Violence In America

to Members of Congress

and all those pledged to protect me

I am an American. You represent me, and you control the powerful agencies paid to protect me. Yet I’m terrified. I’m terrified by the epidemic of violence infecting our country, and the knowledge that much of it was ignored by an informed FBI prior to its occurrence. It seems that the Bureau was too involved in other matters, often political, to protect our citizens from the "honest" members of society. And you are a co-conspirator. Rushing to collect political points, you turned a blind eye to your constituents.

I don’t mean to minimize the hazards of international and internal conspiracies, but though they dominate the headlines, they ignore the concerns of most Americans.

For this reason I want to present several steps you can take that might improve our security. Some will argue that they violate the principles of our Constitution, but I suspect you can find a way to circumvent this issue. The original document was written at the end of the eighteenth century by men sensitive to the concerns of the society of the time. But times change. and some interpretation of the Constitution short of amendment, a long and tedious process, can probably be found to deal with the concerns of a twenty-first century society. Our Legislative and Judiciary branches cannot be limited by eighteenth century sensibilities. (Indeed, I’m not even convinced that the Founding Fathers, in those years long ago, meant the Second Amendment to cover "sport" and hunting use of weapons by a "well armed militia.") And it is worth revisiting previously discussed issues. even if prior discussions have failed. So I suggest

1.     Formation of a committee consisting of NRA members and other citizens to determine maximum needs for valid uses of arms. I suggest a deadline (perhaps two weeks) after which, lacking agreement, a "civilian" should impose a non-appealable decision. There should always be civilian dominance over the military (in this case the NRA).

2.     With the same deadline, the courts should decide what the Second Amendment covers.

3.     A Public Prosecutor should investigate the functions and procedures of the FBI.

4.     There should be widespread publication of who gives to the NRA and who benefits from it -- especially to and from public servants and their families, candidates for office, and any political organization that supports either. There will be protests from the NRA relative to privacy and other constitutional rights, but in an age of "transparency" some means must be found to overcome them.

5.     Mental health proposals and appropriations should be publicized, and spending undertaken immediately -- especially as it relates to the possibility of violence.

6.     Other necessary measures should be undertaken that are not appealable later.

　

I hope that public sentiment will be taken into account in future legislation and with rapid prosecution of alleged perpetrators. There should be similar regard in all judicial decisions. Excessive concerns about the accused’s origin, illnesses, and "rights" should be avoided.

                           Son of Publius

No Answer

 

I got a call a few days ago from “NRA.” That's what it said on my telephone. I assumed it was the National Rifle Association and the woman at the other end confirmed that. I told her I didn't have a rifle and I hung up. It wasn't my intent to be impolite, but I have no interest in the NRA or in its goals.

The call, however, exemplifies one of the many problems in our “system.” I've listed my telephone on the “Don't Call List,” but now I know that this list is only for telemarketers. Politicians, charities, organizations that claim to have done business with me, and others, are excluded. Since the NRA is a lobbying organization rather than a charity, and I've never done business with it, I can only assume it is one of the other organizations not covered by the regulation. Somewhere buried in the act there must be an exemption for any individual or organization who donates to a Congressman's treasure chest.

That's the way it is with too many of our laws. A bill is a piñata, a Trojan Horse with a fancy name that has been carefully crafted to contain benefits of some kind for one or more special interests while appearing to the voters as a public service designed to protect them. Our new health care bill was well over two thousand pages, and required tens of thousands of pages of additional regulations. It's summarized as providing health care for all. That's a short summary for a bill that's so long, and it's hard to imagine that there isn't something else inside. But, in all likelihood, no one but those who stuffed the horse with goodies has ever examined the contents in detail.ⁱ As they say, “the Devil is in the details.” So there's a lot of room there for Scratch and his many faithful servants. And for the lobbyists as well (assuming they're not already there among his “faithful servants”). A recent edition of my morning paper told of the new finance overhaul bill which, in addition to regulating financial firms, is said to be aimed at job creation. The bill is over twenty-three hundred pages long, so just cutting down the trees, making the paper, typing it out, and distributing the bill certainly required many new jobs,ⁱⁱ even if no one reads the small print. Similarly there are likely to be many new agencies and bureaus (and the jobs that go with them) created by the bill. And, of course, there are probably significant benefits for the organizations that support the bill's writers.

There are also numerous new regulations in it as there are with the health-care bill, however their enforcement should not be assumed. Notwithstanding the Don't Call List, I've still been getting many appeals from telemarketers, but when I complained to my State Attorney General and the FTC, I was told that there wasn't much they could do about it.ⁱⁱⁱ I should just hang up on the callers. I vaguely recall “Just say 'no'” from a previous administration but I didn't know it still existed. Enforcement appears to be a low priority. Once the publicity value of a bill is gone, and once the benefits have been distributed to the donors, there is no need to go further. The nominal justification for the bill is of no concern to those who have voted for it, and the public will be mollified by the next bill, which will be announced to the press this afternoon. Report at eleven.

But we don't require new bills. Especially those whose primary purposes are to win benefits for members of Congress and extend special privileges to their contributors. We need proper enforcement of the ones we already have.

I don't need any more calls from the NRA.

Next episode: “Giving and Receiving” – Charity or “charity”?

i       Not even other legislators who vote for it. Especially if you promise to vote for their bills.

ii      The same is true, of course, of the lengthy health-care bill.

iii     That's funny. The IRS never has problems with its job.