The Blame Game.

  The headline on the TV read, "Sarah Palin Responsible For Shooting In Tucson, Arizona?" I was shocked and in disbelief. Had Palin flipped her lid and gone on a shooting rampage? Did she seriously go after Rep Gifford? The shooting had taken place just hours before I read this headline. Before I even knew the name of the shooter I knew that Sarah Palin  and the Tea Party were responsible for the horrific shooting and the type of weapon used in the attack.
 Over the last five days the talk shows have been buzzing trying to place blame for this senseless crime on two perpetrators neither of which are named Jared Lougher (the actual shooter). What are the names of the guilty parties you ask? The First and Second Amendments are the responsible parties and they are to blame for what happened last Saturday morning.
 You may think that I am stretching this a little bit but if you watch any of the news channels you will see I am not exaggerating in the least. Free Speech (political rhetoric) and firearms were the cause of this heinous crime. The fact Lougher was mentally unstable had nothing to do with it (at least that is what the media portrayed). The blame fell squarely on the shoulders of the aforementioned parties. Lets put these accusations to the common sense test and see if the media is right. You maybe surprised by what we find.
 The First Amendment guarantees us freedom of speech. We have the right to express ourselves with our words and actions. Unless you have lived under a rock your whole life I can guarantee there will come a time that you will be offended by someones freedom of speech. I recently finished a college course on Constitutional Law and I was offended regularly by the Supreme Court rulings that allowed for issues like flag burning or cross burning. But here is a little secret the Constitution protects us from losing our rights as free citizens it does not protect from hurt feelings.
 No one will argue today that political rhetoric is intense. There are polarizing figures on both sides of the spectrum and the talk can get heated. But I would argue that political speech today is no more intense then it was at any other time in our nations history. I was not alive or to young to remember Vietnam and the protests that came with that or for that matter the rhetoric from the Civil Rights Movement. I know from reading history that the nation was greatly divided during both World Wars about our involvement and the way the wars were conducted. I can assure you the political scene during the time before the Civil War was intense and heated. From the very beginning when our founding fathers created this democracy there was strong dissent. I believe a honest look will show that at times this rhetoric produced violence and uprisings.
 The shooting on May 4th 1970  at Kent State University comes to mind. The protesters had gathered in an antiwar rally when violence erupted. Detroit had violent race riots in 1943 and 1967. In the late 1850's a mad man name John Brown dumped fuel on the fire of an already unsettled country over the issue of slavery when he massacred 5 men in Pottawatomie Creek, Kansas and then raided a weapons depot in Harpers Ferry, Ohio. A simple search on the Internet will reveal that during the 1700-1800 close to two dozen politicians were killed in actual duels. Four US Presidents have been assassinated and several other attempts were made on other presidents. There is strong proof I believe that politics in general and certainly heated political talk can incite violence. So step one of our common sense test says, "yes political rhetoric can cause violence."
 The Second Amendment states that as citizens we have the right to keep and bear arms. Let me say that I am a strong believer in the Constitution and that includes the 2nd Amendment. I am a card carrying NRA member and usually very close to that card is a handgun of some type. I have a concealed handgun permit and I use that right as often as I can. I own assault weapons, hunting weapons, recreational shooting weapons and even high capacity magazines for several of those weapons. I enjoy shooting, hunting and having the freedom to protect myself and my family. I recently had a mother tell me that she wasn't comfortable with her child at my home because there are guns in the house. My response was. "I don't feel comfortable with my child at your house if there isn't a gun." I say all that to show you how strongly I feel about the Second Amendment. But again applying the common sense test lets look at the question as to whether firearms played a part in the horrific shooting in AZ.
 This one is far easier to prove then political rhetoric because it is the firearm that did the damage. It was the tool that brought death and it is the teeth behind the violence. In every violent episode I mentioned above firearms were used. All the presidents that were assassinated were with a firearm. The students at Kent State were shot, Martin Luther King was shot and there were many shootings in the Detroit race riots. John Brown raided a weapons depot so he could get more weapons for his cause. Without firearms none of these acts of violence would have been possible. Guns kill people and there is really no debating that sad truth.
 So it would appear that the media got it right for once. The First and Second Amendment are guilty as charged and responsible for the death and mayhem that took place last Saturday. I think the obvious conclusion is that we need to change the constitution starting with more government control of our free speech and then with more government regulation on firearms and if all possible the complete eradication of weapons. The United Nations has been using this with great success all over the world. Where ever the UN goes and weapons are removed safety and peace ensues.
 So the accusations have been leveled at the Constitution namely the First and Second Amendments and because the Constitution we are attacking guarantees us a right to trial I guess we should allow the defendant to speak for itself. Unless of course we just want to go ahead and get rid of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment while we are at it.
 Over the next few days I will try to write a compelling argument in defense of the Constitution and in defense of common sense. Contrary to what some may think they actually go together quite well.

Thanks For Reading
Steve