People Commit Murder, Not Guns

Thomas G. Palaima wrote a commentary for the Austin American Statesman titled, U.S. Gun laws allow a Normal day at UT take a Scary Turn. The title is indicative of the feelings of the writer on gun laws in America. Palaima describes his day at UT on September 28 when a gunman came on to the campus an opened fire. The gunman did not kill anyone, but did eventually kill himself. The author describes the amazing Austin police and their response to the situation. But then towards the end of his article he states, “Why is an AK-47 — or any gun for that matter — legal to buy and use?”
Palaima claims that if guns were illegal in America then there would be no more horrific mass killings. I would disagree. Of course the pure speed of a machine gun allows the rapid succession of bullets into a crowded area, increasing the chances of a mass killing. But illegalizing guns is not going to make psychopaths or other disturbed individuals sane. Ted Bundy, Jeffry Dahmer, Gary Ridgeway, Jack the Ripper and Ed Gein all have something in common; they killed multiple people without the use of a gun. In the mass murder category we have Richard Speck. Speck managed to kill eight women in one place without the use of a gun.
Guns do not kill people. People kill people. It takes a severely disturbed person to actually plan and execute a murder of any kind. So a gun may increase their chances of hitting multiple people at once. But would a lack of a gun make them harmless?
I will take the side of the devils’ advocate by going to the other side of the debate now. We all know 9/11 happened without the use of guns, and 3,000 people died. What if the gun laws allowed people to carry a concealed weapon? Would 9/11 have produced more or less casualties? Many people (especially in Texas) argue that all Americans should be allowed to carry guns on their person for instances such as Virginia Tech. They argue that if Americans were all allowed to carry guns then the casualties of such crimes would be lessened.
I believe the writer was attempting to appeal to an extreme liberal view sometimes held by some college students. He described what it was like in the situation being faced with mortality and described the college kids around him. To propose such an idealistic approach to gun laws is unrealistic and naïve. He is basically saying that if we get rid of crack we will have no drug problem.
I argue that, whether I am in agreement or not that we uphold the 2nd amendment of the U.S Constitution which is the right to bear arms. We need to allow people to protect themselves within limits. People should have the inalienable right to feel safe in their homes and the right to protect their property and family. I do not agree with Palaima that removing gun will eliminate mass killings. Removing guns will be just that; removing guns. Removing guns does not take away psychopathic thoughts and actions from individuals who commit pre-meditated murder. It is absurd to blame murder on the weapon instead of the individual.

Too Much Equality in School Curriculum??

                Is equality threatening to ruin the very core of Texas conservatism?  It appears as though we have been given our children too much information on the rest of the world.  The Texas Board of Education has drafted a resolution limiting what is written about Islam in social Studies books.  They have also proposed limiting information about the Constitution’s stand on separation of church and state.  Apparently the Board sees the information provided on the Islam religions to be over shadowing what is presented on Christianity.

                The conservative bloc on the board of education is afraid that such equality may be heightened by the mention of Islam.  Texas will be educating their children on terrorism and how to hijack airplanes.  Islam is bad.  Christianity is good.   The board has a skewed reality on what religions are dominant in the world.  They would rather present their interpretation that Christianity is the dominant world religion.

This resolution says nothing of educating its schools’ social studies and history teachers though.  The presentation of history seems more important to what is written in books.  The ideology of the teacher and the emphasis placed on certain highlights in history will have more impact than the tweaking of a social studies book.  My daughter came home from school one day last year and said’ “Mr. Henry wanted me to ask you if Buddhism was a religion or not”.  Apparently my child told the social studies teacher that her mom was a Buddhist.  Mr. Henry wanted to make a point to me and the class that Buddhism isn’t an actual religion.  I caught on early to what he was trying to prove by letting my daughter know that technically it would be more of a philosophy than a religion, because Buddhists don’t worship a god.  Mr. Henry didn’t win that time.  But it showed me that he was dead set on letting his kids in class know that certain religions are “valid” and certain ones are not.

The Board proposed to remove any mention of Hispanics dying alongside whites at the Alamo.  The board also rejected adding Hip Hop as a cultural movement.  It is no surprise to me that Institutional inequalities exist for racial and sexual minority groups.  In this case, The Texas Board of Education is an instigator in these inequalities and they help to fuel the fire. Whether we hide the fact that Thomas Jefferson had sex with his slaves or the fact that Taoism and Buddhism are valid religions we are left with the same issue.  Why are the conservatives on The Board of Education so against diversifying our children’s knowledge of different cultures?  It is a frightening thought that we are ok in Texas to keep our kids ignorant.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/12/texas-education-board-app_n_497440.html 

Texas is a State of Being

When I moved to Texas a few years ago I felt like I stumbled upon a long lost culture. I felt strangely out of place and didn’t even know how to drive correctly. There was no road rage and the rules were simple; if someone rides your bumper, move over. There were no mixed messages or angry gestures when someone does this; you just simply move over. Texas is a simple place. The men are more polite and the rules are not as complex as they were in Seattle. Men open doors for ladies and call their elders maam and sir. A Dr. Pepper is a Coke and a tea is served cold. “Y’all” replaced “you guys” and huge trucks replaced little cars.
Among these cultural changes was my first glimpse of a confederate flag, hung in all its glory. Where I am from this would signal a sign of hatred. Texas has taken me a long time to get used to. The lack of rights and wages for workers has been distressing to me. I can enjoy the amazing, expansive freeways, but I may not be able to go to a dentist. I pay about half of what I used to for a gallon of milk but then I also make half as much. I don’t sit in traffic all day but I don’t get breaks at work either. I enjoy not having to remember what politically correct acronym to use for sexual minorities, but I hear people refer to Asian Americans as Oriental.
Strangely the experiences I have had here, adopting to a new culture have made me a more well rounded person. From the extreme liberals up North who believe in taxing rain barrels to the staunch conservatives in Texas, I believe I fit squarely in the middle.