arizona shooting

16Jan/116

Tragedy Begets Bad Law

First of all, Schumer's a tool and we all know this, but I thought I'd address his latest idiocy before it starts to gain bi-partisan support. As if some lowly small-time blogger is going to be able to stop that, but one can dream, can't he?

Apparently Loughner was able to buy a gun in spite of two things. 1. He's crazy; but has never been treated or officially diagnosed. 2. He's got a history of drug use. That drug use kept him out of the military because he admitted it to recruiters. It did not, however, keep him from buying a gun because without an arrest, it never made the FBI radar. So Schumer, in his finite wisdom, has declared he wants to force recruiters to disclose this information to the FBI when they get it; ostensibly to prevent the next Loughner.

One thing that constantly amazes me about politicians is their super-human ability to ignore obvious (if unintended) consequences in the name of good intentions. The only thing this bill would do is prevent applicants from disclosing their drug use to military recruiters, which would simply mean someone like Loughner would have been allowed to enter the military.

How scary is that?

Well, it would do one more thing, it would keep otherwise qualified applicants from even trying for fear of their drug use getting onto the FBI radar (no one likes the idea that the FBI might have a file on them). Prior minor drug use isn't necessarily a disqualifier, but if one gets caught lying on the application about this issue, it could be grounds for immediate dismissal (less than honorable).

More on our propensity to respond to tragedy with bad law at the Colorado Springs Gazette.

Adam Wells

Living life at 84 mph and 7000 feet. All I ask is that you don't block traffic, act like a professional, and don't act all surprised when your actions have consequences. Oh, and don't complain about the refs; trust me, they don't care if your team wins or not.

Tagged as: arizona shooting, bad law, law of unintended consequences, LUC, schumer 6 Comments

10Jan/1119

Tragedy And Rhetoric

I've been slow to post on this, for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, I just haven't felt like posting much since Thursday. But today, I've been walking around without crutches most of the day (except for stairs), and I took the bandage off without incident. The hydrocodone has helped, although it's contributed to an excess of sleep. Speaking of hydrocodone, I'll be right back.

All better now.

Now, onto the topic at hand. I'm really getting tired of people whining about the political rhetoric, as if we can blame political speech for the horrific tragedy committed by a crazy lunatic in Tucson. I have to admit, one of my first thoughts (after the horror set in) was a fear for how this would affect political discourse; and particularly a fear of the blame that was bound to be attached to the right wing (she is, after all, a Democrat). I was preparing my stock response, "You can't blame what this guy did on political metaphors."

Knowing that he was actually upset with her for not being far left enough, my stock response is still appropriate. We cannot blame the actions of crazy people on the metaphorical turns of phrase expounded by those who may hold some sort of political similarities. We don't get to blame Obama for this guy, we don't to blame Algore for the nutcase at the Discovery Channel, we don't get to blame Limbaugh for Oklahoma City, and we don't get to blame Bill O'Reilly for the guy who shot the abortion doctor.

To do so would require some sort of legal standard to determine a number of things. We'd have to somehow quantify similarity of thought (unless you want to hold a leftwing nutjobs actions against a political antagonist) as well as correlation. Did this guy go crazy after reading Al Gore's book, after listening to Obama's speech, or maybe after reading Paul Krugman's column? I'm not smart enough to be able to think of a legal standard that wouldn't completely destroy free political speech as we know it.

Whether the rhetoric under discussion is something God will hold them accountable for is something different entirely. Personally, I think He will hold us accountable for our slanders, lies, and half-truths. He will hold us accountable for our exaggerations and intentional misquotes.

No matter how inappropriate the post-tragedy rhetoric (name your tragedy, there's been rhetoric to follow), or how vitriolic the pre-tragedy rhetoric, it's just not helpful to blame it for the tragedy.

Adam Wells

Tagged as: arizona shooting, blame game, discourse, Political Theater, rhetoric 19 Comments

9Jan/111

How Do You Find Words?

Roxanna Greene the mother of Christina Greene, the little girl who was killed in yesterday's shooting in Arizona, was on FNC this morning. It was a heartbreaking couple of minutes and once someone puts it up on the web, listen if you didn't get to see it first time around.

I was crying and just contemplating the horror of your child being taken from you in such a violent way. Contemplating the complete and total feeling of loss her mother must have felt in knowing that her child died.......without her.

And then I see this piece of complete crap and I just lose it. I'm a HUGE fan of the Constitution and particularly of the First Amendment....but Dear God. I know, if you don't stand up for the rights of everyone you give up your own. In theory I believe that and 99% of the time I even believe it in practice. I loathe and detest hate crime legislation...I think it is completely ridiculous to criminalize thought. But somewhere there's a line .....right? If the Westboro Baptist Church (makes me gag every time I see that word attached to these vile, vicious, hate mongering, vitriolic, self-righteous, ignorant, bile spewing freaks) doesn't at least get right up on the line....who does?

/rant.