The overarching "we" that is politically active Americans have come to the point where we will use any tangentially related event - known in the study of public policy as "information shock" - as an excuse to push our own agenda. Blogs, mainstream media, politicians, interest groups, we're all horribly guilty of trying to convince the world that our own political desires ultimately trump the truth itself. The consequences are frightening.
We all know of the miserable policy decisions that national politicians jumped to in the immediate aftermath of the attacks of September 11th 2001. Perhaps the most famous is the USA PATRIOT Act - a series of laws that curtailed individual liberties for the sake of national security - Benjamin Franklin's nightmare spelled out in a nauseating acronym. But what about the worst policy decision of Mr. Bush's presidency - the war in Iraq? Wasn't that a long term result of the same information shock? Yes it was. There are many explanations as to just why President Bush decided to invade Iraq, and many people, myself included, do not wish to pretend to understand the lunacy behind his failed logic, but one matter is undisputed: this war never would have started were it not for the fear caused by the attacks of September the 11th.
Since then reason has begun to dawn on the American public once again and we are the better for it. Amongst other things, Democrats far and wide have enjoyed electoral success. Here in Virginia, the Democratic party and progressive ideals are stronger than they've ever been in my lifetime, and I'm thankful for it. But today, I'm afraid. I'm afraid that we are quickly and happily falling into the same trap that led to the Republicans' demise. We are sacrificing truth for the sake of our own desires.
Governor Kaine wishes to close the "gun show loophole" which allows people to purchase firearms at gun shows without a standard background check and waiting period. Is this a good policy decision? In my opinion, yes, it certainly is. He wishes to change the law, however, in the context of last year's massacre at Virginia Tech. This is a huge mistake. The murderer who killed 32 people in Blacksburg on April 16th, 2007 was mentally unstable and should not have had access to a college campus, much less semi-automatic pistols, but he did not need to go farther than a licensed dealer to purchase his guns.
So what does the Virginia Tech Massacre have to do with the gun show loophole? Well, here's where the Roanoke Times pipes in: "It could have. And it is easy to imagine the scenario in which it would have." God help us now. It's the conditional tense: the almighty leveler of all policy discussions.
First of all: no such scenario is "easy to imagine." No scenario in which a student at a Virginia university buys two guns, kills two people, waits two hours, chains up the doors of an academic building, and, in a period of 20 minutes shoots 60 people, killing HALF of them is "easy to imagine." Likewise, such heroism as shown by teachers who blocked the door to let their students escape and injured who bore intense agony with stoicism to play dead did not need to be imagined before that fateful day.
So let's not "imagine." Let's focus on the truth. The truth is that Virginia's gun laws are too liberal. If we agree that gun owners should undergo background checks at stores, let's apply that law universally, and let's learn our lesson from the massacre at Virginia Tech and reform our mental health system and keep our communities safe by not letting violent individuals access to weapons.
If we start letting "coulds" and "woulds" and "imagine" dominate our policy agenda we will end up exactly the same as the Republicans who believed Iraq "would" be a threat, gay marriage "could" lead to weaker families, and "imagined" the "Islamic jihadists who want the green flag of the crescent and star to wave over the capitol of the United States and of the White House of this country." The people of this nation and of this commonwealth put Democrats in charge to better the discussion of policy and not only fight for what is right, but fight clean.
I spent 20 years in the US Army, and carried concealed for more than a few of them in civilian clothes. What P***,d, sorry, irritated me was that because of 38 and 45 ammo costs in 1979, I got to fire 2 each 3 round clips for a total of 6 bullets familiarization rather than qualification.
What scares the S***T out of me is that there are police officers and concealed permit carriers out there that don't have to go back to the range for a qualification, not familiariztion, round before being allowed to carry concealed.
I'm not a redneck "my gun is my penis" nor am I a "nobody should have a concealed gun." All I want IS WEEKLY COMPETENCE TESTS with real bullets at a police range to prove the permit owner still can hit what he or she aims at, AND NOT ME or MINE!
Is that too much to ask of the NRA and its members?