Obligatory “American society killed these people” post
So that didn’t take very long. Granted, there have been rumblings for days on all the MSM networks but I think we might just have found the most offensive one out there. The Left has come out full force in claiming that American society and all its inequalities and injustices is to blame for the recent cluster of mass murders. We’re supposed to understand from this that America is at fault when a crazy person spontaneously goes off the deep end (oftentimes after days or weeks of planning) and commits a random, or not so random, act of violence – we drove him to it. And we’re getting schooled by a man who claims that he almost did it himself? In case you didn’t see it, here’s a snippet.
Can my telling of my tale prevent maybe at least one future tragedy? While I would like to think so, I’m just not sure. However, I am sure that the spate of recent shootings are symptomatic of a deeper malaise in America, and, tragically, I suspect there are going to be many more mass shootings to come. After all, we’re a nation that loves—nay, idolizes—guns. More than one model of handgun has been named “The Equalizer.”
And equalization—of power—is, I think, is what drives many individuals to “go postal.” For quite some time, I’ve been totally amazed that more people don’t go off the deep end every day and start spraying gunfire in crowded places, particularly workplaces.
He goes on to describe his union work experience in the 1960’s, as a black man – not exactly the friendliest period in history towards black men – and the resentment that built in him. His work life and home life were a disaster and all this guy could come up with as a plan to improve his circumstances was to shoot a bunch of white guys? Now, is this a societal problem or a perception problem?
I also had—and still have—a deep-seated sense of fair play. I’m going to treat you right, and I damn sure expect (really, demand) the same in return. If I don’t receive it, there’s going to be hell to pay—which pretty much explains why, to this day, I’m somewhat of a loner. I have the reputation of a straight-shooting (albeit somewhat curmudgeonly) son-of-a-bitch. I’ve learned over the years how to live without letting anyone else have very much power over my life and am usually in a position where no one can %$#* (Edited by Mom) me over—at least, not without suffering consequences. This, to my mind, is critical for people like me, it’s a release valve. I know I can be dangerous.
But back in 1968, I didn’t have such a relief valve, so when I was passed over again and again I became angry. I’d been given a seat at the table and was quite willing to play the game of life, only to find out “they” were dealing from the bottom of the deck; the dice were loaded; the game was rigged. I was devastated, and then I got very upset.
At the same time my work life was disintegrating, I realized that my marriage was out of kilter: A 17-year–old woman had married a 17-year-old boy, and when I grew up and attempted to renegotiate the terms of our marriage and put it on fair, adult footing, I was soundly rebuffed by my wife. Two years of counseling did nothing to solve the problem. My marriage was falling apart and I was being dissed at work, so my rec room became my place of solace, and my .30-06 rifle became my best friend…
I had the rooftop picked out (less than 30 yards across the street from the shop), the crosshairs of my Hawke scope were sighted in, and I knew the order in which my antagonists would exit the door. I’d make sure that $#@%^&*&*$# (M0m) bastard Steve Grabowski would be first. Of course I was slipping into madness, but it felt so goddamn good, so right, and so fair. The thirst for revenge is a blinding $#@%^&*(&^%* (Mom again).
I was going to avenge the wrongs and make them right, and there are literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions, out there right now in this county, feeling just as I did back in ‘68. A man can only take so much. Take note, America.
Seems like he’s grown a lot, doesn’t it? I love the warning – so threatening. ”A man can only take so much. Take note, America.” So somehow, all those people in the NC nursing home, all those legal immigrants in Binghamton, those Oakland and Pittsburgh police officers, those children in CA, are somehow responsible for their own deaths, as are we, because America is severely flawed and we need to be taken down a notch? This guy is an a**. If any of what he claims is true, that mass murder is the equivalent to blowing off steam, we’d all be long gone by now. But it’s not true. And anger at society is not an excuse. For pete’s sake, I’m angry and I have access to weaponry. I rant and rave on the net instead.
The author then goes on to describe his “rebirth”. Surprisingly, it was a white woman who brought him back. Isn’t the irony of that simply sublime? A shop full of union white guys keep him from reaching his potential, but the love of a good woman solved everything – not his kids, not his conscience. And certainly not recognizing the simple difference between right and wrong. Haven’t I been saying this for years? If your priorities are in line, everything else will fall in to place. He must have been going to one of those Rev. Wright churches – or no church at all.
As I write this it’s 3 am, I’m half drunk, and crying… for the people I didn’t kill, and for the people who are going to die. We have to learn one lesson in America: Quit doggin’ people. That’s the answer we’ve been seeking.
What an admirable guy – gets all sloppy drunk reminiscing about what a hero he is after all. ”Quit doggin’ people. That’s the answer we’ve been seeking.” Huh? So the answer is higher self-esteem and random acts of kindness? Don’t they teach that in the public school system? Maybe that’s who is to blame? (Makes sense to me.) Again, if societal injustice were the true culprit, people would not kill children and strangers, they would kill their “tormentors”, their leaders. But they don’t. They go for the defenseless, the blameless, the easy targets. Or they choose death by cop, an equally admirable act. Because they are crazy, their minds are warped. They have a problem, not society. Hundreds of millions of us seem to be coping just fine.
The person who fires the legal or illegal weapon, at people he does or does not know, who have or have not wronged him, is the sole person responsible for crimes like this. It is unconscionable to claim any differently. And it demeans the lives lost. Every one of us has to deal, everyday, with unkind, unfriendly and unfair people. Most of us chose to not let them in – we brush it off. Most of us build a support system around us that insulates us from the outside. Most of us realize that even that unkind, unfriendly and unfair person may just be having a bad day, year, life and leave it at that. You find a way to work around it. The boss who just won’t let you get ahead is not a threat to your life – he’s a jerk. Find another job.
A lot has changed since the author nearly went postal, a lot has changed. America, even in recession, even under Obama (or Bush, choose your poison), is still the best place in the world to be if you are looking for an opportunity to build a better life for yourself and your family. But if you make poor personal choices and refuse to accept personal responsibility for yourself, you may find yourself feeling “postal”. But that’s all down to you, my friend. All down to you.
*Additional irony – the author resides in the Hough neighborhood of Cleveland, famous for race riots in 1966, just before he almost went “postal”. As a person familiar with Cleveland, I can assure you this area remains one of the most dangerous and depressed areas of the city. Apparently the author did not see fit to spread the “hope and change” once he had improved his own situation. I wonder if he lives in one of those new homes they built in the 90’s with money from subprime mortgages, on lots awarded tax haven status, surrounded by 8 foot iron fencing with security gates?
I put up as much of this article as I could, so that you wouldn’t have to click the link, but if you must…
H/T – HotAir
Great discussion @ Michelle Malkin
Another great discussion @ HotAir
Popularity: 6% [?]
Review this site
This is just another tool for them to use to try to limit (read take away) our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.
There will be cries of “if people didn’t have guns this wouldn’t happen”.
NOT TRUE!
In a society whee handguns are banned from legal ownership, the criminals will STILL have guns. It’s only the law-abiding citizens who will be left defenseless against aggression from crazy people, invaders, or an oppressive government.
I have also noticed that while places like Canada and the UK can sit there and claim “lower gun crimes” they have MUCH higher crimes against people… theft, violence (other than gun related), etc.
To be fair, Patriot, the shooters last week weren’t “criminals,” they were nutjobs.
Argument against gun control: Americans need to be able to defend themselves from criminals and crazy people. How many instances of ordinary citizens shooting an armed offender or criminal do you know of?
Argument for gun control: Less guns would prevent accidental gun deaths and crazy people going postal. How many instances of accidental gun deaths or crazy people going postal do you know of?
The first argument seems like a pretty unrealistic straw man argument to me. I don’t buy that the right to bear arms is a deterrent to crime either. If you were a criminal right now, how worried would you be that any random person could be carrying a gun? Probably not too worried, because citizens don’t tend to exercise their 2nd amendment rights and carry around guns everywhere.
Re: Canada and the UK… I’d rather get mugged 5 times than shot
If you’re really worried that Barack is going to take away your guns, though, better use them while you can!
Wow. Pretty powerful argument, ATG.
OK. So, if, as a nation, we have decided that the protection of a human life is more important than a constitutional right, as written in the Constitution, then logic says you ban guns and ban abortion.
Right?
Right?
Agreed?
Or is owning a weapon a lifestyle choice?
*Disclaimer – I saw no need for assault weapons being made available to the general public – right up until the Muslims bombed us. Oh, and then Obama started talking about a Civilian Security Corps. I’m keeping my gun.
What were you going to do with your assault weapons? Carry it around every day in case there’s a stray 737 to shoot at?
I’m in the camp that thinks the Constitutional right was put in place to allow Americans to protect themselves from an oppressive government. Today that would involve giving Americans the right to own tanks, bazookas, and nukes, and unless we’re okay with that simply allowing Americans to carry around a Colt isn’t going to cut it for anything except shooting civilians.
And you already know I agree with you about abortion, my views on the defense of human life are consistent (are yours?)
My argument, ATG, is simple re: civilians LEGALLY owning firearms, and is backed up my the crime rates in “right to carry” states.
If you look at the RATE of theft crimes, break-ins, vandalism, etc. in places like Vermont, New Hampshire, Texas, and other “right to carry” states; as well as VIOLENT crimes such as rapes and other assaults, they are… LOWER than in places where gun regulations are very strict; or banned, such as UK/Canada.
There is a very very simple reason for this:
If I’m a POTENTIAL perpetrator of a crime, and I’m considering doing something like, say, busting into a college building and shooting up 30 or so people… I will THINK TWICE before making such a move if I know that it is a right-to-carry place… if I know that there is a reasonable chance that someone is there to MIGHT shoot me back.
NO, this won’t stop EVERY crazy out there. But it DOES reduce it.
VA Tech is a classic example. That nutjob wouldn’t have shot half that many people if the liberal fascists hadn’t banned people from exercising their God given right to carry a weapon to defend themselves.
And I’m in agreement with GOPMOM’s disclaimer, and her position… fully.
Eh. Usually when people are frustrated and go shooting up schools they don’t care about the consequences of their actions…lets say getting shot at back. So I don’t think you can create a link between the two. I could understand your position if someone was thinking about robbing a store…but that’s about it.
But if you do have some information on the correlation between gun carriers and crime rates, that would be interesting to see. I couldn’t find anything myself.
Marie – I know most search engines tend to be bias towards the left, but with a little effort one can find lots of data. I present only two from thousands of references. There are many supporting both sides of argument.
——————————-
More Guns, Less Crime (Second Edition)
John R. Lott
University of Chicago
————
Concealed-gun-carrying laws and violent crime: evidence from state panel data
Jens Ludwig
Georgetown University and Northwestern University/University of Chicago Poverty Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
Well done wrench, your second study argues that concealed weapons laws have increased rates of homicide. Maybe reality has a bias to the left?
(Typo corrected)
Okay, so let’s assume the numbers are indeterminate. Do we really want to walk around the streets of our respective cities, and know that everyone we see around us is probably carrying a handgun? I don’t think this is a society I would feel safe in. I think I’d rather take my chances with a one-in-ten-million insane person going off and walking into a building with the intention of shooting it up than any average Joe having a pistol on him at all times, even when he was upset about something.
Walk around any city here or in Europe, people are already carrying guns. The percentage of people carrying is going to be higher in Dallas vs. Paris (France…not Texas).
There are guns on the street, If we were to impose strict gun controls, there will still be guns on the street.
Guns and gun owners are here to stay.
From personal experience, I come from a country with ’strict gun controls’. I known people from rural England and big Cities (especially London) who own guns, all manner of handguns, shotguns and rifles. All of which are ‘Controlled’ in some way.
Many of the guns I know about are rarely fired, but I am certain the owners will not give them up – especially now Socialism is plaguing England. I have read somewhere (I cannot find the reference) that you are 5-7 times more likely to be the victim to Violent crime in London that you are NYC. Socialism has softened the police and smaller crimes are ignored.
From ‘Gun Free’ UK
(Offical UK Stats courtesy of ACORN trained staff)
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/66899
The time when the UK bobby would shout “Please stop or I will be forced to say stop again” is coming to an end.
I am sure that your circle of friends includes gun owners – even if they do not admit it.
BTW, I have never taken much notice of the ‘Crime vs. Gun Control’ arguments. I certainly do not pay any attention to the ‘Crazies’ with respect to control.
I don’t really care what people do with rifles – if many in my circle of friends or in rural England own rifles, that’s fine. Incredibly hard to conceal, and useful for little besides hunting and (potentially) pointing at someone who breaks into your house. In that sense, I have no particular desire to change the fact that “guns and gun owners are here to stay.”
Handguns and assault weapons, however, are more easily concealable, and built specifically with the intention of being efficient killers of human beings. I see no reason that they should be in the hands of anyone other than law enforcement.
Also, I think you set up a false choice by pointing to ineffectual British bobbies – nothing about gun control has any bearing on how vigilant (or how well-armed) our police force can be.
On an unrelated note, I had no idea there was a Paris in Texas. You learn something new every day!
Mad Patriot,
I’m pretty much a supporter of the 2nd Ammendment, and the right to bear arms. It’s our right to have guns, so unless we can come up with a non-hypocritical reason to ban them, I think we need to leave the issue alone as-is.
However, please make sure your statistics have meaning. You pull out a few states with liberal (loose) gun ownership policies, and then compare them to countries with more restrictive countries on gun ownership. First, you may want to compare more to the US, as it is more apples to apples. 2 of your 3 states are very low with no, or limited restrictions on gun ownership (Texas has high rates). But compare them to Alaska, which has little restriction (less than NH) and it’s rate is far higher than that of even Texas. Illinois, with restrictive policies similar rates, to Texas. Wisconsin with restrictive polities is about 40% lower violent crime than Texas. What these stats mean to me, is that it’s far more than gun ownership that decide whether crimes are committed.
I agree with your philosphy on the psychology of why there might be a deterrant to these crimes out of fear that you may get shot, but that most-likely is larger for rational people like you and I, than the lower-level thugs that often carry out these crimes.
But again, I’m for ownership. Until law enforcement can jump through your phone and save you, I’m all for responsible gun ownership for those that want it. The side-bonus is that it really keeps the inlaws away.
Elf,
What do you consider hypocritical about efforts to tighten gun control?
A better analogy perhaps would have been to Massachusetts, my home state.
We have high levels of various crimes despite having very restrictive gun laws.
I was trying to point out extremes above… and I understand how it probably read.
Are we forgetting the fact that the 2nd amendment was written when war was fresh on the minds of its citizenry that was called into service. My point is the 2nd amendment is dated. I have been around guns for most of my adult life i.e., hunting, gun ranges, shootin stuff while drinkin beer around a campfire, and I have to say I would never own a gun and have no qualms with stricter regulations on gun control. There is no need for automatic weapons unless you are in the military. Stricter regulations would only keep guns away from criminals not “joe suburb” who is afraid of the “uprising”. And lastly how would you feel if your gun was responsible for a death because your child was curious or a criminal breaks into your house specifically looking for your gun. (and don’t preach to me about how your gun is locked safely away because that defeats the whole purpose of having a gun to protect your home) Guns have one purpose, to kill. Let the professionals carry them. And if you don’t feel safe gear up and you will be the next headline we’ll be talking about.
oh I almost forgot, my family was entertaining the idea of relocating to Mass. but now that I know GOPMOM is armed and dangerous I’d rather move to Haiti.
Or Hough?
Thanks Little Brother – way to support your kin.
You know, some of us need to own guns. Not all of us are as talented at killing dinner, I mean deer, with our cars as you are. That reminds me, get that grill fixed yet.
And if you lived in Cleveland, MA (or Haiti) you would want a gun too. You’re so far out in the ‘burbs, guns are just for shootin’ coyotes.
You’re so not getting a Christmas card this year.
[...] Obligatory “American society killed these people” post [...]