By now, everyone in America has heard of the January 8th shooting of Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords as well as nineteen others in Tucson, Arizona. This horrible tragedy should be bringing Americans together in sympathy and solidarity against the horrors of gun violence. Instead, it has simply sparked useless accusations about incendiary political rhetoric.
I’m a liberal, and therefore I know that Sarah Palin is the epitome of all evil (perhaps second only to Wall Street), and she also breathes fire and kills puppies in her spare time. However, even I am disgusted by the useless finger-pointing that many liberals are now engaged in. Casting blame on Tea Partiers for their “political rhetoric of violence” is completely unproductive, and serves only to further alienate the Tea Party from the American mainstream.
For example, Drew Western compares Sarah Palin’s infamous crosshatch map to jihadist websites that call for terrorist actions against America. Arianna Huffington notes that conservatives have engaged with their political adversaries by “crudely demonizing them… and treating them as enemies to be targeted.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. compares today’s political climate to that of fall 1963, before and after his uncle John F. Kennedy’s assassination, when “toxic right-wing vitriol… dominated the public airwaves.”
While I certainly don’t like hate-mongerers or violent rhetoric, I can’t see how these accusations against Fox News, Palin, the Tea Party, and the entire American Right help cool the fiery political climate.
I am certainly not her biggest fan, but Palin got one thing right in the video response she posted on Wednesday: Jared Loughner’s criminal actions were not necessarily a response to vitriolic discourse. After all, the man is mentally ill. There’s no evidence that his assassination was politically motivated, and even if it was, I’m quite sure that Sarah Palin didn’t exactly have this kind of thing in mind when she came out with her now-infamous “crosshairs” map of swing districts.
After decrying the “toxicity” of the American political climate, Arianna Huffington declares that “the Arizona shootings put a spotlight on the need to redirect that anger, frustration, and despair, and use them to take action, and make life better for those who need help.” In my opinion, the action that Americans on both sides of the aisle should be focusing on is not political rhetoric: it’s gun control.
Jared Loughner was psychotic. Insane people sometimes do insane things, regardless of what shape Palin chose to mark swing districts on her political map. But Loughner bought the Glock-19 (a semiautomatic weapon) that he used to shoot Representative Giffords and nineteen others entirely legally. In fact, everything he did—from walking into a local Walmart to purchase 33 rounds of ammunition, to carrying his weapon concealed near a government official—was completely legal in Arizona.
As blogger Drew Western writes in the Huffington Post, “that bringing a weapon (in Arizona, concealed) within that proximity to an elected official could be legal in the world’s longest-lasting democracy is both surreal and shameful — and now it threatens that democracy.” Insane people aren’t going away, but state and federal governments can and should impose restrictions that will keep insane people from doing this kind of damage.
Following the attempted assassination, NY Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D), NJ Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D), and NY Rep. Peter King (R) have announced plans to introduce legislation that would do a little bit to control guns. Their proposals would make ammunition clips with more than ten rounds illegal and ban guns from a 1000 foot radius around government officials. Unfortunately, lack of public attention and the NRA lobby make gun control advocates fear that even these moderate measures might fail to pass in Congress.
It might just be me, but America’s aversion to gun control seems absolutely ridiculous. There is no conceivable reason why a well-meaning citizen should carry around 33 rounds of ammunition. It might be a bit more convenient for hunters or people at shooting ranges… but it’s inconvenient for me to stop at red lights on deserted streets, and I’m not lobbying anyone to change that law.
In fact, I don’t see any justification for civilian Americans to carry concealed semiautomatic weapons in public. Gun violence is alive and well in America, and I agree with Rep. McCarthy when she calls the Glock-19 a “weapon of mass destruction.” If this latest shooting hasn’t made it clear to Americans that our gun control laws are too lax, I don’t know what will.
I am personally disgusted by the idea of American civilians owning weapons at all, but I recognize that any sort of blanket ban would be completely politically unfeasible. However, there is no rationale for not imposing reasonable limits on gun use. This week’s Tucson shootings have brought the need for stricter gun control into sharp focus—and Americans must unite and take this opportunity to address gun violence.
Great tragedies should bring Americans together for social change, not polarize them through angry accusations. As such, in the light of the Tucson shootings, liberal pundits and politicians should be focusing on gun control—not on Sarah Palin’s diction.
photo credit: http://www.wisepolitics.com/pics/Sarah-Palins-Target-List.jpg
Vitriol or Gun Control: In the Wake of the Tucson Shootings
- Advertisement -
