posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 09:30 AM
At 09:30am on Friday 14th December, Adam Lanza forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, and with unfathomable
murderous fury began to execute children and adults. The shots he fired echoed around the world, shocking the global collective conscience to its
core. Sandy Hook does not stand in the crosshairs of opposing armies, but in the leafy suburbs of a small town, 60 miles northeast of New York in
America, far away from the world's war torn regions. For all intents and purposes, Sandy Hook Elementary School was a safe and lovely little spot of
education for flowering minds, and should have been the last place on earth one would consider as a site for a massacre.
We may never fully know or understand the compunction that drove Lanza to act in the way he did? There is no security measure capable of predicting
and protecting against such randomness of human rage, focussed so intently as it was upon the annihilation of children and their guardians. The mind
reels with uncomprehending grief, and the heart beats numbly in the aftermath. What is to be done? What can be done? More importantly, is there a
'will' to do it?
It would be very churlish of me, as an Englishman, to castigate Americans for their gun culture. To do so especially, without appreciating why the
'gun' is so allied to the American mind's concept of liberty and freedom, would make impotent the force of my appeal to Americans for
self-examination. An ancestral compatriot of the British once rightfully called Americans to arms against the British with the words..."These are the
times that try mens souls!"; and I suppose, with much less eloquence, I repeat those words as a silent thought...calling not to arms, but to disarm.
There is no war, but that which is in your heart. There is no tyranny, but that to which you enslave yourselves.
Nevertheless, before any form of disarming can occur, it is necessary to identify the obstacles that stand in the way. Two safeguards have to be put
in place that answer the fears towards that of tyrannous government, and that of the criminal mind. Fear really is the heart of the debate. Guns, per
se, are not the problem, alone, they are a tool of killing, but cannot act under their own agency, it takes a human mind and a human hand to work
them. Ergo: the debate must center on the human agency, with its goal to change mindsets.
As things stand at the present, gun control is an unworkable cry for change. Be that as it may, it does not relinquish American society from the moral
and ethical responsibility to seek the change, to seek a societal disarming, first of the mind, and then of the hand. There can be no 'land of the
free' whilst its society is armed to the teeth in fear. It may well be very edifying for the citizens of America to view themselves, not from the
inside out, but from the outside in...even with their fears intact! Needless to say, it would be equally edifying for non-Americans to exercise a
similar view, but vice versa.
How does one beguile a mind in fear of a tyrannous government? How does one persuade a household in fear of unlawful trespass to disarm? I don't for
one second suggest holding answers to these crux questions, nor do I believe any one mind ever will. It will take a collective effort of will and
self-examination to peer into the murk and fog to assemble the answers piecemeal: but, this I do believe, the answers are there, and with the right
mindset, so is the will.
I don't accept that a gun advocate relishes the thought of taking up arms against his fellow countrymen in whatever capacity it may require him to.
He has a gun, not simply because the 2nd amendment gives him the right to own one, but because he seeks to protect his life, his family, and his
property against any unlawful threat. Until the society around him can demonstrate that it can be the 'pre-emptive' safeguard he seeks, that which
it should be, can anyone reasonably expect him to relinquish his weapon?
Nor do I believe that the gun advocate looks upon the aftermath of gun rampages with a disinterested eye. He is affected just like anyone else. He is
shocked and saddened by such scenes just like you and I. Like you and I, he could not look at the sweet cherubic face of blonde Emilie Parker, without
looking into the eyes of his own daughter or son and think what if it was his child at Sandy Hook? His natural reaction would be to want to arm
teachers, or at the more practical, to have an armed security patrol at schools. Yet, even he would cognise that this is not a real solution, it is in
fact a contraction that actually perpetuates the problem. It is a non sequitur to think that more guns equates to more safety. If that was the
solution, near on 300 million guns in society should have all but obliterated death by gun in America, but the statistics show this to be nowhere near
the case. Just as guns are not the real problem, more guns are not the real solution.
Even though I have called gun control as an unworkable cry for change, it is not without an eye toward contradiction that I also state that some form
of gun control is absolutley necessary, certainly as an interim towards the real solution of wholescale disarming. Gun control has to be more
efficient and more focussed. It absolutely has to hit the targets (no pun intended). It has to identify the problematic areas and it has to make it
very hard to obtain a gun, both legally and illegally. It has to reasonably define what kind of gun each type of household can store, and how many. A
home in the suburbs or urban areas of a city is different to that of one out in the countryside. Farms have different requirements to that of a city
dwelling. Is it really reasonable or necessary for someone to have a small arsenal of weapons in his home...even as a gun enthusiast? Lanza couldn't
get a gun, so he took those legally owned by his mother, and was able to fire a large amount of bullets, and take so many precious little lives.
Honest, self-examination is required.
I do not doubt that there will be those whom will think it unthinkable to disarm, or to accept gun control, no matter what the human cost in wasted
lives. Such rationale I cannot reach, or compete with in debate...I am already defeated before I utter any particular word, yet what I write here is
for them, their rationale has to be argued with for the sake of the current unworkable change. We have to examine and debate the problem until the
change becomes workable. It's going to take time, it's going to take years, and more rampages are going to happen...more lives are going to be
Sandy Hook was the blooming flower of a deadly weed, and unless American society can find a way to pull up the roots, more weeds are going to bloom
and flower...you've just got to find a way...
Charlotte Bacon, 6. Daniel Barden, 7. Rachel Davino, 29. Olivia Engel, 6. Josephine Gay, 7. Ana Marquez Greene, 6. Dawn Hochsprung, 47. Dylan Hockley,
6. Madeleine Hsu, 6. Catherine Hubbard, 6. Chase Kowalski, 7. Jesse Lewis, 6. James Mattioli, 6. Grace McDonnell, 7. Anne Marie Murphy, 52. Emilie
Parker, 6. Jack Pinto, 6. Noah Pozner, 6. Caroline Previdi, 6. Jessica Rekos, 6. Avielle Richman, 6. Lauren Russo, 30. Mary Sherlach, 56. Victoria
Soto, 27. Benjamin Wheeler, 6. Allison Wyatt, 6.
...their memory demands it! Rest in Peace.