A gun-control Easter

Easter isn’t about bunnies, eggs and chocolate: it’s about gun control. According to Bishop Melissa Skelton’s Easter message, at least:

 As I write this, snow is on the ground covering the many crocuses and snowdrops that were just popping up last week to remind us that spring is indeed on the way. Also as I write this, almost two weeks have passed since the deadly shooting at a school in Florida in which young people and teachers lost their lives.
It’s hard to know sometimes how much news from the US affects us here in Canada, and given the fact that I was born in the US, I don’t always trust my instincts on such things. But as the news about the shootings in Florida spread, once again, Canadian after Canadian wanted to talk with me about it, about their perplexity at a society where access to guns, especially assault weapons, is so easy. And they wanted to talk to me about their amazement and awe at the young survivors of the shooting who overnight began speaking up and demanding stricter gun laws.

I don’t pretend to know much about guns nor am I particularly interested in them, but I am reasonably certain that “assault weapon” is a slippery term whose definition varies depending on who is using it: after all, a kitchen knife is an “assault weapon” if it is used to stab someone. Still, we mustn’t be too hard on Skelton because she is an Anglican bishop with years of seminary training in Biblical slipperiness to confuse her thinking.

Here is a list of assault rifles – a more precise term –  and they are not easy to obtain:

The US Army defines an assault rifle as follows:

“Assault rifles are short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachinegun and rifle cartridges. Assault rifles have mild recoil characteristics and, because of this, are capable of delivering effective full-automatic fire at ranges up to 300 meters.”

Small Arms Identification and Operations Guide – Eurasian Communist Countries, pg 100 para 90

Real assault rifles are capable of automatic firing. Therefore, they are regulated by the federal government as machine guns under the Federal Firearms Act of 1934 and the completely misnamed Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986. The Firearm Owners’ Protection Act entirely banned the new manufacture or importation of automatic weapons for civilian use. That left roughly 150,000 registered automatic weapons in private ownership and eligible for transfer between individuals. The transfer of such weapons is handled by the ATF’s NFA branch. Basically, anyone wanting to legally own a fully automatic weapon needs $15,000 to over $40,000 to buy a weapon from an already licensed owner willing to sell one of theirs, plus pay a $200 federal transfer tax, plus pass a background investigation of National Agency Check with 10-point fingerprinting.

Fred Hiltz denounces gun violence

Fred Hiltz has taken his cue from protesting teenagers and denounced USA gun culture. It’s no surprise, since Anglican clergy seem to have difficulty digging up an original thought of their own and the higher one ascends the ecclesiastical totem pole the deeper one must excavate before hitting coherent thought.

Hiltz has grave concern over gun violence, leaving the impression that he is unwilling to fritter his limited reserve of concern on less conspicuous forms of violence: violence against the unborn, for example which claims the lives of almost 1 million babies per year in the USA.

Predictably, Hiltz offers a political solution – the church is, after all, more interested in politics than religion – rather than a Christian solution, namely modification and, I’m sure, eventual scrapping of the Second Amendment. Western Anglicanism, for the most part has given up on heaven or hell in the afterlife and is focussing what little energy it has left in cheering on socialist utopianism with carefree disregard of the resulting nastiness when the goal is attained.

Clerical distaste for guns can quickly dissipate when personal safety is in jeopardy: TEC’s first homosexual bishop, Gene Robison, was protected by armed guards during his consecration. Anglican gun culture at its finest; perhaps the guns were blessed beforehand.

From here:

What is remarkably notable in the aftermath of this recent shooting in Florida is the tremendous resilience of the young people in standing up and speaking out with grave concern for the gun violence that is tearing apart families and communities. While some people note that many of the shooters have serious mental health issues or have links with terrorist groups, and that needs to be acknowledged, many others are asking deeper questions about “the gun culture” across the United States. Some question an all-or-nothing approach to the Second Amendment in an age of automatic weapons. Some question why many Americans so vehemently defend that right. Some question the measures around gun control and the extent to which they can be enforced. Some question access to semi-automatic weapons that can fire dozens of rounds within seconds.

One young man reminded a rally in Florida, that addressing these issues was not about being Republican or Democrat, but about being human. These students are speaking out with a courage and conviction that cannot go unnoticed. Their cry for reform will not pass soon as some might expect and others might hope. Many Americans are joining them and crowding the roads to places where legislation is considered, including those to Capitol Hill in Washington.

Rowan Williams calls for more gun control in the U.S.

From here:

The leader of the world’s 80 million-strong Anglican Communion has thrown his support behind stricter gun control in the U.S., saying the easy availability of powerful weapons drew vulnerable people toward violence.

[….]

Turning to the issue of gun control, Williams said: “People use guns but, in a sense, guns use people too. When we have the technology for violence easily to hand, our choices are skewed and we are more vulnerable to being manipulated into violent action.”

If Rowan Williams is right and “guns use people” then, if the citizens of the U.S. are completely disarmed and only the police and armed forces have guns, only the police and armed forces will be “vulnerable to being manipulated into violent action”, potentially leaving ordinary citizens at their mercy.

If Williams is right – and I’m not sure he is – that’s a good reason why U.S. citizens should not be disarmed.