Political Vitriol

I don't have any right to browbeat Republicans, T-Partiers, or the multitude of overpaid talking heads on conservative airwaves.  Because I am the one who has said, more than once, that one can vote with a ballot, a bomb, or a bullet.  Back in the Bushie days, I called for a million Americans to take up their shotguns and deer rifles and march on Washington ro effect a change of government. 

Heck, young Loughner's Uncle Fester mugshot even looks disturbingly familiar, like the strange face that peeks out at me from the mirror each morning.  (I hope I don't have that smirk.) 

But just because I don't have any right to complain doesn't mean I won't.  I can be as hypocritical as anybody else.  So here goes.

This was a political crime, however messed up Loughner's brain wiring was.  His web output was political and some of the books he claimed to like were political. 

His target, Congressperson Giffords, was a political target.  A controversial person figure in the area, by virtue of bitter attacks by a T-Party opponent last year.   Loughner bought his Glock in November, several weeks after the 2010 election.  Coincidence?

Now I'm not saying Loughner was a Republican or T-Party goer.  Only that his motives were political in his mind and had a political nexus from an objective viewpoint.  What he seems to have been, was anti-government.  What in the late 1800s we called anarchists.  What in the late 20th century we called anti-government militias.  Except that so far he seems to have been a militia of one.

Sure, there was that messed up brain wiring.  But let me tell you:  We all have messed up wiring.  The difference is that some of us are more messed up than others.  It may well be that all extreme politics is a matter of brain wiring, of dysfunction. 

Political dialog has always been but a step away from the strike of a fist or the drawing of a knife or a gun. 

A few days ago in an argument over the Second Amendment, I was informed by a Far Right Republican in my community that the Second Amendment was there to assure that citizens could resist their government if need be.  That's in no way realistic, but I have to admit that I think the same way.  A big part of the ownership of a weapon is not in its potential and mostly imagined use as an implement of self-defense, but in that feeling of independence, from anything and everything.

There is a close connection between a man and his guns, unlike even his relationship with a favorite wife or dog.  Guns are things that dreams are made of.  The fantasy is 90% of gun ownership.  I feel that siren-call too, but unlike true gun-nuts, I recognize it for what it is, and I fear those dreams in myself.

We are soon going to be fighting another war over these shootings, about gun control in some form or another.  I think what will come out of it is, first, a return to a limit on ammo magazine size.  IMO, no shooter needs more than six shots, and encouraging people to think they can haphazardly spray bullets around when in the process of defending themselves or their homes is irresponsible.

Second, we need a checkable database for those with mental problems and a fair way of nominating individuals for that database.  This may prove impossible because of privacy and medical confidentiality issues, and nearly useless since of the mass killers who go postal, most of them are recognizable as dangerous only in hindsight. 

The Tucson tragedy is like all tragedies that impinge on the public consciousness.  Thousands may die.  60,000 or more Americans may be shot every year, but we don't notice or don't think about it.  It takes a small scale tragedy like this to grab us by the shirt collar and shake us into wakefulness.   We;ll see how long this fad lasts.

Back to the vitriol. 

Isn't it ironic that we are now in a deluge of political vitriol thrown back and forth over whether political vitriol played a role in these shootings?  No sooner had Sheriff Dupnik uttered his dictum in a public statement than he was attacked by a barrage of criticism from the Far Right.  And Palin and T-Partiers were attacked by Democrats.   And Palin defenders and associates are attacking back. 

Whether we have real shooting or ersatz shooting, it continues.  Maybe the shooting analogies will become politically incorrect for a time, but the conflict and attacks continue.