeches at Market Square in Portsmouth, yesterday.
Renny Cushing spoke, as always, with calm authority, about the absurdity of the New Hampshire law which requires police departments to sell rather than destroy guns which are turned in or confiscated. As if to destroy them would be to destroy some sentient being, which needs to be protected. That deer hunters in New Hampshire are limited to 5 bullets in their chambers but men can buy 38 round clips for their assault rifles which are designed with people in mind, was telling.
In New Hampshire we try to protect deer; people, not so much.
A nurse practitioner simply read off a list of mass shootings in which she listed the number of minutes the gun man fired and the number of deaths and injuries he managed to visit upon his prey and it was stunning: In Las Vegas, if memory serves me well, it was something on the order of 55 dead 155 injured in about 5 minutes.
A teacher described the predicament of being an armed teacher inside a classroom with twenty pupils, seven year old children, who she would try to wall off by closing windows and shades and overturning desks to barricade them and then she would open the door to the hallway, to go seek out the killer with her gun, turning to her children to say, "Mrs. Curtin will be right back." And she mentioned the study of New York City policemen, who hit their target only 18% of the time in real gun fights.
Some allusions were made to the law which had banned assault rifles which expired in 1994 and all the mass shootings which happened after it expired.
Of course, nobody got to considering the arguments: That laws meant to stop mass shootings focusing on gun sales to minors, sales of assault weapons, sales of high capacity magazines would address, but likely not completely solve, the issue of mass shootings in schools or public places, but such laws would do nothing for accidental shootings at home, domestic dispute shootings, bar room fight shootings, suicide by gun shootings.
Little comparative sociology was mentioned, except on some of the signs held around the square: Why is it other countries with the same percentage of mentally ill people have so many fewer gun deaths?
Then there is the problem of France, where fundamentalist Islamic "soldiers" do mass shootings, when they are not driving trucks into crowds.
The most fundamental question is: Who are we trying to convince? The folks on that stage were in the most real imaginable way "preaching to the choir."
A student described the "active shooter" drills they do at her school, where "they are teaching us to become victims."
Of course, the Second Amendment freaks would agree with her: None of us should train to become victims. We should train to kill shooters.
Actually, we do active shooter drills at our work site and one of the things the training videos mentioned is that thinking about hiding and cowering in place have changed and the new idea is it may be better to try to assault the shooter, especially if you can organize a force of numerical superiority, because the greatest number of deaths occur in the first few minutes before any police can arrive.
The most discouraging news of all is the news that since taking a stand on selling assault rifles to kids under 21--hardly a radical position one would think--Dick's Sporting Goods has seen a precipitate and unexpected decline in all sales at its stores. Not just in guns but in all sales, bats, balls, shoes, jerseys. This may or may not be related to the new gun policy. Other business factors may be operating, including greater competition from Amazon and Nike, but if this loss of revenue is in fact, ultimately, tied to the gun policy, that would mean consumers have voted against gun control.
What is hard for me to understand in this is whenever I'm in Dicks, I see people buying Patriots jerseys, shoes, baseball gloves, and I would be surprised to learn there is much overlap between these customers and the guys buying assault rifles, or even hunting rifles. But maybe this just shows how little I know that part of our society, that 40% subculture.
We must all know by now, we will never convince the Donald Trump crowd of anything. They are beyond reason, for the most part, beyond salvation.
The question is, if they are beyond reason on guns or on abortion, is there any other way to peel them away from Mr. Trump? Or should we simply focus on agitating and motivating the rest of the electorate?
Personally, I think it's likely there is a portion of the nation which while no fans of Trump, are unable to bring themselves to vote for Democrats, who they perceive as being weak, wailing and too soft for governing. They are looking for a strong man to rally behind, but not Trump. Joe Biden appeals to this group. You can be a man and be against Trump and for Biden.
"Debate him?" Biden asks. "Hell, I'd take him out behind the gym and beat the shit out of him. That's what he is, one of those fat, ugly kids in high school who bullied the smaller kids."
For my money, Biden would be trading a stupid conservative for a stupid liberal, but that's a deal I'd take.
I still think we can do better. We just need to find some tough guy Democrats.
Renny Cushing spoke, as always, with calm authority, about the absurdity of the New Hampshire law which requires police departments to sell rather than destroy guns which are turned in or confiscated. As if to destroy them would be to destroy some sentient being, which needs to be protected. That deer hunters in New Hampshire are limited to 5 bullets in their chambers but men can buy 38 round clips for their assault rifles which are designed with people in mind, was telling.
In New Hampshire we try to protect deer; people, not so much.
A nurse practitioner simply read off a list of mass shootings in which she listed the number of minutes the gun man fired and the number of deaths and injuries he managed to visit upon his prey and it was stunning: In Las Vegas, if memory serves me well, it was something on the order of 55 dead 155 injured in about 5 minutes.
A teacher described the predicament of being an armed teacher inside a classroom with twenty pupils, seven year old children, who she would try to wall off by closing windows and shades and overturning desks to barricade them and then she would open the door to the hallway, to go seek out the killer with her gun, turning to her children to say, "Mrs. Curtin will be right back." And she mentioned the study of New York City policemen, who hit their target only 18% of the time in real gun fights.
Some allusions were made to the law which had banned assault rifles which expired in 1994 and all the mass shootings which happened after it expired.
Of course, nobody got to considering the arguments: That laws meant to stop mass shootings focusing on gun sales to minors, sales of assault weapons, sales of high capacity magazines would address, but likely not completely solve, the issue of mass shootings in schools or public places, but such laws would do nothing for accidental shootings at home, domestic dispute shootings, bar room fight shootings, suicide by gun shootings.
Little comparative sociology was mentioned, except on some of the signs held around the square: Why is it other countries with the same percentage of mentally ill people have so many fewer gun deaths?
Then there is the problem of France, where fundamentalist Islamic "soldiers" do mass shootings, when they are not driving trucks into crowds.
The most fundamental question is: Who are we trying to convince? The folks on that stage were in the most real imaginable way "preaching to the choir."
A student described the "active shooter" drills they do at her school, where "they are teaching us to become victims."
Of course, the Second Amendment freaks would agree with her: None of us should train to become victims. We should train to kill shooters.
Actually, we do active shooter drills at our work site and one of the things the training videos mentioned is that thinking about hiding and cowering in place have changed and the new idea is it may be better to try to assault the shooter, especially if you can organize a force of numerical superiority, because the greatest number of deaths occur in the first few minutes before any police can arrive.
The most discouraging news of all is the news that since taking a stand on selling assault rifles to kids under 21--hardly a radical position one would think--Dick's Sporting Goods has seen a precipitate and unexpected decline in all sales at its stores. Not just in guns but in all sales, bats, balls, shoes, jerseys. This may or may not be related to the new gun policy. Other business factors may be operating, including greater competition from Amazon and Nike, but if this loss of revenue is in fact, ultimately, tied to the gun policy, that would mean consumers have voted against gun control.
What is hard for me to understand in this is whenever I'm in Dicks, I see people buying Patriots jerseys, shoes, baseball gloves, and I would be surprised to learn there is much overlap between these customers and the guys buying assault rifles, or even hunting rifles. But maybe this just shows how little I know that part of our society, that 40% subculture.
We must all know by now, we will never convince the Donald Trump crowd of anything. They are beyond reason, for the most part, beyond salvation.
The question is, if they are beyond reason on guns or on abortion, is there any other way to peel them away from Mr. Trump? Or should we simply focus on agitating and motivating the rest of the electorate?
Personally, I think it's likely there is a portion of the nation which while no fans of Trump, are unable to bring themselves to vote for Democrats, who they perceive as being weak, wailing and too soft for governing. They are looking for a strong man to rally behind, but not Trump. Joe Biden appeals to this group. You can be a man and be against Trump and for Biden.
"Debate him?" Biden asks. "Hell, I'd take him out behind the gym and beat the shit out of him. That's what he is, one of those fat, ugly kids in high school who bullied the smaller kids."
For my money, Biden would be trading a stupid conservative for a stupid liberal, but that's a deal I'd take.
I still think we can do better. We just need to find some tough guy Democrats.
Unless you are planning to run, it is hard to identify the phenotype you describe among the currently known Democrats. While I share your reservations about Biden, he is a far, far better choice than the current clown occupying the White House. How did we come to this??
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteIt's the guy from Rochester, NH who is running for Congress in the NH first, Terence O'Rourke, pictured above. Have to learn more about him, but he might be the real deal.
A friend from up here was in Washington for the rally down there and made a sign, which I hope to display in a future blog, which said, "The only thing easier to buy in America, than a gun, is a Congressman."