Monday, April 22, 2013

In The Eye Of The Beholder

Meanwhile, back at the Capitol, the same morons who haven't quite grokked the idea that over 90% country is calling for sensible gun legislation starting with background checks,  are now calling for the white hat bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, to be declared an enemy combatant. What is wrong with those people? I was operating under the impression that we all were agreed that US citizens were accorded the full protection/weight of the law. As such, even though he is not native born, Dzhokhar is an American citizen. That makes a difference. You can't modify the law because you don't like someone's religion or politics or even their native country. The surviving brother is an American and must be treated accordingly.

Now, I'm gonna guess the Tsarnaev boys got their pressure cooker collection from some discount home store...but where did they get their guns? According to police reports, they were packing another pressure-cooker bomb, seven IEDs, an M4 carbine, two handguns, and a BB gun. The guys lived in Cambridge where ownership laws are very strict, and neither guy seems to have had the local permits for gun ownership. So who sold them the guns, and were the sales legal? Would background checks have slowed them down? Perhaps a little. Perhaps it would’ve  been harder to get the weapons and the magazines. Perhaps. Perhaps. Perhaps. But it would have been a valid hurdle.

There is not much common ground between the Tsarnaev brothers and Adam Lanza. They are apples and oranges that ended up as part of a heinous. spoilt, fruit salad. Still, guns were in the hands of thems who should never have had them in the first place. How do we stop that?

The truth is that you probably can’t. Lunatics are going to get weapons, criminals are going to get weapons, and all a background check can do is to slow the process. If we’re really lucky, the process will alert some proper authority that a nut-ball is trying to get guns and there can be a timely intervention. 

But at the end of the day, We, the People, are Americans who are governed by American laws set in place by our duly elected legislative bodies. If you are an American, then you are equal before the law with every other American regardless of place of birth, faith, race, gender, sexual orientation, or the color of your eyebrows. 

Dzhokhar will be tried in an American court of law, not a military tribunal, not a kangaroo court, and not the court of public opinion. He is entitled to a defense lawyer and the best possible defense. We cannot appear to bypass our own judicial system because these two were Muslim. We cannot permit any appearance of impropriety in regard to his trial. This is our chance to demonstrate how American justice works….transparently, openly, and with great deliberation.

But if you have your heart set on finding enemy combatants, I suggest you try Washington, DC. You will find lots of them wandering the halls of congress masquerading as concerned legislators when, in fact, they are aiding and abetting the overthrow of America as We, the People, know it. As I commented in Andrew Rosenthal’s editorial blog, Taking Note: What’s the Difference Between McVeigh and Tsarnaev?, in today’s NY Times:

I think Lindsey Graham should be arrested and tried as an enemy combatant. He has done everything in his power to subvert the law in favor of arms dealers who supply criminals and would-be terrorists. He has steadfastly refused to support background checks for gun purchasers at the same time he has voted in favor of allowing unlimited shot ammo magazines and a national conceal and carry reciprocity bill.
How can you not suspect him of nefarious activity when his very platform sets up America to be attacked by anyone with a credit card and an internet connection.
Clearly, he is _encouraging_ acts of terrorism by refusing to enact sensible gun laws.
If one hates Americans and works to further open the door to terrorists and criminals, one might think that would meet anyone's criteria for enemy combatant....including his own.

For the record, I threw the comment over the wall at 3:51 PM (CST) and it is the #1 reader pick comment. I think I struck a chord with this one. 

Why doesn't that surprise me?

 [Correction in paragraph one - I originally stated both were citizens. That is incorrect. Tamerlan Tsarnev was legal resident alien whose application for citizenship was still pending at the time of the bombing.] 

Wifely Person's Tip o' the Week

The best thing about snow in April is that you know it can't last.....

can it?

April 22, 2013
Enough, already.


  1. What I don't get is that the people that think the govment will come to take their guns away are also the ones most ready to take away the liberties of others. And those same people that think the govment is too ineffective to be trusted with our money would be highly effective at taking away said guns. And have the wherewithal to do things with no one ever finding out about them. Which way do they want it?

    1. Isn't that the $64,000 question?

    2. I agree the comment is heartfelt & strikes a chord, but any well stated plea on an emotionally charged issue can do that. However, the content doesn't really doesn't address the statistical data. The statistics clearly show that more guns do not equal more crime. Reference:

      Additionally, gun crime rates in the USA have consistently been dropping nationally for some time now, despite the continued increase in gun sales. The majority of people actually disagree with this data. Reference:

      With regards to weapons confiscation, it has occurred in other nations & the USA in localized instances. Rarely does a nation progress from full gun ownership rights to confiscation in fell legislative swoop. Normally it occurs over a long period of time & gradual declination of ownership rights. Confiscation is simply the logical conclusion of such a strategic policy trajectory. Reference:
      While one may disagree with the concern, it's clearly a rational basis to explain why some might conjure up thoughts of it potentially occurring in the USA.

      The fundamental issues are neither guns nor policy imo. I believe they are much deeper & more profound. I think the simplest way to attempt to touch on this is with this simple question:

      What does history teach us about ourselves?

      thanks & best regards,

  2. Been thinking about your photo and caption, WP -- here's mine:

    Elu elu keeps on snowin'
    Keeps on snowin', I keep shov'lin
    Keeps on snowin', I keep shov'lin