Guns Guns Guns

Just barely eclipsing the note-worthiness of Anna Nicole Smith's passing, the latest incident gun violence at Virginia Tech has marked some important ideas concerning gun control in the US.

Consider first Cho Seung Hui, an anti-social South Korean man enrolled at Virginia Tech. Noteably, labelling Seung Hui as anti-social and South Korean hints directly at supposed causal relationships between these two unrelated qualities, which is markedly evident in articles concerning the tragedy. Wayne Chiang is another South Korean at Virginia Tech, a man who simply happens to have a passion for firearms. Once the news of the V. Tech shootings appeared on the internet, Chiang received violent, angry and racist messages from users who believed that he was responsible. The burning of religious temples and defacing property owned by ethnic minorities as a result of the 9/11 terror attacks similarly frames this case, as the resulting hate tactics had nothing to do with the incidents described, other than people drastically misinterpreted dark skin as an indication of terrorist intent. In the case of the Virginia Tech shootings, 'outraged' citizens and netizens decided to express their outrage through channelling it towards descriptive labels rather than assessing facts.
Dr. Nikki Giovanni, one of Seung Hui's professors, explained that "there was something mean about this boy. It was the meanness – I've taught troubled youngsters and crazy people – it was the meanness that bothered me. It was a really mean streak" (Toronto Star, April 18th). Evidently, Virginia Tech's screening process for professors who speak using expressive, coherent dialogue is limited. Giovanni's statement means practically nothing, closely approximating the relevance of Senator John McCain's condolences, who expressed that the 2nd amendment concerning the right to bear arms should continue to exist, but only for responsible, law-abiding citizens. Meanness is hardly a precursor to gun-toting rampages, and even if it was, why would Giovanni explain her thoughts on Seung Hui after the incident? McCain's aggressively vacuous statement undercuts the seriousness of the V. Tech shootings in exchange for some bizarre personal agenda of the political right, centering on the positive attributes of universal gun possession. The quoting of vague, non-specific references does little to enhance any kind of understanding into what exactly transpired or what the original motivation for it may have been.

In the wake of tragic events, those targeted by the media to offer insights or sympathies to victims involved are numerous. The problem though, is that none of these people offer any hint of what can be done to prevent it in future. Most stumble through some unnecessarily gruesome personal details (while salient, incessant reporting of the horrors associated with an incident of massacre helps nothing), or rehearsed commentary, expressing sorrow, disbelief and shame that something like the V. Tech shootings could possibly occur. Keep in mind the American practise of gun control, whereby a minor can order guns on the internet, firearms can be purchased at Walmart, and owning a gun for 'protection' is a constitutional right. Given that school shootings are not something new in America, how could anyone harbour feelings of disbelief? Nothing has changed since the Columbine shootings that might deter this kind of event from happening in the future, save for an increasing level of paranoia propogated by the media. Rarely is it mentioned that in Virginia, anyone over the age of 12 can own a shotgun or a rifle (Globe and Mail, April 18th). Under Senator McCain's penchant for upholding the 2nd amendment, American policy, for the safety of its citizens, should express that instead of buying a gun, buy 2 or maybe 3 guns. That way, you'll be 2-3 times as safe. In retrospect, the 2nd amendment was established in the 18th century in order to legalize the insititution of an American military. This has been drastically taken out of context in recent years, and is completely inapplicable in relation to the Western 21st century world.

If gun control laws remain unrevised and national policy fails to address or in some cases even locate the actual problems concerning why and how school shootings and other similar tragic events occur, it is safe to assert that other similarly horrific scenarios will unfold. And everyone will be just as shocked and appalled and passive as they are concerning the recent incident at Virginia Tech.

Easter (eggs and hunting and such)

Nothing feels better than starting an Easter egg hunt and then ending it by winning. Especially when one's competition are several small children with hands that easily fit into places where yours do not. Devious children operating under the tenets of youth and skill appear to triumph old age and treachery.

I remember being able to consume an absolutely massive quantity of chocolate and candy and highly refined sugars before feeling ill and having to take repose on the couch. Despite the best of intentions, I barely managed to eat 3 units of sugared delight (treacherous organs). Which also means that the minimal sugars ingested failed in their ability to counteract the tryptophan pass-out that massive quantities of turkey incur.

One of the more fun aspects of Easter is not having to cook or buy the food. It's like a magical restaurant where everything you want is free of charge, provided that you show up. It's also really interesting to watch parents start acting like kids as well. Nothing says 'getting back to basics' or 'being a kid' like the resurrection of J.C.

Wooooo, now back to the real world. Essays, work, early mornings, responsibility, ball and chain, death.

Joe Republican + commentary

A story which has been floating around the Internet for some time:

"Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised. All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment cheque because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have." "


Joe Republican clearly highlights the real-life effects of liberal principles with positive benefits. This is an easy and clear idea located within the story. Interestingly enough, while true and salient in terms of reality, the problem with this is that the liberals are convinced that accurate, solid and tenable information will automatically sway people from their previous political or intellectual positioning. This is a mistake, and simply furthers the rift between the Neo-Fascist Christian right, and the Progressive yet Blind Liberal Democrats. Like so many issues, the reductionary stance of rendering a complex process into something simple and binaristic fails to address the problem itself, instead becoming bound up in ad-hominen style debate. Clearly, a two-party system is not in the best interests democracy.

Self vs.System vs.Self

Money! Dating! Fashion! OMG! OMFG roxor! Dazzle my eyes with false promises and seemingly endless variety of distractions presenting those things that I should be thinking about, and I will no doubt be unable to avoid thinking about them. My cell phone keeps me too busy to pay attention to domestic political and my Facebook commitments outweigh my personal free time. So many peripheral events and networked transactions occur everyday, throwing people in and out of social engagements, encouraging more and more dependence on and commitment to someone else's ideas. It's not very plausible, wanting to be recognized for achievement in a proactive, creative manner. Corporate success, being made economically viable through paying little attention to problems with free-market visions of high life, appears much easier. But ironically, it does feel good to go and spend money on something personal and unnecessary when life is getting you down. Why is that? Encouraged since birth, consuming is the lifestream of 'successful' existence. Despite recognizing the fallibility of this concept, it's strangely easy adhering to a system which cleverly replaces autonomy with 'stuff'.

The current 'spring' weather in the Southern Ontario region doesn't help to encourage that everything around you doesn't suck and isn't crap, which is arguably a difficult lie to continually tell oneself when your senses explain otherwise. As a temporarily embarrassed millionaire, I feel assured that my time is nigh, whether guised as a perfect job that falls into my lap, or the big lotto win, or perhaps the swift universal justice of heaven cleansing the Earth of fundamentalism and intolerance. Jaded, so jaded. Get a grip, man.

Settle for the job you have and the life you chose and live vicariously through the representation of others. Settle for your existing social climate. Get a degree in Arts, and then settle on becoming a teacher, even though you're not too keen on kids. Opposition is always a difficult route in the face of comfort and conformity, but freedom costs a buck o' five. That's, like, dramatic irony.

Please understand that I respect and admire this culture of consumption. And I honour it every bit as much as the next.....anarchist. Yet I am completely dependent on it for my continued existence. Kind of a weird paradox that I can't seem to be able to explain my way out of. Feeling meaty with cynicism.