These and other similar examples are accurately summarized with the same language federal law employs to describe domestic terrorism. Generating maximum media attention, the weapons-brandishing displays are "intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population." Yes, the gun has been transformed from a sport and self-defense device into a tool of mass bullying. Like the noose in the Jim Crow South, its symbolic message is clear: If you dare engage in the democratic process, you risk bodily harm.These people are the same ones that are having a hard time accepting the reality that the majority have rejected their control over the last several elections. They also cannot present a logical, rational or compelling argument against health care reform, so they will try to bully us around to reach their goals.
With that implicit threat, the incessant arguments about gun ownership have been supplanted by a more significant debate over which should take precedence: The Constitution's First or Second Amendment?
Based on America's history, the Founders' answer to that question clearly lies in the Bill of Rights' deliberate sequencing.
The First Amendment ethos guarantees people -- whatever their politics -- a fundamental right to participate in their democracy without concern for physical retribution. It is the primary amendment because America was first and foremost created not as a gun-owners' haven, but as a place to shelter citizens from oppression.
It says more about them than the topic at hand.
Tip of the crown to James Rowen.
Posts
Well, i don't know about you, but I haven't seen any legitimate media stories about people feeling intimidated at these town halls because of the guns.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, the guys that bring guns to these things are idiots.
While I certainly don't thin it's necessary to bring a guy to these debates, I don't think it has anything to do with intimidation.
ReplyDeleteThe true purpose is to make people guns less scary, believe it or not. People feel that if you see a gun, then you automatically need to be scared. The people who bring guns to "ordinary" places, are doing so to acclimate people to the sight of guns, so they don't automatically feel scared when they see one, because it would be a more common occurrence.
Is it the smartest thing to do? It's pretty debatable, but it is certainly a purpose that is different than "domestic terrorism".
Nick, I would be more prone to believe you if they weren't also holding signs that call Obama all sorts of names or allude to doing him physical harm.
ReplyDelete