On an issue as divisive as gun control, it's hard to find diplomacy in general, let alone in writing. I came across some today.
In his three minute story that centres around public rights, Tom Dover uses the NHS as an analogy to explain the US Right's seemingly foolish position on the issue of firearm regulation.
Critics may list reasons why the NHS shouldn't be compared to a handgun and they might have a point but it wouldn't be the point, which is that gaining an understanding of those we disagree with gives us an important foothold in the climb towards reconciliation. Indeed it may be the only foothold.
I was reminded of how dangerously clunky the Constitution was when the violence erupted in Charlottesville earlier this year. Yes, the white supremacists and the counter-protesters were responsible for the damage they caused. Let's not forget though, that in most countries any group walking the streets carrying Nazi flags and semi-automatic weapons would be arrested within minutes, rendering any such protest or counter-protest impossible. Under the circumstances, it's hard not to place some responsibility on the government.
This is not to say that US politicians should be expected to suddenly amend the legal foundations of their country. That is Mr. Dover's point. It's merely about accepting that the issue really is that complicated. The noble intentions of those who set out to make the best framework that they could, for reasons no more sinister than the basic truth that none of us are perfect, ended up contributing to the creation of an environment where such atrocities were possible.
It is only after viewing the situation through such a dispassionate lens, that we are able to begin to converse constructively with those whose views we oppose. Stories like Tom Dover's are a timely reminder that it's possible to do so.
In his three minute story that centres around public rights, Tom Dover uses the NHS as an analogy to explain the US Right's seemingly foolish position on the issue of firearm regulation.
Critics may list reasons why the NHS shouldn't be compared to a handgun and they might have a point but it wouldn't be the point, which is that gaining an understanding of those we disagree with gives us an important foothold in the climb towards reconciliation. Indeed it may be the only foothold.
I was reminded of how dangerously clunky the Constitution was when the violence erupted in Charlottesville earlier this year. Yes, the white supremacists and the counter-protesters were responsible for the damage they caused. Let's not forget though, that in most countries any group walking the streets carrying Nazi flags and semi-automatic weapons would be arrested within minutes, rendering any such protest or counter-protest impossible. Under the circumstances, it's hard not to place some responsibility on the government.
This is not to say that US politicians should be expected to suddenly amend the legal foundations of their country. That is Mr. Dover's point. It's merely about accepting that the issue really is that complicated. The noble intentions of those who set out to make the best framework that they could, for reasons no more sinister than the basic truth that none of us are perfect, ended up contributing to the creation of an environment where such atrocities were possible.
It is only after viewing the situation through such a dispassionate lens, that we are able to begin to converse constructively with those whose views we oppose. Stories like Tom Dover's are a timely reminder that it's possible to do so.
20 comments
It’s a very measured commentary and although I agree in part there’s a big difference between the NHS and guns. One saves lives, the other.......?
To me, the ability for anyone to go out and just purchase a gun is insane. Almost laughably so. But then again my mind set has been conditioned by living in a country that thankfully has that mentality.
I don’t think things will ever change in the US because the fundamentals, albeit forged with good intent in that era, hadn’t factored in the glaringly obvious fact that they were arming their population with lethal weapons and that people are unpredictable.
Interestingly Canada also has the same mentality towards gun ownership, but there’s clearly a very different mentality towards using them. I guess it must be a cultural mentality problem in the US.
I watched the Bowling For Columbine documentary years ago and it made some pretty good points around those issues and differences and I think it’s depressingly a problem that is unlikely to ever go away.
Yeah, I agree the NHS is an odd comparison.
What about traffic law? Here, every person has a right to drive up to 70mph and cross the road any time we want, whereas US law forbids both.
I have no idea what the road traffic accident statistics are in each country.
You're right about culture, I suspect gun crime was far lower in the UK even before hand guns were banned.
It's gone too far the other way here. I have a blog post half written on it. A crime to defend yourself and your woman and child in your own home, against an intruder here.
Legislating against people crossing the road where they like just seems excess to common sense requirements to me. Maybe we just have a more common sense approach to things here and allow people to use their heads.
I’ve yet to see any evidence that the US law system is either effective or to be admired.
I definitely agree with that sentiment. Statistically it’s still not a good enough reason to make guns household items though.
True, this was a farmer, with a licensed shotgun, that wasn't loaded, but he's in trouble. The intruder was brandishing a knife.
Here it's so far from a marked pedestrian crossing , that you're not allowed to use for crossing. Can't remember how far.
Good post here by Robin, the US English Professor
http://betterlivingthroughbeowulf.com/the-nra-preying-on-anxious-men/
My, how psychosexual.
When someone breaks into a house with a knife, hopefully the law will be the last thing on the victim's mind.
Whatever that law is.
It's a bit like the intruder scenario in that failing to exercise appropriate caution could have such grave consequences that perhaps the law should be a secondary consideration.
One hopes the judges are able to be flexible with sentences in such cases.
I just don’t want leave my house trying to remember distances related to crossing roads. How on earth do you measure it while you’re out anyway.
It reminds of a story I read once of an area that was so riddled with traffic signs it was creating more confusion and distraction than being helpful. They took them down, the traffic flow became less congested and there were less accidents.
They say that all negative or positive decisions have their origins in only two emotions, love or fear.
The male ego and sex may well be part n parcel of that.
Fight or flight?
"Fewer". There were "fewer" accidents.
;)
Fear would kick start it. Love if you stay behind.
I’m laughing. Thanks for that ;)
Someone tried to break into my home, I frightened them off, lol. Was still yelling at them as they ran up the road. Afterwards I collapsed shaking.
Blimey.
Such an English word, Blimey.
Post a Comment