Gun Control

IM (an American citizen with an inquiring mind):  Gadfly, what are your thoughts about the Connecticut shooting?

Gadfly:  Proverbs 26:11.

IM:  Refresh my memory on that one.

Gadfly:  Does dogs and vomit, and fools and folly sound familiar?

IM:  Alright, Gadfly, you’re being too cryptic.  Why do you mention this particular proverb?

Gadfly:  It is Solomon’s ancient wisdom about habit and human bondage.  The metaphor about dogs returning to their vomit is about habits.  Aristotle explained that habits are the foundation for virtues and vices.  Habits that are related to virtuous behavior incline behaviors to be virtuous.  On the other hand, habits that lead to vice incline vice-related behaviors.  The metaphor about fools returning to folly is about how emotions and primal instincts trump reason.  I talked about this in my August monologue, Cogito Ergo Sum, where I bemoaned the growing number of Copernican drones in our society who lack the capacity to reason, and how the paleomammalian portion of the triune brain dominates associative reasoning in the human neocortex.  This default mechanism of the triune brain is a more scientific explanation for what Spinoza described as human bondage, that is, how emotions and passion trump reason. We discussed Spinoza’s human bondage in our conversation about your “dry, parched lips” dream.

IM:  I’m still trying to connect what you are saying with the Connecticut shooting tragedy.

Gadfly:  What has been the reaction so far?

IM:  A lot of people are calling for gun control.

Gadfly:  Do you believe the reaction is based on emotion or reason?

IM:  I think the reaction is based on both.

Gadfly:  Explain.

IM:  Twenty children and six adults were brutally murdered by an assault weapon.  Certainly the emotional reaction includes outrage and anger for the mass murders, yet compassion for the families.  Reason suggests that had the assault weapon not been available, then it could not have caused the deaths.  Therefore, banning assault weapons can prevent similar tragedies in the future.

Gadfly:  Fair enough.  But keep in mind, assault weapons or even knives have no intent—they are mere instruments in the hands of a person who has intent.  How about all the murders committed by handguns?

IM:  What do you mean?

Gadfly:  Episodes like the Connecticut shooting receive a lot of attention because of the sensational nature of the event.  Yet, the largest number of homicides is from hand guns.  To put this event into a broader context, of the top 15 causes of death in America, 13 are due to medical conditions, while accidents from unintentional causes ranked fifth on the list and suicides ranked 10th.  Homicides, regardless of the nature, don’t even rank in the top 15 causes for death.  When do we start a national conversation about the suicide rate in America?

IM:  But, don’t we still have a moral obligation to impose more control over the availability of guns and multiple-shell magazines?

Gadfly:  Yes and no.  Control only works for law-abiding citizens.  Law-abiding citizens are not the problem.  Do you think any form of gun control will prevent violent crime by the non-law-abiding citizens?  This is why the discussion on gun control in the wake of the Connecticut shooting is difficult.  Logic may not support more restrictive gun control measures, yet emotions for such action are very strong.

IM:  Isn’t there something we can do?

Gadfly:  Of course there is, but it is not consistent with current cultural trends.  Just yesterday, while driving to the airport I saw an electronic sign that said, “Happy Holidays.”  Of course, this is the politically correct way of telling people we look forward to festivities surrounding the 25th of December.  In the not too distant past, we called this time of the year, “Christmas,” and American people, whether Christian or not, would greet others with “Merry Christmas.”  As most of us know, this day symbolized the birth of Jesus Christ.  Who was Jesus Christ?  Whether or not one believes in His divinity, Christ cautioned the Pharisees that He was not here to change the law, that is, the Ten Commandments, but to teach a more fulfilling way of life based on love and forgiveness.  Imagine what today’s society would look like if children were taught that there is a higher power than the government, to honor their parents (because parents respected and mentored their children), and to avoid dishonesty, envy, stealing, killing, and lust?  Perhaps our young people would be less alienated.  Perhaps our culture would not sap so soon the innocence with which our children come into this mortal existence.  Perhaps this early loss of innocence accounts for why mass killing victims seem to be the innocent.  Although, in the case of the Columbine High School massacre, two gifted seniors resorted to violence against other high school students after four years of being bullied.

IM:  Nonetheless, Gadfly, wouldn’t controlling the availability of guns eliminate the temptation to commit violence?

Gadfly:  No.  Temptation stems from an acquired way of seeing and reacting to one’s perceived and experienced habitat.  This is why Proverbs 26:11 is such eternal wisdom.  We must educate our youth to appreciate the importance of virtue by taking on habits that are consistent with the Ten Commandments and Christ’s example of loving one’s neighbor and forgiving offenses.  Yet, think about how our culture confuses our young people.  We have mothers who are willing to kill their children while still in the womb.  How much more innocent are these poor creatures?  These babies did not choose to be in their mother’s womb.  Their presence in the womb is a result of the mother’s choice to engage in sexual intercourse.  For whatever reason (whether inconvenient, not wanted, or whatever), mothers make a choice to kill the child in the womb.  In these cases, guns are not used; yet, if one were to delve into how these babies are killed in the abortion procedure, it is brutal.  The most common procedure is called aspiration.  The baby is vacuumed out of the womb and discarded.  And, while reported homicides caused by firearms are less than 12,000 per year, approximately 1.2 million babies are aborted each year.  Twenty children were killed in the Connecticut shooting.  More than 3,200 babies are aborted each day, just in our country alone. 

IM:  It’s hard to emotionally connect with a fetus that is virtually invisible in the mother’s wound, but we saw pictures of the children killed in Connecticut. 

Gadfly:  Excellent point, IM.  Some prolife advocates have championed for an ultrasound procedure before initiating an actual abortion so that the mother can see a picture of the life in her womb.  But, abortion advocates say an ultrasound is too invasive, as if inserting a vacuum for the aspiration procedure is not invasive. 

IM:  Do you see same sex marriage factoring into this discussion at all?

Gadfly:  Absolutely.  The push for same sex marriage is another cultural development focused on pure selfishness.  Same sex marriages satisfy emotional and physical appetites and have no potential to naturally create life.  Only a marriage formed by a man and a woman can naturally create life, consistent with the laws of nature.  Darwin himself called it the “theory of creation” five times in his seminal work, On the Origins of Species.  Contrary to common understandings, Darwin clearly acknowledged the existence of God and used a variety of expressions referring to a plan of creation--over 20 times in the first edition and over 40 times by the sixth edition.  To suggest that same sex marriage is equivalent to traditional marriage is pure folly.  The unfortunate part of this social experiment is that there is a concerted effort to create new memes to justify this folly and, as a consequence, modify habitats that encourage the mimicking of similar behaviors.  Meanwhile, suicides will continue to take place, more babies will be aborted, and political elite will continue to diminish Judeo-Christian principles and traditions while increasing the rhetoric on gun control.

IM:  I now understand why you say the gun control discussion is an example of Proverbs 26:11.

Gadfly: There are other considerations as well—they mostly relate to Jefferson’s reminder about oppressive governments in the Declaration of Independence and the rationale for the Constitution’s Second Amendment.  Gun control is not a complicated issue—it’s a red herring in a sea of far greater issues.

Compromise or Capitulate?

Old Gadfly:  IM (an American citizen with an inquiring mind), there seems to be a serious impasse with current “fiscal cliff” discussions.  How do you understand the different strategies at play?

IM:  Obama and Democrats feel they have the political momentum to further advance progressivism through the further distribution of wealth with higher tax rates for the wealthy and more government spending.  Republicans are opposed to raising tax rates, but will consider increasing revenues through tax reform and want spending reductions.

Gadfly:  Which strategy is best?

IM:  That depends on what the strategy seeks to achieve as an outcome.

Gadfly:  Do you have a sense for the outcomes?

IM:  Yes.  Resources provide power.  The more money the government spends, the more power it wields over the affairs of American society.  And when a lot of that money is in the form of entitlements, the recipients become more and more dependent upon them and those who claim to be their champions.  This is why Obama and the Democrats push for higher taxes from a very small percentage of the population to support more spending.  Notice, Obama and fellow Democrats have not offered to use increased tax revenue to pay down any of the deficits incurred from the massive spending growth over the past four years.

Gadfly:  So, how about the Republicans?

IM:  The Republicans understand that real revenue generating potential is tied to a growing economy.  When the government takes money out of this dynamic by increasing tax rates, this is money that cannot be used for investment or consumption.  New taxes for more government spending requires more government jobs to monitor and regulate the spending programs, which is another drain on the wealth generating capacity of a nation.  Besides those who receive entitlement benefits, government employees also become dependent upon these programs.  Investment and consumption generate jobs.  New jobs increase the tax base.  Thus, when the economy grows, and unemployment rates decrease even without any changes in tax rates, tax revenue increases significantly.

Gadfly:  Why do so many Americans not appreciate the Republican logic?

IM:  They align with better story tellers.

Gadfly:  So, are you saying Obama and Democrats are better story tellers?

IM:  Yes, and not only are they offering no compromise in current negotiations, they are preparing the public to blame Republicans if America falls off the fiscal cliff.  The only way to delay the fiscal cliff in the short-term is for Republicans to capitulate, to surrender.

Gadfly:  What happens if the Republicans capitulate?

IM:  Republicans should explain to their constituents and the American people that they have sheathed the sword to give the Obama and Democrats full accountability for the outcome of their policies.

Gadfly:  That is an interesting thought.

IM:  As the baker’s union discovered with the Hostess negotiations, there is only so much that can be done when wealth is not being generated.  When the baker’s union stood on ideological principle despite reality, Hostess closed its doors and thousands of employees lost their jobs.  We’ll see a lot more of this across our nation.

Gadfly:  Life could become pretty grim in America.

IM:  Yes, but we can recover if enough people who hitched their wagons to the progressive ideology discover how unsustainable it is and vote in 2014 for those who have a better understanding of how to work with the private sector.

Gadfly:  There is such a simple logic to the flow of money between the private sector, the government, and recipients of government funding.  But, those who align with Obama and Democrats seem to forget where the government receives its funding resources.  It’s almost as though they believe the government creates the money it uses to “provide for the masses.”  It is the private sector that generates an economic wave and its corresponding jobs, wealth, and tax revenue for government spending.  If businesses close, the wave subsides, jobs go away, wealth creation goes away, and tax revenues go away.

IM:  Obama will likely get his way.  And, it won’t take long to see how quickly the economy will further contract.  Character-based leaders would rise to the occasion; unfortunately, Obama will exploit the occasion for more power.

Gadfly:  A future Spielberg is not likely to produce a movie about a Representative or a Senator involved with current policy negotiations, but Obama will certainly have a legacy to dramatize.

IM:  I suspect any production will more likely be a comedy than a portrayal of epochal history; and its massive cast of characters will be the Copernican drones who voted Obama and other progressives into office.