Monday, June 13, 2016
Lessons from the June 12 Orlando Massacre
by Tom Kando
● So far this year, 50 Americans have been murdered by radical Islamists in the US. During the same period, about 7,000 Americans have been murdered by “common,” “regular” criminals, including 161 who died from mass shootings. See:Mass Shootings.
● Omar Mateen was born in the US, so the “Trumpian” proposal to keep Muslim immigrants out wouldn’t have helped. You may say, yes, but his parents came from Afghanistan, so if THEY had been kept out, the Orlando massacre would not have happened. By such reasoning, we need to figure out how many Americans are murdered every year by children of immigrants.
● This massacre will help Trump’s quest for the presidency.
● Radical Islam IS a problem.
● People who, like former UN ambassador John Bolton on Fox News today, say that the fight against terrorism is a WAR are wrong. Terrorism is a CRIME, not a war.
● The conflicts in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere involving ISIS, Al-Qaida and other groups ARE wars. Insofar as we participate in those conflicts with air raids, special ops and “advisers” on the ground, we ARE engaging in (low-level) warfare.
● We are fighting terrorism just about as we should. While there is always room for improvement, our low-level participation overseas and vigilant law enforcement practices at home are working, by and large. ISIS is in retreat. The greatest need for improvement is the need for more effective collaboration with and active participation by local allies such as Turks and Saudis, although even in that respect much has been accomplished, for example with the Kurds.
● But sending in the marines or the 102nd infantry division, World War Two style, as hysterical right-wingers seem to wish for, is preposterous.
● Fight the “ideology”? (again proposed by republicans). I don’t even know what this means. ISIS recruits hoodlums from the slums of Paris and Brussels and from American suburbs. These hoodlums haven’t even read the Koran. They are a problem, but no “ideological” campaign is likely to be of any help.
● Gun Control? Of course! Hillary Clinton is absolutely right: Weapons of mass destruction should not be disseminated in the streets of America, as they are by the NRA-backed gun shops all over the country. We need the same vigorous gun control legislation as exists in Japan, Australia, Canada, Europe and other sane places, including strict registration, background checks and ZERO allowance of automatic firearms in private hands. Rapid-fire weapons must be limited to the military and to law enforcement.
● Right-wing Republicans like John Podhoretz and Donald Trump are immediately politicizing this event. Trump has called President Obama’s reaction “disgraceful” and Podhoretz has called him “disgusting” for using the term “terrorism” instead of “radical Islamic terrorism.” It is people like Podhoretz who are disgusting. They cynically exploit the tragic death of 50 innocent people for political advantage. They have the audacity of blaming the president for the Orlando bloodbath. They have no shame.
(Note: I taught the course on violence and terrorism for many years at the university)
© Tom Kando 2016
leave comment here
10 comments:
Thank you Tom, for being a sound, sane voice in today's world.
The 102 infantry division hasn't existed since WWII. Do you mean the 101st Air Mobile Division (used to be airborne up to Vietnam, but is now helicopter deployed)?
Obama is to blame for Orlando; he withdrew from Iraq allowing the "JV team" to become the varsity, thereby pulling in followers like Mateen and others.
Thanks, Linda.
Anonymous 1: No, I meant the 102 infantry. That’s why I wrote “World War Two style.” I know what I’m doing. It’s a figure of speech.
Anonymous 2: Why not blame Bush Jr., who started the disastrous Iraq war, or Mateen’s mother who gave birth to Mateen, or the USSR, who caused Mateen’s parents to move to America?
My point: causal relationships are often debatable, and people often choose the cause they prefer, not necessarily the correct one. You choose Obama as the/a cause of the Orlando massacre. I find that absurd, but predictable, as right-wingers have been blaming him for nearly everything for the past seven years.
"ZERO allowance of automatic firearms in private hands. Rapid-fire weapons must be limited to the military and to law enforcement." Automatic weapons (multiple bullets for one trigger pull) are already illegal. AR-15 and AK-47 type weapons sold in the US are semi-automatic : one pull, one bullet. It's the magazine size that is the problem, but even if it is reduced from the max 30 to 15 or to the California 10 bullets, most of us can switch out in less than 2 seconds with a little practice.
Hey Tom,
Probably right about all of this . I just hope trumps numbers don't go up. I'd like to think he's now in a downward spiral.
Jon
Reply to anonymous:
I’ll let syndicated columnist Eugene Robinson answer you (Washington Post, June 14 ‘16): “The Supreme Court has made clear that (the Second Amendment) does not preclude reasonable gun control...Not all weapons must be considered suitable for private hands...When the framers wrote of ‘arms,’ they were thinking about muskets and single-shot pistols. They could not have foreseen modern rifles or high-capacity magazines. They lived at a time when it was impossible to imagine one man barging into a crowded room and killing more than one or two people before having to reload and surely being subdued. ...No hunter needs an AR-15 to bring down a deer. None of us needs such a weapon to defend our families against intruders....”
Look: It’s obvious that we’ll never reduce the murder rate to zero. But it’s equally obvious that we can greatly reduce our scandalously high level of violence through a combination of measures: Background checks, “no fly no buy” laws, gun control legislation at the NATIONAL level, so as to eliminate the absurdly easy interstate traffic in firearms, re-instating the 1994 federal assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 and which banned many categories of semi-automatics. Also, better enforcement of the laws that already exist. Technicalities should not be used as excuses for inaction. If it takes smaller magazines or banning semi-automatics altogether, so be it.
To quote Robinson again: “Freedom is possible without the right to buy military weapons designed for killing SPREES. Banning them would not end mass killings, but it would mean fewer deaths.”
Rational remarks from an expert.
Tom, I like your emphasis on treating terrorism as crime. As for restrictions on assault weapons-yes. As for all weapons-no. If a few people in the club had been carrying pistols, they might have lowered the body count considerably. Places that "ban guns on these premises" are open invitations to mass murders.
No, I'm pretty sure it's the opposite:
The worst possible thing to do if you ever got involved in such a nightmare situation would be for you to pull out your own gun and start a shoot-out. It would be unclear to everyone, including to law enforcement,whether you are a good guy or a bad guy. A cop or someone else would promptly take you out, or someone else would. Such a melee would make things way worse.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!