The Folly of an Old Argument

In the wake of the tragic events in Colorado, some seek to take the opportunity to rehash an old argument – the elimination or reduction of weapons in the United States.  Social and political liberals feel that the only way to reduce such happenings is to simply eliminate the ability to purchase advanced weaponry.  Some go so far as to ban the sale of any weapon.  While it is true that these activists are capitalizing on a horrific event that is not what concerns me.  The truth is that draconian measures against weapons are not effective and indeed, only hurt the innocent and law-abiders.   

For many international observers, Americans’ obsession with and adherence to gun rights is perplexing at best, unbelievable at worst.  The nature of U.S. development depended upon the idea of the “citizen soldier.”  From the earliest days of the colonies until well into the 19^th-century, soldiers were as likely to report for duty with their own rifle or other weapon then depend on a government issued firearm.  Until the late 19^th-century, Americans were still exploring unchartered territory and weapons, be they handguns or rifles, were essential for defense.  The traditions of hunting and self-defense are the basic reason why the majority of Americans agree with gun ownership of one type or another.  It is the reason why they resist demands to give up their weapons and why some internationally find themselves philosophically against what some represent. 

In the worst crime-laden cities (Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Chicago and Detroit), city leaders passed some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country.  Law-abiding citizens, fearful of their lives and when accosted, had little with which to fight back, had no options but belated phone calls to police long after the perpetrators fled.  City leaders promised that gun restrictions would ebb the amount of violence but crime rates remained (remain) high and indeed, the only people who are impacted by the laws are legitimate citizens.  Those using weapons for crimes do not register or purchase weapons legally.  Therefore, their access to firearms remained unfettered and conditions continued to deteriorate and proved increasingly dangerous for the average law-abiding citizen.  In the last two years, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the Second Amendment to the Constitution yet, the recent events in Colorado have brought the issues back to the fore.

Personally, I think that certain military grade weapons have no business in civilian hands but I have an unwavering belief that we are allowed by the Constitution to have individual firearms.  The problem with eliminating some is that it quickly leads to the elimination of all firearms.  Some states allow for concealed handgun licenses and it would have been interesting if someone in that theater had had a pistol.  On a news talk show, I heard an activist say that such a scenario would have created a worse blood bath.  Her paradigm suggests that any positive reason of a firearm destroys her entire argument against them.  The Aurora, Colorado theater was already a blood bath – unfortunately, it was a one-sided affair.  That is the future of activists’ arguments. 

Gun ownership in the U.S. has always been accompanied by training and responsibility as well as instruction on the history of weapons in the U.S.  It is one reason why so many gun advocates are well familiar with the Second Amendment and the country’s history in relation to weapons.  As for the demented man in Colorado, no society can prevent or anticipate previously undocumented insanity and to burden society with such a task shows the folly of anti-gun activists’ point of view.  The best that Americans can do is being prepared when the unpredictable happens. 

Japan’s Uncertainty with Nuclear Power

This past week, large scale protests took place in Tokyo against the government’s decision to reactivate two nuclear power plants.  Meanwhile, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda explained that the purchasing of oil and gas imports to replace the missing energy sources was forcing the Japanese to quickly restart the heavily public invested nuclear plants.  However, the protestors fear that the dangers posed by Fukushima and other power plants have not subsided and the very nature of nuclear power plants in such a geologically unstable region like Japan makes little sense.

In the wake of the Japanese nuclear disaster, several countries banned or scaled back their nuclear power facilities.  It was a knee-jerk reaction to the calamity in Japan.  In Japan, racked by fear and uncertainty since the earthquake/tsunami, some Japanese are lashing out, albeit in an organized and peaceful way, to the news of the re-started plants.  It would seem that the Japanese government is in a difficult position yet the Japanese people have legitimate concerns about the viability of nuclear energy and the stability of those plants currently operating.  The Economist, in an article on the protests, suggested that the incident has ignited the urgency of a rather small group of liberals on the issue of nuclear power as a whole but the party that represents that point of view has not grown in support, a temporary reprieve for the Noda government.

While a country like Japan, unique in that it is a mountainous country without fossil fuels like coal, could have naturally gravitated towards geothermal power, previous Japanese governments have sought the clean and cheap alternative of nuclear power.  Throughout the world, nuclear power has provided an energy alternative that has seldom created the nightmarish scenarios that protestors and activists promised.  True, if things go wrong as they did in that “perfect” storm of natural disasters in Japan, nuclear power poses an extraordinary risk but the history and technology of the industry suggest that it would take another confluence of disasters to create the same ideal setting for catastrophe. 

Countries who sought to eliminate or reduce nuclear power energy were often those who had no history of risk but simply did so to mollify fears generated by the immediate hysteria of troubles in Japan.  In the United States, in the aftermath of the Three Mile Island near-disaster, nuclear power plant construction dropped to a stand-still yet, the increasing safety measures and technology have made such plants safe, dependable and productive.  It seems that the attempts to throw the baby out with the bathwater are unreasonable and illogical. 

If any country’s reactionary stance on nuclear power is understandable, it is that of Japan.  However, the Japanese have grown increasingly weary of their governments – the rate of government turnover is remarkable.  And a beleaguered government cannot throw away the millions of dollars in investments on a progressively safer and reliable energy source.  The geological instability of the region would suggest a shift towards geothermal is advisable but for now, the Noda government must utilize the resources they have in order to bring more normalcy to daily lives while working diligently to upgrade all nuclear facilities. 

I Know It’s Only Rock n’ Roll…

I remember it like it was a bolt out of the blue.  I was at a friend’s house and his older brother had just purchased a new album – Black and Blue by the Rolling Stones.  The older brother also possessed Goat’s Head Soup and Exile on Main Street.  The three albums were very different from one another but I was hooked.  I would digest every album from that point on and through the years, have enjoyed much of their earlier albums though their period of the 1970s is my favorite.  Yesterday was the 50^th anniversary of their first gig as The Rolling Stones.  Consider this article a little tribute to the greatest rock n’ roll band in history. 

When I was a kid, one was either a Rolling Stones fan or a Beatles fan.  I never understood The Beatles but the Rolling Stones impacted me like no other band.  There was something raw and rebellious about the Stones where the Beatles seemed to be pretending.  I must have annoyed the daylights out of parents with singing and asking to buy this album or another.  Of course, they had the right to suspect my musical tastes as I was once fond of KISS.  The Stones are based on the rich tradition of the blues and as I grew older and more aware of their lyrics and complexity, it simply intensified my affiliation. 

Of course, as a young teen, part of the Stones’ attraction was their rebel status and to think they had been ticking off parents for decades.  It is quite impressive.  I do enjoy some of their post 1970s material, most notably Tattoo You, Undercover (the title track is still amazing to hear) and Voodoo Lounge.  Unlike some fans, I’m not as upset about the “newer” material as the progression of the band was both predictable and inevitable.  After one achieves international stardom to become some of the richest musicians on the planet, it is hard to play the rugged, life-is-tough style.  Though they are based on the blues (a great love of mine as explained in an earlier article), most of the older blues musicians are not much better off than they were when they began.  They certainly do not enjoy the riches of the Stones so they remain tied in.  What the Stones still bring across, however, is audacity and brashness.  Brash might be a difficult adjective for men well into their 60s but it applies.  Yet, they also represented danger. 

As a young man, dangerous people and ideas were like a drug.  I remember the first time I heard “Gimme Shelter” with its focus on the worst of mankind.  I still get chills listening to Merry Clayton belting out that rape and murder is “just a shot away.”  Similarly, songs like “Shattered,” “Midnight Rambler” and “Dead Flowers” drew me in.  “Undercover” fits into the category.  As dark as their music could be, their presentation was just as troubling to my parents with Mick’s serpentine movements and Keith’s death-defying existence.  As an adult, I know most of their antics were part of a show (something the “rock-is-deviltry” folks never understood) but to a young boy, they were thumbing their noses at the powers that be and it is hard not to like that.   

In honor of their 50^th anniversary of existence, I’m spending a great deal of time listening to everything I have, from box sets to studio and live albums.  In sounds trite but the Stones served as a soundtrack to my life and often, I remember certain events in conjunction with a new Stones’ album or a song.  Though I’m well into my 40s and in lifestyle, far from my wilder years, I can pretend and remember my halcyon days when I was young and tough.  Like the Stones, I’m not what I used to be but the music and the memories remain the same.

A Second Brief Message

Well, for my tens of rabid fans (including the occasional spammer from Russia or Malaysia), you might remember the last time I had this kind of posting. I was carefully navigating communist territory in eastern Germany. Today, I’m hedonistically enjoying the sun and beaches of debt-ridden Greece. One would think that Greece is not quite as problematic as life behind the Iron Curtain (do they still have that?) but Greece ups the ante with Neo-Nazis, recently elected to the Greek Parliament under the strangely optimistic name of the New Horizon Party.

Kidding aside, this is a beautiful and wonderful country and the people could not be more generous (again, notwithstanding the occasional skinhead). Try to get here if you can. Hellas was not originally on the top of my list of places to visit but I’m so glad to be here now. Please visit next Friday for my next article.

Cheers

Ross