As those on the right continue in their refusal to take any responsibility for the shooting death of a nine-year-old girl in the Tucson massacre which also seriously injured Arizona Democratic representative Gabreille Giffords, they also continue to throw the Second Amendment in our faces because they seem to believe that President Obama is out to disarm them.
After the shooting rampage from this past Saturday, that actually seems like a good idea.
As I stated in a post on another seed, the Second Amendment was written for Americans who lived during a time when they still faced serious military threats from European powers.
The British and French navies harassed the new kid on the block, as they raided American vessels. What's more, Britain actually invaded the United States in 1812.
So, in the context of the time, the Second Amendment was not only practicle, it was essential.
Children were not only taught how to use a firearm by their parents, but were expected to treat firearms in a responsible manner because guns were essential for hunting for food and also for self-defense.
The times have changed.
Americans no longer face any real military threat from any nation. And in case anyone wants to bring up the idea that we could be attacked by a terrorist group, it hasn't happened in a decade. What's more, the only reason that did happen was because George W. Bush ignored the August memo, as well as Richard Clarke's warnings....but that is all for another article.
The threats Americans face today are economic and intellectual in nature.
The Chinese steal our intellectual property. The Japanese steal our ideas.
Since American students are nowhere near the top in math or science scores, one can expect our military dominance to eventually end within our lifetime because Americans refused to educate another generation of engineers and choseto waste money on tax cuts for the wealthy and a military which supposedly couldn't locate Osama Bin Ladin-as if spy satelliteswhich can allegedly take a picture of your license plate can't find a 6-foot, five-inch tall terrorist. Yeah, right.
What good are guns in either one of those cases? No good at all.
Consider the following from the Violence Policy Center.
Facts on Firearms and Domestic Violence
- In 2000, in homicides where the weapon was known, 50 percent (1,342 of 2,701) of female homicide victims were killed with a firearm. Of those female firearm homicides, 1,009 women (75 percent) were killed with a handgun.
- More than five times as many women were murdered by an intimate acquaintance (605) than by a stranger (113) in the year 2000. Additionally, while firearm homicides involving male victims were mostly intra-gender, 95 percent of female firearm homicide victims were murdered by a male.
- Domestic violence against women is a disturbingly common occurrence in the United States. Estimates from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) indicate that from 1993 to 1998, women were victims of violent crimes by their intimate partners an average of more than 935,000 times a year. During this period, intimate-partner violence comprised 22 percent of all violent crimes against women. Although firearms are used in a relatively small percentage of domestic violence incidents, when a firearm is present, domestic violence can and all too often does turn into domestic homicide. Congress, recognizing the unique and deadly role firearms play in domestic violence passed the Protective Order Gun Ban in 1994. The law prohibits gun possession by a person against whom there is a restraining or protective order for domestic violence. In 1996, Congress passed the Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Gun Ban, which prohibits anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence or child abuse from purchasing or possessing a gun.
- A 1997 study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.
- An analysis of female domestic homicides (a woman murdered by a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative) showed that prior domestic violence in the household made a woman 14.6 times more likely, and having one or more guns in the home made a woman 7.2 times more likely, to be the victim of such a homicide.
- The circumstances of firearms violence differ significantly between men and women. Compared to a man, a woman is far more likely to be killed by her spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a family member than murdered by a stranger or an unidentified intruder. A 1976 to 1987 analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation data revealed that more than twice as many women were shot and killed by their husbands or intimate acquaintances than were murdered by strangers using firearms, knives, or any other means.
- Between 1976 and 1996, 65 percent of the male and female victims of intimate partner homicides were killed with a firearm. And while rates of intimate partner homicide have been declining, the ratio of female-to-male victims has risen. In other words, when an intimate-partner homicide occurs, it is increasingly likely that a woman is the victim rather than a man.
- Having a gun in the home makes it three times more likely that you or someone you care about will be murdered by a family member or intimate partner.
- A firearm in the home may be a key factor in the escalation of nonfatal spousal abuse to homicide. In a study of family and intimate assaults for the city of Atlanta, Georgia, in 1984, firearm-associated family and intimate assaults were 12 times more likely to result in death than non-firearm associated assaults between family and intimates.
- The effects of firearm-related domestic violence last long beyond the actual crime. In a study on child witnesses of marital violence, the authors noted that children who observed incidents of domestic violence involving the use or threat of a firearm exhibited higher levels of behavior problems than children who did not.
Now, where they get their information from? None other than the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
You know, it just isn't fair. A nine-year-old girl no longer has her life, but you still have your gun.
Should a nine-year-old have had to water the tree of liberty? I don't think so.