Chris Wright

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Gilbert Arenas, Guns & Race


By Chris Wright

Every year. Without fail. A gun debate surfaces. The right to bear arms. Really? For who? When? Have our irresponsibililty with guns and the misinterpretation of gun laws which vary from state to state, alter the very meaning of the second amendment?

Well before I get into my foray on gun behavior, let us take a closer look into The Second Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Then after that, someone said, "Well what does that mean?" And some lawyer or politician or something, something, something advocate said, "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers."

And somehow, from December 15th, 1751, all the way through today and beyond, it's been interpreted as "I have a right to have a muthafuckin' gun!" How did we get here? It doesn't matter. We're here.

Yesterday, NBA player Gilbert Arenas was suspended indefinitely by NBA without pay. He's paid $150,000 per game (and we wonder why sports tickets are so expensive. Another day). If he does not play another game this season, he will lose $10 million dollars. Quite a price to pay for stupidity. Why was he suspended? Because he felt that since he had "the right to bear arms", it would be ok to keep his firearms in his locker at the Verizon Center. Whoa! That's not all. He got into a pissing match with a rookie teammate and wanted to show who's boss. The argument got heated and this multi-million dollar superstar brandished his gat! But wait! It doesn't end there! The rookie baller was like, "What muthafucka! Gats don't mean shit to me, I got gats too! Rook proceeds to go into HIS locker and pull out his Johnny Blaze. And yes. In an NBA locker room, they faceoff. Huh??? Is anything sacred? A sports locker room?

We all should be aware of the Plaxico Burress story by now. NY Giants star wide-receiver who almost blew his dick off in a nightclub last year. Yep. Doing 2 years and might never play football again. His income was $4 million a year plus incentives. I'm sure one of those incentives was not "blow your dick off". Now, he's currently in prison for, not brandishing his gun, but concealing his gun. And it just happened to go off in a public venue. He said that he felt it sliding down his leg and he went to grab it and because his ring finger is probably about a size 19, he pulled the trigger. Ouch!! Mayor Bloomberg decided to make an example out of him because he has a huge name and Plaxico Burress is good billboard fodder for the gun problem in NYC.

So now all over talk radio, The Great American Debate begins. Do we have the right to bear arms and how do we bear arms according to the state that we live in. A caviat in the Plaxico Burress case was that he thought that his gun was legal. Yes. His gun was legal in Florida, so he thought that it was legal no matter what state he was in. Not so fast my friend. But he had to know that it was not legal in a nightclub, so that argument is moot.

Then it becomes a racial issue. Al Sharpton got involved in the Gilbert Arenas case and sportswriter, Screamin' Stephen A. Smith wrote a piece on Foxsports.com called "The Black Community Suffers from Arenas Stupidity". Your can read it here after you finish reading this. In a nutshell, he points out how black star athletes' behavior promotes and condones similar activities with black youth. Debatable. But I don't want to talk about that. I want to get back to Al Sharpton. He proclaimed that "Gilbert Arenas must be punished!!". No shit Reverend Al! But what's your point? Do you really think that you're that important that when you say it shall be, it actually shall be?? Because you were ready to castrate Mayor Bloomberg for going after Plaxico with such fervor. And I believe... correct me if I'm wrong... but I think threatning a person with a gun when you're own life is not endangered... is a called ... ummm.. a crime??? So Al, you did not have to make the proclamation, "Arenas must be punished". But I give you a slight pass, because you understand that many people will justify Gilbert Arenas stupid actions.

I heard former NBA All-Star, Jerry Stackhouse say on his radio show, 'aww shucks man, that's just Gilbert. He's a fun guy. Nothing should happen to him. The NBA needs to understand..., blah blah." Shut up Stack! Then, Stack went on to lament on how these million dollar athletes come from dangerous neighborhoods and how guns are the way of the land. And he went on to point how the late Washington Redskin Defensive back, Sean Taylor was gunned down in his own home. Whatever. Sean Taylor wasn't gunned down in his dangerous neighborhood. It's idiotic commentary like that exacerbates the problem. Stackhouse is black if you didn't know.

Then white folks calling up saying how "these people" think that they can do whatever they want because they make millions. The talk show host asked the caller to define "these people" and without fear of retribution, the caller simply said, "these young black athletes". Well, I guess that cleared that up! So does that mean that the right to bear arms has race clauses too? Ooh. I hope not. Then I would have to worry about only whites having guns. That's scary. (Visual of the 1700's. Very scary).

Where is the NRA in all of this? I've not heard a peep. This is bad publicity for them; athletes and guns. While they want to ensure that the second amendment is secure and intact. These high profile gun incidents are making it very hard. Well, I did hear one peep. I found it on a podcast. A gentleman from the NRA said that he did not want to comment on it because the percentages of gun crimes compared to the amount of guns sold is very small. Of course, he's talking about sold legally. So the NRA marches on.

What we all need to do is examine how we really feel about guns and their usefulness in society. Do you own one? Are you concerned if laws are tightened to make it harder to acquire guns? Would you like to see harsher punishment in regards to guns and gun crimes? If you had a gun, would you use it? Do you believe that politicians and our justice system are consistent in the punishment of gun crimes? Or, do you see a problem at all?

Since i've lived in Central NY, I haven't seen so many stabbings in my life!! A cop recently stabbed his wife to death then stabbed himself 14 times. So next, we'll tackle Knife Laws. Not.

2 comments:

  1. First off, I do not own a gun, but know many people that do. I grew up in rural Upstate NY. I mention this, because my perspective is based on the environment I grew up in. If I was raised in the inner city, it is likely that I'd have a different take on all of this.

    "Are you concerned if laws are tightened to make it harder to acquire guns?" No. If I chose to legally acquire a gun, I don't think I'd consider the process daunting. That said, I don't see a need to obtain one. I'm not a hunter and I don't have any interest in killing someone.

    If you say we need harsher punishment for gun related crimes and incidents, that might be too much of a generalization. Do I think that someone like Plaxico deserves the same punishment as an individual who mugs someone at gunpoint? No. Now, if that bullet had killed someone instead of hitting his own leg, accident or not, that's negligent homicide or should be on par with vehicular manslaughter. Accident or not, it was preventable. The problem is that when you toughen laws, it can lead to a slippery slope.

    I think there should be more emphasis on the safe handling of guns. There should be more mandatory training involved in the legal acquisition of firearms. I am also okay with a ban on assault weapons. The biggest problem, as I see it, is that none of this will contribute to the ease with which weapons are obtained illegally.

    If I had a gun and was put in a position where I had to shoot someone to save myself or my family, I believe I would pull the trigger without flinching. That said, I would prefer not to do so. If I could immobilize that person with a golf club (or something else) instead, I would prefer that.

    I don't think that the justice system is any more or any less consistent with the prosecution of gun crimes than any other laws on the books. If you ask any individual, you'll still get anecdotal evidence based on the environment the person was raised in, the area they live in and the stories they've read. I'm sure urban gun crimes are dealt with very differently versus those in rural America. I don't feel qualified to judge whether this is right or wrong (or Wright.)

    In the end, it is a complex problem with no easy solution. Just like many issues, there are groups vehemently arguing both sides with no doubt that their view is the correct one and unwilling to budge an inch. It will be a long time before we see any real solution or change and we'll probably have to hit some watershed moment to precipitate that.

    ReplyDelete