Daniel Hernandez, 20, comes off as a soft-spoken, intelligent young man. But it was his steel and calm - literally under fire - that is attributed to saving Congresswoman Gifford's life, during the shootings in Arizona. He is being called a hero and rightly so.
It wouldn't normally be appropriate to call attention to someones orientation, but in this case I think it is paramount. Daniel Hernandez is gay, and although this played no role in his calm demeanor and quick thinking. It may have the potential to change the perception of homosexuals.
As a nation, we recently saw history being made, with the demise of DADT, after 17 years of sanctioned discrimination. The arguments against repeal are based in ignorance and stupidity, but the national attention this story has generated, is a much needed focused lens of truth on the oppositions mirage of lies. His orientation speaks directly to readiness, cohesion. He was able to make split second decisions, during combat, that were life saving and all while homosexual. I dare Senator McCain to refute this truth.
The intense coverage has also brought to light how Gifford became a target, the tea party, freedom of speech and it's consequences, gun control and the vitrolism of our media.
Gifford became a target based on her decision to support health care reform, commonly know as Obamacare. Sarah Palin felt it necessary to post this map "targeting" Gifford as an enemy and thus and enemy of the tea party movement.
Sarah Palin's political action committee singled out 20 Democratic members of Congress by using rifle scopes to "target" them on a map. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was one such target. After the historical health care reform vote Palin told her followers On Twitter - Concerned Conservatives and Lovers of America "Don't Retreat, instead - RELOAD!"
Sharon Angle from Nevada, who was defeated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in November, said that if Congress - then dominated by Democratic majorities in both houses - kept going in the same direction, people may resort to "Second Amendment remedies."
Following the Gifford shooting, Palin removed the map from her website, which begs the question, is that a sign of perceived responsibility?
As Americans we are all entitled to freedom of speech via the Constitution, however does that freedom free us from the consequences. I am torn on this aspect of the issue. I have never been a fan of blaming TV, Music or Movie industries when something like this happens. It ahs happened often. My favorite genre of movie is horror. In my many years I have never seen a killer thriller and thought i should get a machete and exact my vengeance on the city.
If you have an imbalance or are crazy from the get go, then the media by which you snap can not be blamed. Crazy is as crazy does.
Then I think about Charles Mansion. Charles Manson is an criminal who led what became known as the Manson Family, a quasi-commune that arose in California in the late 1960s. Although he personally killed no one, he was found guilty of conspiracy to commit the Tate/LaBianca murders carried out by members of the group at his instruction. He was convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's objective.
So are Sarah and Sharon responsible for perpetrating the conspiracy that Obamacare and democracy are anti-American and if they don't get their way, then their followers should resort to 2nd amendment remedies. If one or more of their followers to took their suggestions and brought them to fruition, wouldn't they bare a portion of the responsibility. To quote Spiderman - with great power comes great responsibility.
This incident should shine the light on the need for gun control. I realize this is a touchy subject, but the shooter was able to procure a 33-round clip for the glock he used. Is there any reason why a 33-round magazine exists for the Glock? With the exception of special forces, the general police in your area are only allowed a clip with 12 bullets and one in the chamber. Why is the criminal allowed to have more fire power than the police. The people sworn to protect us are out numbered by bullets.
Yes, the Constitution says we have the right to bare arms. But we must look at the intent of the statement. As a fledgling nation, we had just ended a war with England over our very freedom and were concerned that they would come back, so we needed our citizens to be ever ready. We do no have a fear of being conquered anymore and we have our own established Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. We have our own sanctioned, publicly funded militia.
So should we be allowed guns? yes. But, we do not need assault rifles, rocket launchers, grenade launchers, flame throwers or hand guns with mega-clips that can bring down a dinosaur, for home protection. What the hell are you hunting that requires a 50 caliber bullet. Does the average citizen have the right to stock pile weapons of what could be mass destruction, if we invade other countries to prevent them from doing the same.
Enough blame to go around...
No comments:
Post a Comment