Gun Control and Privacy ... briefly

I'm back. I wasn't really away, though, just wasn't posting new entries. There have been a few comments, which is exciting to me. It's always much more interesting when there's a dialog in comparison to when there's only a monologue. I've added a "widget" over on the left hand side that will track the 5 most recent comments if you want to go back and read what's being said. I actually added that back in the beginning of May (wow, already 2 weeks into May) when I changed out of the maroon and orange.

With a couple of those comments in mind, I plan to use the rest of this entry to ramble a bit about something that seems to be counter-intuitive. Before I get going on this, I want to preface that while I'm going to be talking about liberal and conservative generalities, I consider both sides to be a bit baffling. I am not at all saying that the liberals are right and the conservatives wrong ... and while I do find both persuasions are equally odd-ball, I probably will in the end try to justify my own beliefs. Confused yet? Hopefully I'll make more sense once I get down to it.

Almost all of the comments so far have revolved around gun control. I really didn't intend for gun control to become the hot topic here, at least not yet, not with my entries to date. I personally have never owned a gun but I have lived in a house with a gun. The only guns I shot are on my Wii but I admit that I would enjoy going to a shooting range and learn how to properly use a gun. I don't have a problem with people owning guns but I do think there should be certain restrictions on types of guns and ammunition and I also think that people owning guns have a huge responsibility to keep their firearms safe.

Following strict political persuasions, I think it is fair to say that conservatives are pro-gun ownership while liberals are pro-gun control. Some people may see that as complete opposites but I believe that there can be compromise and that it doesn't have to be one way or another.

Now that we have an incredibly brief view of the sides of the gun control debate, I'd like to compare it to the privacy debate, especially when you think about things like the Patriot Act. I would argue that, perhaps only indirectly, gun ownership is tied to privacy so wouldn't it make sense that gun rights activists would be against violations of privacy such as the Patriot Act? And wouldn't gun control activists be for something like the Patriot Act if it is in the best interest of public safety? Bizarrely, the answer to those questions is no. Conservatives who tend to be against gun control are also for the Patriot Act. Liberals who tend to be for gun control are very much opposed to the Patriot Act. What is going on here?

There are, of course, other issues where liberals and conservatives seem to be a contradiction to themselves but I really don't want to get into that yet. In fact, I'm not really sure how much I'll get into this discrepancy in regards to the issues of gun control and of privacy. The only thing I can do is try to explain my own wobbly reasoning.

Gun control isn't imposed on specific individuals based on evidence from an intelligence agency and granted by private courts with records that no one has access to. Gun control is imposed on people in the act of buying a gun. Some guns and ammunition are deemed to be too dangerous and unnecessary for private ownership across the board. Everything else in the gun control is a gun owner's journey to prove he/she is responsible to own a gun, to carry a concealed gun, etc.

Things like the Patriot Act, though, are invasive based on flimsy evidence. Most people for the Patriot Act and other forms of invasion of privacy will say things like "well, if you're not doing anything wrong, who cares if someone in monitoring you?" and "I know I'm not a criminal so it doesn't bother me for someone to listen in on my conversations." I think that's a pretty easy thing for most Americans, particularly white Americans, to say. It is usually first generation Americans or people of Arabic or Islamic descent who's rights are being trampled and who have to prove themselves because certain key words were taken out of context in their emails.

I'm not sure I explained myself well enough here but I'm going to stop for now. As always, I'd be interested in hearing what others think and discussing it in the comments.

National Day of Silence

Tomorrow is National Day of Silence, a day to call attention to the silence that many gay, lesbian, bi and trans-gendered people are forced to experience through bullying, harassment and intimidation. Because of this anti-LGBT attitude, the LGBT community fears coming out of the closet and must silence their true selves.

This day is primarily a youth event that takes place in middle schools, high schools and colleges. Its purpose is to encourage schools and classmates to address the anti-LGBT atmosphere in our education system. It started at the University of Virginia in 1996. Read these four truths for more information about Day of Silence.

I'm actually surprised this hasn't caught on outside of schools ... and maybe it has. If you notice people completely silent tomorrow in settings where there usually is conversation, this may be the reason.

Violence in America

I'm not one of those people who believes that any one thing leads to violence in America or in today's youth. I also have a feeling that people who blame things like the Internet, video games, movies and TV know that there is much more to it than that. I do believe that those things probably do desensitize us to violence and for people with other risk factors (for lack of a better term), violent forms of entertainment can further increase their likelihood of committing violent crimes.

I do not think that guns are inherently evil but I do think there need to be restrictions on gun ownership and that safety classes should be required for people who own guns. Responsible gun owners will take care of learning about their guns on their own and will make sure they know how to keep guns safe but you can't say that is true for every gun owner. A look at the statistics of accidental gun fatalities and injuries alone will tell you that.

I know that many gun rights activists believe this to be an underhanded way to restrict gun ownership but I disagree. If you have to have a license to operate a car, it should be required in owning a weapon and it makes sense for part of that license to include gun safety. If every air traveler has to go through intense security checks at airports for the safety of us all, it makes sense that gun owners would also have to take certain steps for the safety of us all as well. That's enough about guns for now, though. It's not something I intended to talk about but I also know there is always more to say on the subject.

I've heard a lot of people lament about today's youth, saying that this generation is more violent than previous generations. Most likely, this is true. It's hard to completely trust statistics, though. A lot more crime and instances of violence is reported today than may have been reported decades and even a century ago. That does not mean these things didn't happen, though.

When you look at the instances that have really grabbed the attention of the media like Columbine and Virginia Tech, you can argue that things like this haven't happened before ... but would you be correct? Well, there have been other instances in the past but not at this level and not for these reasons. For example, when Kent State happened, the Ohio National Guard was responsible for the death of 4 protesters. Then again, the school shooting with the third most fatalities in history took place over 40 years ago at the University of Texas in Austin at the hand of a lone, unbalanced gunman.

So, has something changed? Has something happened somewhere along the line where more and more people are resorting to violence? Perhaps it only took one highly publicized school shooting for others to find glory in such an action. The copy-cat theory is possible but I don't think that's everything either. Perhaps society has changed, perhaps families have changed, perhaps this generation (and I am of the Columbine generation, by the way) just have all their priorities fucked up.

There certainly is evidence for that. The recent incident in Lakeland, Florida where 8 students worked together to kidnap and video tape 6 of them beating a classmate lends evidence to the idea that this generation has the wrong priorities. These 8 students committed this act for two primary reasons that I know of: 1) the victim was talking trash online at MySpace and 2) for "fame" on YouTube.

For those of you out there who don't know this already, violence is no way to respond to trash talk. I don't care what someone says. This is especially true when the resulting violence is 8 against 1 ... 1 individual who refuses to hit back. As for YouTube fame, that is beyond disgusting. I know plenty of people who, long before this incident, said that sites like MySpace and YouTube were nothing but trash and should not exist. I disagree with that. For every questionable item on YouTube, I believe there are many, many worthwhile, timely and funny videos. I don't have a problem with MySpace either. It's a good place to keep in touch, to meet people and to find out about music, podcasts and more. Just like any form of technology or free speech, there will be people who use it improperly or even grossly abuse it.

While on the subject of YouTube, I think it's important to know that many people take part in something called Vlogging. Similar to Blogging but instead of coming from the term "weblog" it comes from "video log." It is just like blogging but to a video camera instead of to a keyboard. As you can imagine, many people who love and use YouTube had things to say about the Lakeland Florida incident. Afterall, this is the most highly publicized event of people using YouTube to become famous for an act of violence (although, it's definitely not the first time). Others who use YouTube want to distance themselves from such an act and say to the world that they are not such people.

If you watched some of the linked videos and other similar videos, you may have noticed one particular recurring theme and that is that a lot of these bloggers and those who commented on their videos are not only angry and desire justice but they also want all out revenge. They want to see these students beat down and there's little that would make them happier than if they could personally deliver the beatings.

Now, I'm not trying to say that revenge isn't a natural human emotion but I definitely think it is a natural emotion that we need to rise above. Mostly, I find it interesting that when we as a society see these atrocious acts of violence, we want to answer with violence. The idea of an eye for an eye is very pervasive throughout our culture. The truth of the matter is, though, violence begets violence. As I've stated before, I'm not a particularly religious person but I don't think you have to be religious to appreciate the grace in the idea of turning the other cheek. Most importantly, though, violence begets violence. To quote Mahatma Gandhi, "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

For those of you who don't like the idea of turning the other cheek, I'm not suggesting that we forget about any kind of justice. All I'm saying is that vengeance is not justice. There is punishment in justice, yes, but that should not include violence. Furthermore, we as a nation need to figure out a better way of including more rehabilitation and helping criminals readjust to life after prison or jail. That too is for another journal entry, though.

I said before that I wanted to talk a bit about how we can learn from Cho's shooting at Virginia Tech last year. Part of that will hopefully be better care for the mentally ill and even less stigma for the mentally ill. I remember hearing a DJ on a local radio station last year talk about how anyone who has these homicidal and suicidal thoughts is insane, abnormal and that they need to get themselves committed immediately. I wouldn't be surprised if many people agree with that sentiment. Few people want to admit to ever having had such thoughts so it's easy for some people to dismiss such thoughts as "insane" and "abnormal." I do not disagree that people having such thoughts should seek help but many people need help for many mental health aliments. It does not help to alienate any of these people; in fact, it makes such people more likely to act on their thoughts.

Similarly to having more respect and compassion for those with mental health problems, we all can do better about treating those who are different than us better than we do. This starts in grade school with the bullying that occurs and continues on through adult life. The day before the anniversary of the Tech shooting, a local school had an informal "Kick a Freshman Day." I was shocked when I heard about this for a number of reasons, but mostly because students at the school are hyper-aware of the VT tragedy and yet many of them stupidly took part in the same kind of bullying that separates, humiliates and leads to more violence. This is the kind of thing that needs to stop. It's no longer just kids being kids.

We as a society are not a lost cause but we can and need to do better. Luckily, for every act of violence, there are examples of amazing humanity. If you need a reminder of that, just read this article that Chris Fowler wrote last year about the Virginia Tech students' response, grace and dignity in the face of such a tragedy. There is always hope. This generation is not lost.