Archive: Opinions

Are we again sitting in our home or car, watching and listening to another wave of horror and revulsion, helpless at another mass shooting? Are you like me, numb and feeling bereft of feeling, not even able any more to wonder what 'went wrong' this time? Are you, like me, unable to listen any more to efforts to blame the newest tragedy on (choose one): the FBI, the NRA, the mental health system? (Fill in your own blank). The only thing new this time seems to be the nascent student uprising, with the phrase 'I shouldn't be afraid to go to school', echoing in our ears.

After the Las Vegas massacre, I cried, as you did, and then wrote in this space that I believed in the potential for a national day of mourning and remembrance. It was in November that I checked and found that almost 14,000 had died in America by gunfire, not counting the 22,000 suicides as of that date. I had called (quixotically, but I am the crusader type) at the time for our need to gather on December 31st, a Sunday, at not only churches and places of worship, but also at town halls and other community gathering places to quietly pay homage and contemplate the names of the thousands of victims in 2017 who had died by gun violence. To read those names aloud as a testament and witness, to contemplate in silence and divorced from politics. Now, less than two months later, we have had a count of 19 school shootings since my proposed 'Memorial Day' on December 31st.


It occurred to me that it seems impossible to characterize these shooters in a convenient 'box'. Yes, they had access to a plethora of guns and ammunition, but almost always 'legally'. Yes, they almost always can be described as pre-meditative in their motivations, and so often had troubled pasts. But, let's take the two areas where much of the debate about 'cures' or 'solutions' (according to Washington Post 2/20/18) lie, as far as public opinion goes. If you can stand a few more lines of talk about the subject without tears, or rage (both of which I have experienced in the past days, weeks, months...).

The mental health issue is legitimate and needs to be discussed. It is no great stretch of our imagination to say that a sick mind perpetrates these heinous deadly crimes. But how will we attack it? The 'boy' who committed this latest was a true victim of lousy circumstances and had been the victim of a troubled childhood (yes, many troubled children do not pick up guns, I know).

Look at his face, if you can: chances are that he was the focus of bullying, or name-calling, had been the focus of numerous police calls to his adoptive home, and hurt neighborhood pets, as well as finally being expelled for behavioral issues. He was a walking time bomb.

But the system that failed him has been the subject of failures of adequate public funding for years. It was the American public that has cut back the funding for mental health institutions, opting instead for community 'solutions', but failing to establish and fund the community that this boy and so many other ticking time bombs that are still walking around need, and deserve. Not to mention the community at large that needs to see these people addressed and protected.

The cry is now to stop those with mental health issues from obtaining weapons. But, here's a fact that we need to face up to: after Sandy Hook (another young mental health sufferer with legal weapons in a tightly gun controlled state) President Obama sought executive action with a directive that would have added 75,000 people who receive Social Security disability benefits due to mental impairment (Wall Street Journal, 2/17/18). Guess who raised hell about this executive order?? The NRA?? Of course. But, guess again: how about mental health groups/organizations, and the American Civil Liberties Union, all filing strong opposition to the rule.

Get that: the bogeyman NRA is joined by the ACLU and national mental health groups. And, don't you think this same assemblage of strange bedfellows will align again if we go to the next 'solution', as in what is being called 'extreme risk protection orders', that a court could sign off on? And how many people do we think might be subject to an investigation or order to either confiscate or ban sale of firearms due to possibly eccentric behavior or even inflammatory speech?

In this day and age of shutting down 'free speech' for those we disagree with, wouldn't you think the ACLU has at least a stronger case than the NRA to stop potential gun purchases? And, advocates for mental health sufferers, God bless them and their work, they've struggled for years to get recognition for their constantly growing problem in America, and all they get are blank stares (or ridiculous accusations based on years of misunderstanding about mental health). Shall we remember that 15% of America is now utilizing anti-depressants? Now we may be faced with the continuing issue of these advocacy groups trying to defend the mentally challenged's right to be left alone if law abiding, even honored for their eccentricity, not hounded into court to make sure they're not a threat and trying to buy an arsenal. Let's not even contemplate (or should we ?) how many we know who might be dragged into court for cross-examination by psychiatrists/psychologists for what might be considered 'far out', 'extreme' or 'outside of the mainstream' opinions or statements.

But this won't change the fact that America now has 300,000,000 guns in its homes, business and autos. No background check apparatus (no matter how thorough or perfect) will put those weapons back into their nefarious wombs. These are for the most part owned by law abiding Americans and over 90% of American crime is committed by illegal handguns. That genie is out of the bottle. Ban AR-15 and so-called assault weapons? A mere political sideshow. The sad loner who wants to shoot up a concert, a church, a school, will find a weapon that isn't included in the sideshow of political arm wrestling. Or use what he already has or can get, legally or illegally. Mere distractions to allow the people in elected positions to show us they are 'doing something', when in reality they are as dumbstruck as we are (Dylan: 'Idiot wind: It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe'). No, I am not a member of the NRA, nor do I espouse much of what they preach.

We will, in the next few days and weeks be regaled with audio and video of students around the country staging sit-ins, lie-ins, protests and emotional outcries outside of city halls, state legislatures, the Capitol and the White House. Great 'copy' as we said in the news business, great footage; legitimate outcry, and all for naught, as the laws that are eventually passed will not stop the slaughter. I'm sorry for the cynicism, but you know in your heart as well as I do that protests and the laws they produce never really change much of anything. And, one reason for that fact, as I see it, is that it's not a problem of politics, but of morality and loss of deeper meaning in community. Real answers, if there are any, must come from inside our hearts, not Albany or Washington.

I saw an extended video of a psychology class 'set-up', recently: a hidden camera was placed outside a coffee shop in London, and an unkempt man (in some cases an unkempt woman) was lying on a step just outside the shop, in full view (even in the way) of passers-by. A digital clock was in the corner of the video screen, establishing how long it took for someone to stop and 'check on' what was going on with this unkempt person in obvious trouble, who appeared to be unconscious. In many cases it was minutes before a good Samaritan stopped to inquire or touch the person and express concern. Minutes, if at all.

Change the scene. Now, the person is well-dressed: a suit, a dress. It now takes mere seconds for someone to stop and express concern with this person's well-being. And one other fascinating aspect of these videos: if one person stopped, it was frequently followed by another person stopping as well, asking if they could help, should they call for help, etc.

Conclusion? Well, one is that we will frequently avoid (walk around, avoid eye contact or words) any person who may need help but doesn't fit our version of acceptable looks, safe, or presumed behavior, as evidenced by one outer indicator such as clothing, or presumed incapacity. Conclusion two: We apparently will frequently assume that if the person who needs help 'looks' like what we presume to be 'normal', or like us, we are more likely to stop and offer help. Conclusion three: If someone appears to be brave or kind enough, we may then move as well to assist.

So, what's the point? Possibly it is this: To quote Shakespeare, the fault lies not in our stars, but in our selves. How often are we confronted with people in our daily life that could use help? A kind word, a real effort to listen for a moment, a stopping of our busy-ness for a bit to help out? How often are we confronted with a loneliness that expresses itself in eccentric behavior, non-conformity, a different affect, or an angry visage which moves us away from contact? How often on a daily basis are we confronted with an opportunity to help someone instead of turning our head the other way? How often do you think that 'kid' in Florida was confronted with rejection, or just indifference? 'I'm too busy', 'Not my concern'. Hurry hurry. Bustle, bustle. Ignore, close our eyes, communicate with only those we think we know and somehow trust.

But communicate is a shaky word, too, in our inhospitable world. Or even communicating between family members, or spouses. How much pain, and need, surrounds us that we are oblivious to? How many people confronted this Nikolas Cruz over the past two, three, four years and failed to see a damaged, hurting human child who needed something that only another human could give? And how many of these mass murderers (or for that matter, the single murderers in our cities and towns every day) could have been touched by another human who tried to reach out, 'showed up', but this hurting individual was relegated to an invisible status: too weird, too sick, too angry, until one day they would decide to be invisible no more (like the person on the sidewalk outside of the coffee shop).

At the Wailin' Jennies concert last week at the State Theater (just hours after the Florida massacre) one of the group stated 'I still believe that the good outweighs the bad'. Even Wayne Dyer (God bless his departed, peaceful soul) said that one good person could influence and counter-balance an evil force in a village. But, the reality is that outweighing the bad or evil is not done with politics or law; it is done individually, by you and me, being a counter balance to the pain and suffering of loneliness in our world, one tiny act at a time. One simple act, instead of averting our eyes, or turning away.

It is something that many of us are not only willing, but more importantly able, to give: time, caring, a kind word, a reaching out a hand to one other human being. And knowing that only caring and acting out the message of caring will keep a precarious balance that we are fearing is tipping the wrong and disastrous way. One hand and heart at a time. A smile, a bit of patience, an anonymous act of generosity. Are we willing to risk it? Or put it all aside until the next tragedy. Willing to try tipping the balance in our 'village'? Do we have a choice?

v14i8