Anger, conspiracy theories offer fertile atmosphere for gun violence

Carol Forsloff — "I'm here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! Doesn't matter how many lemmings you get out there on the street, begging for 'em to have their guns taken. We will not relinquish them. Do you understand?! That's why you're going to fail, and the establishment knows, no matter how much propaganda, the republic will rise again!" The rant reveals the pent-up fury of gun owners that often comes from the mere mention of gun control.

Alex Jones, the controversial radio host, who said the United States government was involved in the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Towers, offered a heated argument about guns and the fact he is against any form of gun control. His tirade with Piers Morgan revealed a deep anger that often develops in his programs and his arguments. On the Piers Morgan show, however, Jones continued his barrage of verbal attacks on any institution or individual in favor of gun control.

But the anger generated toward Morgan and gun control appears only to be a reflection of Jones' rage against  government rules or regulations, even the request to remove his shoes at the airport during screening, as is required by the TSA. He was detained by TSA security officials for his removal to remove his shoes. His publication claims, however, that Jones refused because he had allegedly got athlete's foot from the process a few years ago.

While the National Rifle Association, politicians, and ordinary citizens debate the matter of gun control, many people argue that mental health issues need to be addressed as part of the problem with guns. On the other hand,  anger and arguments that become out of control often create an atmosphere where some of those who own guns turn to violence.

Andy and Kate Grosmaires are parents of a daughter who was killed by her boyfriend, Conor McBride, who had admitted to police that he had shot Ann Grosmaire on March 28, 2010, following a two-day argument with her. The Grosmaires met with Conor to forgive him, a process they told viewers on the Today Show on January 7, 2013, allowed them to work through their own grief.  Both the Grosmaires and the McBrides joined Savannah Guthrie in a discussion of restorative justice, a process that allows victims of violence to come to terms with their emotions. The Grosmaires also explained that they felt Conor would not be an ongoing threat and that the incident had been an aberration of his personality. It is one of those incidents, however, that illustrates how guns are used during violent quarrels when the anger becomes overwhelming.

Not every angry person would turn to using a gun to resolve a dispute, as experts underline; however, the availability of guns and without restrictions, can lead to these incidents, in groups or with individuals. Alex Jones' anger is mirrored by gun owners, most of whom would not use weapons to make a point, but as conspiracy theories continue to develop around gun control and the government, the toxicity of the atmosphere can generate conditions where even the mentally healthy can do things they might not otherwise in the heat of anger. Then there are the adolescents, some of whom use guns to settle "scores" in gang violence.  But there are also those ordinary teens who, in a flash of anger like Conor's example, can turn to that available gun.

It is not just the mentally ill, therefore, who kill but people who lose control and judgment during stressful situations, which is a good justification for the examination of gun laws. People can kill with their bare hands, with knives and with other weapons, but the availability of the gun presents the victim with far less time for defense. That's why the gun creates the greatest widespread threat to the safety of the community. Experts tell us that verbal violence, sarcasm, blaming and name-calling are often the behavioral characteristics that can be predictive of people who can become problems for themselves or others. The anonymity of the Internet fosters these behaviors, which experts remind us can create a toxic environment where anger can be acted out in other social situations.

Anger and conspiracy theories help to fuel the potential for violence.

 

 

Religious debates over prayer in schools part of gun violencecontroversy

[caption id="attachment_17209" align="alignleft" width="234"] Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas Governor and Fox News Commentator[/caption]

Carol Forsloff — Does God withdraw His love when there is no prayer in schools, therefore allowing 20 children and six adults to die? Those who see God like themselves with feelings of jealousy, anger, and rejection might think so; but there are many who disagree and believe that notion is part of the reason why more and more people seek their answers to perplex questions outside religion.

The mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School is being blamed on the lack of prayer and praise in the schools by a number of religious leaders, like former Arkansas Governor and Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. These same notions were pronounced after Hurricane Katrina and the bombing of the World Trade Towers. However, these statements presume an angry God, jealous of not getting man's full attention and acknowledgment, and loving selectively. These are the characteristics we assign to ourselves, but why do we assign these same ones to God, when we are told by virtually every world religion that God is love instead?

We are also told in many churches how we should love like God, some saying that as God loves us all without qualification, we should love our brother in much the same way. Yet when tragedy strikes, many religious leaders describe God's response as a qualified one, selective according to those who pray or don't.

In that same fashion, God is seen as saving the lives of those who praise him, so we pray for our health and our lives. We ask God to give us what we need and want, as if God is a finite being who makes decisions based upon selective judgments and qualifications.

To blame God for the deaths resulting from mass shootings, or other forms of violence, presumes God functions like ourselves and to blame ourselves by accusing one another of not having enough faith, the wrong kind of beliefs, selectively judged, or not praying, again where selectivity may be used to define prayer and in what manner again assigns to God our own negative human qualities and how we make demands. We get angry if someone does not say thank you for a favor or service we perform and believe God too requires the same attention and in the same way. Yet how can finite beings comprehend the infinite and reduce God to a being who looks on idly by, with the power to stop a shooting in Connecticut, and then decides not to intervene because prayer is not allowed in the school?

While some religious leaders maintain their beliefs that there is insufficient faith, and therefore an increase in violence, many of these same leaders side with the gun owners on the lack of gun control measures and promote concealed weapons that can be carried to church, as the law permits in Louisiana.

For many people believe God is love means God is everywhere, loving unconditionally sinner and faithful and yet allowing each person the freedom to make responsible or irresponsible choices. It is the lack of making those responsible choices that creates the violence among us and the lack of love, cooperation, trust and help required of a community that truly cares for everyone.

9/11 families continue to question cause of Building 7 collapse ofWorld Trade Towers

[caption id="attachment_4695" align="alignleft" width="174" caption="September 11, 2011 World Trade Towes bombing"][/caption]

NEW YORK - PRN - GHN
-- More than nine years after the bombing of the World Trade Towers,
there are still people questioning the specifics of the buildings'
collapse, including family members of those killed as well as a judge
and major journalist.


The New York City Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN), a group of family members of those killed in the 9/11 attacks, issued the following statement:

We who lost our loved ones on September 11, 2001Andrew Napolitano and Geraldo Rivera
for the courage they have shown in publicly questioning the official
claim that the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 was due to
fire.

Judge Andrew Napolitano and Geraldo Rivera
for the courage they have shown in publicly questioning the official
claim that the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 was due to
fire.vigorously applaud Judge

We who lost our loved ones on September 11, 2001 vigorously applaudIn
the week since Judge Napolitano aired his views on Building 7, many
voices in the media have singled him out for attack while conveniently
ignoring the sequence of events that led to his revelation and the
overwhelming evidence that validates his concerns.

This past month, on TV screens across the New YorkTV ad to draw attention to the fact that more than 1,300 architects and engineers publicly join us in challenging the official explanation that Building 7 came down due to fire.

In the Metropolitan Area, millions of viewers have been seeing footage
of Building 7's collapse for the first time ever.  This is because we
took it upon ourselves to produce and appear in ato draw attention to the fact that more than 1,300 architects and engineers publicly join us in challenging the official explanation that Building 7 came down due to fire.

We were fortunate enough that Geraldo Rivera saw our ad and invited our representatives to appear on Geraldo At Large.
There they presented the irrefutable evidence that Building 7's
collapse could not have resulted from fire as the government claims.  Geraldo Rivera then appeared on Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano to discuss our campaign and express his doubts about Building 7.  The following week, Judge Napolitano courageously voiced his own opinions on this matter.

However,
you would not know anything about our position if you are getting your
information from outlets like Media Matters and the Huffington Post.  On
November 29, Media Matters published an article entitled, "9/11 Victim Families Criticize Judge Napolitano Comments,"
in which four 9/11 family members were quoted as attacking Judge
Napolitano, without a single mention of the more than one-hundred 9/11
family members from NYC CAN who share
Napolitano's skepticism.  One family member quoted in the article went
as far as to say, "Anybody who talks about that is obviously not a
family member and just trying to stir the pot and cause controversy."

We
who lost loved ones on that day cannot stand idly by as our honest
search for the truth about their death is trampled upon.  We demand that
Media Matters apologize for its unfair, irresponsible and injurious
coverage of this deeply sensitive issue.  And we call upon other voices
in the media to follow the lead of Geraldo Rivera
and Judge Napolitano, who have so courageously begun to question our
government's scientifically bogus explanation for Building 7's collapse.

The organization gives the following contact website:http://www.BuildingWhat.org