I want to address an issue I feel too strongly about not to address as my first diary entry. This one in particular does not get the support it requires to be dealt with logically. To any hardcore liberal out there, I know I may be preaching the choir, but bear with me.
The problems that surround the 2nd amendment in this country are so unbelievably important, however, it is also something that is so embedded in our culture that not enough people feel enough passion about changing the gun laws for anything to happen unless of course they have personally suffered a loss of a loved one as a result of gun violence. It's the saddest thing, really.
I, myself, feel that I am lucky enough to live in Connecticut, one state in particular that has certainly become on of the most progressive states in the Union, particularly on gun laws. It is a shame, however, to think that our government can only be reactive instead of proactive in that sense.
I was attending WestConn at the time of the Sandy Hook shootings which is located about ten minutes away from where that unthinkable tragedy took place. I knew professors that had lost children at Sandy Hook Elementary and could never imagine the pain of losing a child no more than seven years old. It is absolutely ridiculous that something as awful as the murders of twenty first graders is what needed to happen in order for our state legislatures to create such strict gun laws. I would apply the same opinion to the rest of the country, however, for some states, particularly southern it would seem, I am not entirely sure what would need to happen in order for the legislatures to strengthen their state's gun laws. Our government being reactive is, of course, the case with any disaster we deal with. I guess we cannot assess the correct way to fix a problem until it has actually occurred? I just don't know.
What's even more absurd is having a 90% public approval for background checks incorporated into the gun purchasing process in the United States and still not one single republican congressman could vote for something that would have literally saved the lives of the people who were victims in the recent California shootings, which brings me the point of this whole entry.
It is because our congressmen FAILED to do the right thing, because the NRA has far too much power over the government, that they now both OFFICIALLY have blood on their hands. It is appalling to think that these are the people who run this country. One of the fathers of a boy who was murdered by Elliot Rodger actually addressed this to the press, although, it was eye-opening to see that he actually knew the real reason his son died, or was at least aware of decisions that could have saved his sons life.
"Why did Chris die? Because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA. They talk about gun rights. What about Chris's right to live?"- Richard Martinez, father of Chris Michael-Martinez, victim of May 23rd, 2014 shooting at University of California, Santa BarbaraEveryone is supposed to have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To all the gun nuts, your second amendment rights DO NOT triumph ANYONE'S right to live. Nor will it ever. I believe in the silly idea that less guns will equal less deaths. Call me crazy.
God forbid a republican in congress feels compassionate enough to vote in the best interest of the people. A country of the people, by the people, for the people? A joke. The conservatives that we've observed ever since Obama took office hold no interest except their own, or is that too obvious of a statement to make?
While I try see both sides of story, it is also important to make the distinction between the people who stand up for the rights of the people versus the ones who simply stick to their ideology and nothing more. We have seen who those people are. We know who is controlled by the NRA and who is not. I will never see the gun argument and I refuse to see how anyone else does when any gun supporter seems to think the ONLY solution to gun deaths in America is to make guns even more accessible than they are now and at the same time think that anything that makes having a gun safer means that the government is trying to take away their guns completely. From their cold, dead hands, supposedly. I do not claim to be expert by any means, but the numbers are very simple and really just a "google" away. Britain had 33 homicides due to gun deaths in 2010 and the United States had 11,078 that same year. It's not rocket science... or at least I never thought it was until recently.
So this is my question: When will enough finally be enough? When will these gun advocates set aside their ideology and put the lives of their people first? Although some of us are more open-minded than others, unfortunately, humans as a species do not seem to identify with any sort of struggle until it actually happens to them.
Sympathy, however, is something that needs to be more important than empathy in a matter of gun violence towards a six year old child. The fight for a progressive nation continues...