Where have you been?
Yesterday, I had brief conversations with two interesting people: former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman. Today, it's two blasts from the past: you and GBV. Will it be Samir Geagea and Walid Jumblatt tomorrow?
Yesterday's event:
http://jewishreviewofbooks.com/event/
I would rather pay $300 for this type of event than risk it in Atlantic City.
My Politics page posts of today:
Post 1:
. . . the father told police he got the gun from "another [emphasis added] gang member". I wonder what kind of work he does?
Another implies that the father also is a member of the gang. Is the gang his full-time employer?
If the gun is illegal, then the father shouldn't have had it. The gun should have been locked up securely, whether it was legal or illegal. Young boys have a way of getting access to things unless they are locked up very securely.
TN should have a strict law on parental responsibility to keep guns secure for access by kids. Call it "big government." Assert the second amendment. It's about keeping kids alive!
Suppose that a six year-old stabbed his three year-old brother to death with a steak knife from the drawer in the kitchen. Does any state have a law that requires that kitchen knives be locked up securely to block access by kids? I doubt it. Should states have such laws? Probably not. Kids routinely use steak knives at the dinner table. They can be deadly weapons, but their primary and almost exclusive use is for cutting food. It is much easier, at least for an adult, to run away from or disarm a young kid with a steak knife than a young kid with a gun.
[end of post]
According to published reports, the father, whose gun was used by his 6 year-old son to accidentally fatally shoot his 3 year-old son, was a former gang member, who "needed" the gun for protection, after he testified in a murder trial. The defendant was a gang member.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-man-held-on-75k-bail-after-son-6-fatally-shoots-brother-3-20151018-story.html
Post 2:
This tragedy reinforces my belief in what I posted ten years ago on the gun issue:
1. A deranged person can kill many more people with a gun, especially an automatic, before he is subdued than with a knife, baseball bat, etc.
2. If someone is out to get me, then how am I supposed to defend myself? The police are not my bodyguards. You may ask who is "someone" and what is he out to do to me? If he is an armed thug experienced with guns, then my best chance may be to leave town and keep a low profile. If he is just out to beat me up, then he may back off if he knows that I have gotten a gun. What if he decides to get a gun also, creating an arms race? Should I get an AK-47? There is no simple answer to who should be allowed to get a gun and what type of gun.
3. A friend of mine is very anti-gun. She has a black belt in karate. She suggested that I take karate if someone were "only" out to beat me up. If I get a gun, then someone else can get my gun and misuse it, perhaps killing me or someone else, but if I learn karate, then no one else can misuse my karate, she says. She has a point. How much karate will I have to learn and how long will it take before I can defend myself against a really street-tough thug? Am I at greater danger taking karate and fighting against the instructor and other students or from my own gun? There is no clear answer.
4. One thing: We don't need our cities to become like the wild west.
Look at item #2. I was not referring to a gang member, who testifies in murder trial and then quits the gang. I was referring to a victim of bullying or threats, who is not involved in crime. Could Michael Santiago gone into the Witness Protection Program? How well does it protect witnesses?
There is no easy answer to the gun question. We should all agree on a few things:
1. Guns must be securely stored.
2. The mentally ill and violent criminals should not be allowed to get guns.
3. There should be a limit on individually-owned fire-power.
We are a rights-obsessed society. All too often, divisive social issues are resolved by the Supreme Court discovering or creating a constitutional right. First amendment rights apply to mentally ill persons and violent criminals. A mentally ill person, who beat a murder rap with a not guilty by reason of insanity and was released from the facility for the criminally insane, is permitted to buy an unlimited number of books on firearms, start a religious congregation and become a street corner preacher, etc. Son of Sam laws may one day be overturned. Can items 2 and 3 above survive second amendment challenges? I hope that they can.
I am more concerned with my security than with my liberty on this and similar issues. Should an individual be permitted to own 500 AK-47s or an F-16 and some daisy cutters?
[end of post]
Just in case you miss my Politics page posts. :-) Who are you for for president of the U.S. in 2016? I'm for Lindsay Graham. I'm not for Trump, Paul, Clinton or Sanders. Do you plan to return to Green Chip?
