Blame Game Part II

In my previous post I discussed how the guilty parties in the tragic shooting in Tucson, AZ were in fact the First and Second Amendment. The following is part II of why I think the First and Second Amendment are in fact guilty and what should be done about it.

 The day after President Obama spoke at the memorial service for the dead and wounded of the January 8th shooting in Tucson, AZ; press secretary Robert Gibbs squared off with a Russian journalist. Andrei Sitov of the Russian official news agency ITAR-TASS suggested the "deranged" actions of the gunman represented the "reverse side of freedom." He then went on to tell Politico, "if you want this to stop you have to be willing to restrict some freedoms." I couldn't have said it better myself minus the heavy accent of course.
 It is the freedoms that we are guaranteed in the Constitution that provide the opportunity for terrible crimes and abuse of those freedoms. Show me a guaranteed freedom in the Constitution and I can show you where someone has misused that freedom.
 The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." One does not have to look far to see where people have taken this freedom to unhealthy levels. David Koresh in Waco, Texas and Jim Jones and the Nov 18th, 1978 mass suicide of 900 members comes to mind. Who can forget the sexual abuse by some in the Catholic church? These were terrible abuses of the religious freedoms that we enjoy in this country, but should all ministers, pastors, priests, rabbis or imams be judged by the actions of a few? Should we as citizens be demanding more government regulations and control over the church to stop these abuses? Most reasonable people would say no.
 The First Amendment guarantees, "freedom of speech and of the press". You do not have to think very hard to recall times when those freedoms have been abused. The Second Amendment is obvious as we discussed in my last post. People have severely abused the right to bear arms many times. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee a fair trial but how many times has the justice system failed by convicting an innocent person or letting a guilty person go. Anybody other then me thinking OJ Simpson? The Fifteenth Amendment deals with a persons right to vote. I know I have abused this freedom many times by casting and uninformed vote or just voting for a party instead of a man or woman that holds to my ideals. The Twenty First Amendment repealed the Eighteenth and ended prohibition. How many people have been killed by drunk drivers since the Twenty First Amendment became law? There is no doubt the more freedoms we are given the more likely abuses of those freedoms will take place.
 Whenever a hideous crime, like this shooting, takes place people look to see how it could be avoided in the future. I for one am all for looking into how things could be different so that tragedy can be avoided. Unfortunately what usually happens is knee jerk reactions and finger pointing that make no sense and resolves nothing. Here is where some common sense would come into play.
 Rep. Peter King, a Republican from New York, is planning to introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official. Lets see if this passes the common sense test. For the sake of this argument I am going to try to get into the mind of a deranged gunman.
 I have finally decided, for whatever reason, to take the life of a politician. I have purchased, stolen or borrowed a gun and I have planned my attack. There is only one problem I have and it is a law on the books that states I am not allowed to go within 1,000 feet of the politician I am going for. I guess I will have to call of my attack that would have violated fifty laws because I just got a conscience and I realized I can't break the law. Maybe it's me but the use of the term deranged should be for the man who created this law. Here is a news flash for you. Criminals don't care about the law hence the name criminal. Sadly there is no common sense in our reactions.
 So what should we do? First, is we honor all those killed and wounded that day by realizing they were taking part in what makes us great, democracy by the people and for the people. Rep Gifford just a few days before the shooting swore and oath that she would defend and support the Constitution and she was shot doing just that. The oath she swore was very similar to the very oath I took as a soldier. When a soldier is shot or wounded we call them heroes and to me Rep Gifford is a hero. To be quite honest with you so are all the victims of that tragedy.
 The second thing we do is realize that in our greatest freedoms lay the potential for great abuse. However, we do not change our freedoms because we fear the few evil episodes that may come up but we celebrate the immeasurable good that is done everyday in the name of freedom. If you really want to honor the lives of those wounded and killed on January 8th find out the next time your congressman or congresswoman is going to be in town and attend the meeting, even if they are not who you voted for. Do your part to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and let those who would do evil know that their actions will not stop freedom. Let the Russian journalist(who clearly doesn't get it) and the rest of the world know we are not going to give up any freedom because we will not dishonor the lives of those lost and wounded on January 8th by giving up what they suffered and or died for; freedom.

Thanks For Reading
Steve

In the next few days I will write about the most attacked amendment in the Constitution.