Guns

...now browsing by category

#721 – Dick Bernard: Drones, etc. Todays President Obama speech on U.S. Security Policy

Thursday, May 23rd, 2013

UPDATE 4 p.m. CDT: Here are the printed remarks given by President Obama today. Apparently there was no live video.
*
On occasion – this is one of those occasions – I deliberately do a post before some kind of major action which can be anticipated.

This morning, perhaps even as I write (9:40 a.m. CDT), the President is already speaking about Drones and other things related to National Security.

But, at this writing, I have no idea what President Obama is going to say on the issue of Drones, Terrorism, etc., except that I believe it will be important, and I will watch it in its entirety today. The White House website will likely carry the address live, and it will be archived, uncluttered by chatter by pundits or news media interpretation.

I’ve written a few times about Drones. All of the links which mention the word “Drones” are here. The December 13 & 20, 2011, postings drew particular “fire” from people who I’d usually consider allies: folks in the Peace Community. The post and the comments say what they say.

I’ve noticed that President Obama has, in past months, challenged the U.S. Congress to establish policy on use of Drones.

My guess is that he will again do so today.

But it is not in the best political interest of Congress to take unto itself its Constitutional responsibility of Declaring War, or acting on such policies as when, whether or how to use such weapons as Drones. (Constitution of U.S.001, see Article I Sec 8)

Easier it is to blame the President at the time; or to use the President as cover (it depends on whether the President at the time is my party, or yours).

Personally, I would eliminate War. But since eliminating War is not a reasonable possibility, perhaps I’d agree with changing the rules of engagement to fighting war like they did in the good old days: down and dirty, hand-to-hand and very, very personal combat.

In my bookshelf is a volume I found in a box at my ND Grandparents home some years ago. It is ambitiously entitled “Famous and Decisive Battles of the World. The Essence of History for 2500 Years” by Brig Gen Charles King copyright J. C. McCurdy 1899. I wrote about this book June 5, 2012, including a list of the 52 battles, culminating, naturally, with the Spanish-American War of 1898.

Of course, we’re no longer in those good old days when people trudged around with primitive cannons and did not have airplanes or huge megaton bombs…or drones, or cellphones, or computer technology.

We take for granted high-tech in our own daily lives.

Why should warfare be any different?

The rules of engagement have changed.

Listen to the Presidents speech, but most important, make your voice be heard with policy makers you elect.

Posted in Guns, History, International Relations, Politics, Technology, War | No Responses »
Tags: drones

#707 – Dick Bernard: The Gun Issue. It’s time….

Sunday, April 7th, 2013

UPDATES at end of post.
For other posts on the issue, simply place the word “guns” in the search box.
There have also been many comments to the same post at Woodbury Patch here

This mornings Minneapolis Star Tribune had a very powerful full page pictorial editorial on the Gun Issue. Here’s the article, and below is a photo of the actual full page spread.

(click to enlarge)

Editorial, page 2 of OpEx, Minneapolis Star Tribune April 7, 2013

Tonight, CBS 60 Minutes had two segments featuring the Newtown parents, whose children were killed in the massacre on December 14. The segments are accessible here, and are well worth watching.

We are urging our lawmakers to do the serious and courageous work of tightening control of firearms in this country. If people wish to own guns, then they need to accept more responsibility, especially if they wish to own weapons that can only be described as war combat weapons.

Most all the talk I hear from the “Gun” side is “Rights”. It is within the role of our legislators to talk very seriously about “Responsibility” of gun owners as well. Our society has many laws which in one way or another mandate responsibility. Guns are a major area shamefully under-regulated (in our opinion). Too many in the gun-owner population do not well regulate (take responsbility) for themselves. Responsibility does not mean more guns in more places. (Even the most cursory reading of the 2nd amendment notes the words “well regulate” in the very first sentence.) We should not accept a new “wild west” mentality in the 21st century.

If you’re Minnesotan, here’s a current list of lawmaker contact information: Minnesota Lawmakers 2013

UPDATES/COMMENTS:
from Phyllis: April 9: I work at a golf course during the summer months…..Every spring all of us employees are required to go through a criminal background check along with a credit check. And, this is only for a part time summer job at a golf course!!! I have no problem with either of these background checks, but we have people who are so against having criminal background checks before purchasing a gun which would save lives! My “liberty” is that I want to feel safe…..

from Paul: April 9: I find the arguments NRA and others almost laughable – except for the incredible tragedy of excessive gun violence in this country. Notice, I said “this country” because in this we are truly unique in the world. “WE ARE NUMBER ONE! YAY!”

But I suppose they do have a point there when it comes to the slippery slope. After all, those of us who are old enough remember when it was possible to buy and own a personal automobile. Of course, that was before laws like speed limits, seat belt requirements and drivers licenses were enacted prior to the confiscation and outlawing of all personal car ownership. Ah, I remember those early days. I loved my cars. And how stupid those laws were. When cars laws were passed, there were still speeders and drivers without licenses who did not wear their seat belts.

And, of course the same thing has happened since the first gun control laws outlawing personal ownership of submachine guns, bazookas, rocket launchers, grenades, atomic bombs, etc.. We have had so many guns confiscated since that. Now almost no one has one.

Oops, what am I saying? That didn’t happen at all, did it. Duh!

From Judy: I posted your gun comments on my FB page. (I’m on a mission).

From Jeff: The conspiracy of a solid majority of know nothings in the USA, combined with the power of profit (gun/ammunition companies and their lobby the NRA and the right wing media) , and
The long and steadfast tradition of American exceptionalism continue to fight the overwhelming popular support for common sense gun responsibility laws.

Over the weekend, and I am not sure where, I read that the USA is basically one of 3 countries in the world with a right to gun ownership like that in the 2nd Amendment, there are
A handful of other Latin America countries with some sort of similar right in their constitution… if anyone else read the same article or post maybe they can cite it? I am not sure where
I read it.

From Tom, April 9: Dick-When I had a student drop the “I’ve got rights” argument on me, I would hand him/her a dictionary and ask him to find the word “rights” and keep his finger in that page. Then I would ask him/her to find the word “responsibility”. Then I would ask “which comes first”?”

Posted in Guns, Politics | No Responses »

#694 – Dick Bernard: Guns, yet again.

Saturday, February 23rd, 2013

Recently, it seems, I’m fixated on Guns. Mebbe so. It is an important topic. (Additional recent posts at Feb. 3 and Feb. 19, 2013)

I’m an active blogger; this is #694 since March, 2009.

Put the letters “Guns” in the search box, and up pop 27 blogposts which apparently use the letters “guns” somewhere within their text. I’m not inclined to argue with word search, but, of the references it gives, a half dozen of those posts were not about guns at all (#104, 465, 473, 533, 588, 598); three are by guest writers; seven are post the Newtown CT massacre. There are headings like Binghamton NY, Tucson AZ (Gabby Giffords), Aurora CO, Newtown CT, earlier sites of gun carnage by an individual (there are others I would have written about too).

The reader can decide if I’m fixated on the topic of Guns, or someone with a very rational concern….

February 21, I did make an appearance at the street theatre which was the Gun Hearings at the Minnesota State Senate, in the Hearing Room under the Capitol Rotunda. I wrote and have photos of the event here (scroll to the lower half of that post).

The February 22, Minneapolis Star Tribune, headlined “Groups battle over gun checks” on page B1 (you can read it here). (I notice, in the on-line version of the story, that they used a photo of the same guy I caught a little earlier in line – holstered pistol on right hip….)

Today’s editorial in the STrib was about the Gun issue.

Guns are hot. Deservedly so.

Of course, news in our society is predictable: “if it bleeds, it leads” seems still the mantra. So does conflict, as in “Groups battle over gun checks” (the STrib headline).

I was at the Thursday “battle”, and as best I could determine the only war was over who had the most buttons, and the gun side did win, it appeared. Maybe that’s why the guy is smiling in the photo, sporting his “Self Defense is a Human Right“:

(click to enlarge)

His button seemed more common than the more pleasant appearing opponents: “Minnesotans Against Being Shot”:

But my musing on this topic went in a differing direction when I saw the Star Tribune report on the hearing I had just attended.

In Minnesota, it is legal to carry a firearm into the Minnesota State Capitol: “When the legislative session opened in January, there were 523 [licensed permit-holders with right to carry weapons into the capitol]…”As of [February 21] that number had spiked to 723…By comparison, in 2012 there were only 56 new gun-carrying notifications during the entire year.”
(Star Tribune Feb 22)

There were lots of orderly people in those throngs waiting to get into the hearing on Thursday.

How many of them in the line were packing heat, like the now famous guy in the two photographs, mine and the STrib (see below)? (He seems to have been uniquely public about his right to bear arms.)

In line. Note the holstered handgun

What if all those 723 authorized to be armed and dangerous were in that line on Thursday, and their collective feelings of needing to defend themselves led to a group need to enforce their right to bear arms, and they did so?

What would happen?

Of course, nobody knows, but whether an organized armed insurrection to take over the State Capitol, or a Keystone Cops caper, the results would not have been pretty…and predictable.

“Self defense” works better in theory than it likely would in fact.

Gun sanity needs to replace the current rush to insanity.

Just my opinion.

Posted in Community, Guns, Minnesota, Politics | No Responses »

#691 – Dick Bernard: Towards a Rational Conversation About Guns, continued

Tuesday, February 19th, 2013

UPDATE Feb. 24, 2012: Brief comments and photos from today at State Capitol at the end of this post.

February 3 I published a post about Guns. You can find it here, with an important update on February 11. An additional update was published on February 23, here.

Last night came an e-mail announcing hearings at the Minnesota State Capitol Room 15 February 21 and 22. Here are details.

Earlier last evening I had been at a community meeting in St. Paul’s Frogtown (the issue was simple school-community relationships, not guns). Most of us there were strangers to each other. One older man and I struck up a conversation. He had been at the earlier House hearings on Guns, and he was struck by how many angry men were in the room. He felt intimidated. But the experience made him ever more committed to make a difference on this most critical issue. (Frogtown has its own reputation relating to violence, and our meeting was multi-cultural and multi-racial. But the issues that came up were all about building better relationships generally, and not guns at all. I found that interesting.)

Guns in our society do not make for a simple rational conversation. Indeed, after the Feb 3 post, someone named Alex wrote an on-line comment suggesting I wasn’t capable of a rational conversation. I have no idea who “Alex” is – on-line comments are anonymous – so I can’t even engage in conversation with him – or her. I know nothing more than the comment.

So be it.

But I did decide after the post to try to get an idea of what people I know think about the gun issue, and I drafted a brief questionaire to try to find out. Half of the 46 people who received the questions answered the survey – a high percentage return. I bill myself as a “moderate pragmatic Democrat” so that can be a clue as to the people surveyed might be.

The results are at the aforementioned blogpost.

Before you look, I’d suggest you answer, for yourself, the same questions I asked my friends. The questions are below.

And then, get into more conversations with people you know.

We don’t need gun policy to be made by angry men sitting in a hearing room. But that is how it will be if we do not get into action.

The survey questions:

1. Do you (and/or someone else in your own home or dwelling) own a firearm(s) (“guns”)? Yes or No
A. If you answered “Yes”
1. How many firearms are in your home or dwelling?
a. What kind(s)?
b. Where are weapons kept?
c. If you needed the gun for defense right now, how accessible and/or useful would it be to you?
2. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU PERSONALLY USED A FIREARM?
a. For what purpose?

2. For everyone:
If you could decide, what would “reasonable regulation” of firearms look like?

3. Have you ever used a gun for self-defense (against a person), and in what manner? Or do you personally know of someone who has (other than in war – or one of those stories heard from your cousin about his neighbor’s dentist’s brother or the like)? Versus, how many people have you been personally acquainted with who were killed by guns (except for war); how many were due to domestic violence?

The group answers are in the Update, accessible here.

They are just opinions of good people.

What is your opinion?

UPDATE February 21, 2013

My visit to the Capitol today was quite brief. The Hearing Room was limited to 40 people, with tickets. There were large numbers of people waiting in line for the overflow areas. In the end, I chatted with some nice people, took a few photos, and came home. Joan Peterson of Duluth is the lady in the photograph below. Her card gives a website of commongunsense.com which looks like a very informative site. She had the ticket to the proceedings, and she’s active in assorted ways, including Domestic Abuse Intervention, the Brady Campaign and Protect Minnesota.

The battle was between the buttons, today. “Minnesotans Against Being Shot” versus “Self-Defense is a Human Right”. At least one guy in line was packing heat. I picked up and am sporting a Minnesotans Against Being Shot, the button of ProtectMn.Org, “working to end gun violence”.

If you favor better regulation of firearms, now is the time to be very active with your elected officials at every level. Good things will come out of activism this year. The issue is on the table, and the NRA can’t control the conversation as they would like.

(click to enlarge photos)

In line. Note the holstered handgun

Joan

Two-sided sign

Posted in Guns, Links, Politics | No Responses »

#684 – Dick Bernard: Towards a rational conversation about guns and need for their regulation….

Sunday, February 3rd, 2013

UPDATE February 11, 2013: February 8 I posted a very brief survey to 46 persons on my long standing peace and justice mailing list. The survey was about Guns. Ultimately, 23 responded to the questions, and the entire compilation can be read here: Gun Survey Feb 82013R1. I was surprised both by the number of responses, and the kinds of responses received. This may help the reader clarify his or her own mind about the issue of Guns in our Society, and the survey certainly hi-lites the complexity of the issue needing affirmative resolution. This is an issue that needs both speaking and very active listening with an eye to resolving the issue.

Here is how I summarized my feelings on the issue to my Government representatives: Gun Issue Position Feb 2013

THE ORIGINATING POST.
Today is the holiest of holy days in the United States: Super Bowl XLVII Sunday, where gladiators from Baltimore and San Francisco meet on the field of battle in New Orleans to determine the Champion of the World, at least for today. Then there is the Super Bowl of Super Bowl Ads. Now there’s clamoring for a National Day Off for the day following the Super Bowl….

But then we’re also in the real world: Yesterday’s paper front page lede was about a gang member being convicted for a random act of violence: shooting up the house of a rival, killing a 5 year old in the process. It was the second family member killed in that house. Later in the day, on-line, the same paper had a picture story about President Obama shooting skeet at Camp David…which the NRA mostly ridiculed.

I wish the President hadn’t felt the need to prove he’d actually shot a gun, even in skeet, but, hey, this is America in the year of irrational talk about the need for rational gun regulation.

Additional Post on this specific Topic: here and here.

It happened that the same day a cousin (her Mom and my Mom were first cousins, their parents brothers and sisters) sent a photograph of her Dad, Don Thimmesch, who was among the first 53 highway patrolmen in Iowa (1935). (More here.) And it reminded me of another photo she had sent me some years earlier, of her Mom, Cecilia Thimmesch, who was a national champion marksman with the Rifle.

Best I know, Cecilia is the only National Champion on either side of my family. Hers was a well-earned accomplishment.

Their photos are below:

Don Thimmesch, ca 1935, first class of highway patrol in Iowa

(click on photo to enlarge)

Cecilia Thimmesch, Champion with the Rifle, 1939

Daughter, Carol, is rightly proud of her parents, as she has a right to be.

They were responsible gun users.

If we could go back to those olden days.

But not likely.

As I write, a radical government hater in Alabama is holed up in his survival cellar with a young school child as hostage after shooting the school bus driver last week. In his mind he had some point to make. [Note February 5, 2013: the kidnapper is dead, the child was rescued, yesterday.]

There is no good end to this gun story, as there are seldom good ends to gun stories, unless the gunman comes out of his cave with hands-up before the youngster and the gunman both die.

I suppose the guy thought he could beat the government by being armed and dangerous, having a hostage, and going into his underground shelter.

The moment he took action, he’d lost. And so had his innocent victim.

Yes, we do need to talk about rationale and new gun policies everywhere in this land. A suburban police chief from this area described the problem well, very recently: According to my friend, Greg, who knows the chief personally, here’s what he said: “He told of the progression of weapons his police officers carry. First it was a shotgun in the squad car. Then it became an MP-5. Now his officers carry an AR-15. The reason for the progression to greater and greater firepower? As Scott testified, the changes were necessary to keep pace with what the bad guys are carrying.”

In my opinion the NRA spokespeople can go to hell, at least in their current role as shill for the gun industry.

Where does one start on a “rational conversation”? Maybe how guns were viewed when Donald and Cecilia became noteworthy in Iowa, in the 1930s.

Here’s a commentary I received from a great friend who’s a school bus driver and lives on rural property in Vermont:
From Peter, February 1, 2013

The Samurai Always Left Their Long Knives at the Door

For some reason it has been slow going, looking at this crazy, bloody couple of months. My school has been locked down for a week now. Some jerk said something scary.

As a school bus driver it kind of struck a nerve when somebody shot a driver in Alabama and (at this writing) is holed up in a bunker with a kidnapped five-year-old. I guess the NRA would say all school bus drivers should be packing now. Among the drivers I know, every one of them would get between a shooter and a student without thinking about it first, and still would not carry a gun on the bus.

Among all the people I know, I can’t think of more than one or two I’d want to be around if they were “carrying.” For myself, if I ever find out somebody’s packing heat, I will explain that this is a problem that precludes whatever purpose brought us into the building, and leave.

Around here people check with the parents of their children’s playmates to see if they have guns in the house, and whether they are safely locked away. Half the kids around here, at a guess, are crack shots with a deer rifle.

As for hunters, almost every hunter I’ve met on my property has been drunk, and has pointed the gun carelessly at me or at their friends or their own feet, heads, whatever. I have zero faith in hunters to be “responsible gun owners.” We lose two or three a year, here, including kids, to accidental shootings. A farmer was shot while driving his tractor, mistaken for a deer. A blueberry-picker was shot, mistaken for a bear. Two died last year when one mistook the other for the deer, and then, seeing his mistake, shot himself. Best friends and long-standing hunting club members. This is in a county it takes about half an hour to cross on dirt roads.

I thought the police were supposed to be the ones with the guns and the training about when to shoot people. Imagine whipping out a Glock 9 in a shopping mall, for any reason. Whom would the cops point their guns at?

I like one idea I’ve heard: gun-owners’ insurance, similar to car insurance. Mandatory and expensive and track-record based. This sort of solution functions like a check-dam, changing the course of change rather than trying to plug the system. We used to call this “trim tabbing.”

The NRA is simply out of control, and should be investigated and drowned in lawsuits and put out of its misery, like the KKK.

Posted in Guns, Peter Barus, Politics, Technology | No Responses »

#683 – Dick Bernard: The Cost of Fear; the Power of Speaking Out.

Friday, February 1st, 2013

Artists rendition of "Banana clip" automatic rifle seen at a Minneapolis restaurant

Yesterday I was at a local restaurant having a cup of coffee, and writing some letters. It’s a very ordinary activity for me. For some reason, I ‘ve always worked best where there’s some hubbub around.

At the next table, very close by, four men, obviously friends, and probably in their 50s, were conversing about this and that and at some point one of them mentioned that he had been actively thinking about ordering an AR-15, and a gun cabinet to go with it.

The chat went on a short while, then he mentioned the topic had come to the attention of his spouse, and apparently he had changed his mind: she would have nothing to do with the purchase. As he described it, they had an interesting conversation….

If I heard it right, I was listening to one smart man, talking about one powerful woman who had something to say about one important matter: an assault rifle in the home.

The conversation got me thinking in a direction I hadn’t considered before: how much does an AR-15 really cost?

I don’t have a gun, and I don’t plan to have one, and I don’t stop to look at guns in stores or even look at ads about guns. I don’t know the details about todays killing machines.

When I got home I googled AR-15, and there were lots of references.

Succinctly, if you can get the assault rifle (there’s been a run on them – supply and demand), it is not cheap. And that’s just for the weapon.

Plus, a well-equipped AR-15 owner should have a range of accessories to go with the gun, all which cost money; things like the locked cabinet, the ammunition, the gun range, etc., etc.

I also noted a more than subtle paranoid edge to the websites peddling AR-15.

Most merchants sing the praises of their product. These sites were less than welcoming or disclosing. No smiley-faces there.

Any reader can challenge my assertion, simply by doing what I did: google “AR-15 cost”.

So, if I heard this totally decent looking and sounding man correctly, he won’t be getting his new gun, and the family relations will be better, and he’ll have money to spend in more productive ways.

I am not, by the way, anti-weapon. Never have been. I am against the insanity of combat weapons for “self-defense”.

Would this guy lug his AR-15 with him everywhere? If he ever had need for the weapon at home, could he find the key to the cabinet? Would the cabinet be where he needed it to be when he needed it? Would he be thinking clearly when he was squeezing the trigger?

Would his investment prove to a blessing or a curse?

Back home I listened to gun victim and survivor Gabby Giffords brief and extremely powerful testimony to a Senate Committee on the issues of Guns. Her husband Mark Kelly’s testimony as well. And the testimony of NRA’s Wayne LaPierre.

Giffords and Kelly made sense. LaPierre simply “came out with guns blazing” and made no sense at all. He was speaking raw power, bullying behavior, that was all.

I’d recommend support for the Giffords/Kelly brand new website on Americans Responsible For Solutions (they are both gun owners, and not against guns per se).

And another good site to get acquainted with is the Brady Campaign.

There’s no need to be afraid of getting into this conversation. It may even do a lot of good.

Posted in Community, Economics, Education, Guns, Minnesota, Politics | No Responses »

#680 – Greg Halbert: “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms”?

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013

(click to enlarge photos)

Banana Clip AR, as seen Jan 22, 2013, in Minneapolis MN at the Seward Cafe

Dick Bernard: The Gun Issue is on the table, and that is good. Unfortunately, much of the conversation is as much based on reality as the above painting, which I saw in the Seward Cafe on Franklin Avenue in Minneapolis today. The painting does get at a reality, however…. The ladies in the below photo (same place and time) were having a civil conversation “under the gun” so to speak. If only we all could approach the gun conversation in the same civil manner.

There is lots of good information available, if one is interested in learning. The following is an example.

Recently I had occasion to send around to my own e-list a “Was the Second Amendment Adopted for Slaveholders?“, by MinnPost columnist and long-time well respected writer on Government issues Eric Black. The column links to a longer academic paper by Carl Bogus.

Both are worth a read. At minimum, read the last two paragraphs of Black’s commentary.

Greg Halbert, a good friend, fellow church usher and retired prosecutor, is on my list, and read the items, and provided his own summary view, in a note to Mr. Black.

Here is Greg’s note to Eric, with an appended additional note to myself.

I encourage you to read the Eric Black column and his accompanying links as well.

Greg Halbert to Eric Black Jan 19:

Very much enjoyed your article on the Second Amendment; you educated me greatly, as I am sure it educated many other people who read your piece.

There is another point regarding the right to possess firearms that troubles me. I receive numerous emails from conservative people who claim they have a right to possess a firearm for possible use if and when government becomes tyrannical.

Nothing much, that I have come across, is discussed regarding this claim. Our Revolutionary leaders believed the British government had become tyrannical so they launched the Revolutionary War. But, in doing so they committed treason against the king. Fortunately they won the war and gained independence from Great Britain. Had the British won the war, George Washington and others could well have been executed.

So here we sit in 2013 with certain citizens of the United States fearful the U. S. government will become tyrannical, so they possess firearms and ammunition for use if such tyranny develops.

The difficulty I have is just how is this tyranny defined? How will you, me and others know when our government becomes tyrannical? It is left unsaid, but I presume gun toters think they as individuals will determine when the government has become tyrannical. Then what?

Do these Second amendment worshippers actually think they will take on city police departments, county sheriffs, the national guard, FBI, etc?

Do people who assert this right to possess firearms for use against a tyrannical government understand that treason is another word to describe their actions if they ever come to that?

This tortured line of thinking has escaped any careful examination.

Greg Halbert to Dick Bernard Jan 19:

These so-called super patriots fail to appreciate they are really contemplating treason with this talk that they need arms and ammo to be prepared for response to a tyrannical government. Who determines the government is tyrannical? Anyone? Isn’t that anarchy? Sorry, I am running low on question marks so will close.

Posted in Community, Guns, History, Politics | No Responses »

#678 – Dick Bernard: Anniversary of a Retirement

Friday, January 18th, 2013

It was thirteen years ago today, January 18, 2000, that my staff colleagues at Education Minnesota bid me adieu at my retirement after 27 years attempting to do my best to represent teachers in a collective bargaining state.

I was not yet 60 when I cleaned out my office, handed in my keys and walked out the north door at 41 Sherburne in St. Paul.

It had been long enough.

Even so, I had purposely fixed my retirement date to accommodate the statutory deadline for contract settlements that year: January 18, 2000.

My job back then was an endless series of negotiations about anything and everything: elementary teachers had differing priorities than secondary; that teacher who’d filed a grievance, or was being disciplined for something, had a difference of opinion with someone. Somebody higher up the food chain had a differing notion of “top priority” than I did….

So it went.

And negotiations was a lot better than the alternative where the game was for one person to win, against someone else who lost.

It was one of many lessons early in my staff career: if you play the game of win and lose, the winner never really wins, at least in the real sense of that term, where a worthy objective is for everybody to feel some sense of winning something. Win/Lose is really Lose/Lose…everybody loses.

We are in the midst of a long-running terrible Civil War where winning is everything; where to negotiate is to lose.

We’re seeing the sad results in our states, and in our nation’s capital, and in our interpersonal communication (or lack of same) about important issues, like the current Gun Issue, Etc.

Thirteen years is a while ago.

I brought my camera along that January 18, 2000, and someone took a few snapshots (at end of this post). Nothing fancy, but it is surprising how many memories come back:

There’s that photo of myself with the co-Presidents of Education Minnesota, Judy Schaubach and Sandra Peterson. Two years earlier rival unions, Minnesota Education Association and Minnesota Federation of Teachers, had merged after many years of conflict.

I like to feel that I played more than a tiny part in that important rapprochement, beginning in the late 1980s in northern Minnesota.

Both officers have retired. Sandra Peterson served 8 years in the Minnesota State Legislature.

Leaders don’t stop leading when they retire.

February 28, in Apple Valley, Education Minnesota’s Dakota County United Educators (Apple Valley/Rosemount) will celebrate 20 years from the beginning of serious negotiations to merge two rival local unions.

I was there, part of that. And proud of it.

There’s my boss, Larry Wicks, who many years earlier I’d practiced-teaching-on at Valley City State Teachers College. I apparently didn’t destroy him then; he’s currently Executive Director of the Ohio Education Association.

And my work colleague and friend Bob Tonra, now many years deceased, who somehow took a fancy to my Uncle’s WWII ships, the battleship USS Arizona and destroyer USS Woodworth and painstakingly made to scale models, behind me as I type this blog.

And of course, colleagues – people in the next office, across the hall, other departments, etc. Or Karen at the Good Earth in Roseville – “my” restaurant for nearly its entire existence. They gave me a free carrot cake that day….

That January 18 I finally cleared the final mess from my office and took a few photos of my work space, across the street from the State Capitol building. On my office door hung a photo from the Rocky Mountain News in Denver, April, 1999, a few days after the massacre at Columbine.

That young lady in the picture is granddaughter Lindsay, then 13. She, her parents and I walked up that Cross Hill on a rainy April day, and saw the stumps of the two crosses one Dad had cut down – the ones erected by someone else to the two killers, who had killed themselves. They lived then, and now, scarce a mile from the high school….

All the memories.

Let’s all learn to truly negotiate and to compromise on even our most cherished beliefs.

Such a talent is our future. Indeed our world’s only chance for a future.

(click to enlarge)

Judy Schaubach, Dick Bernard, Sandra Peterson Jan 18, 2000

In Gallop Conference Room at Education Minnesota Jan 18, 2000

Karen Schultz and server at Good Earth, January 18, 2000

Bob Tonra with his model of the USS Arizona ca 1996

Larry Wicks (at left)

Cross Hill above Columbine High School, April 1999, granddaughter Lindsay by the crosses, late April, 1999

Posted in Colorado, Community, Education, Family History, Guns, History, Labor, Minnesota, North Dakota, Politics | No Responses »
Tags: columbine, Education Minnesota, good earth roseville mn, judy schaubach, Minnesota Education Association, minnesota federation of teachers, sandra peterson

#677 – Dick Bernard: President Obama’s Moment

Thursday, January 17th, 2013

In my opinion, Wednesday, January 16, 2013, will go down as President Obama’s John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King moment.

It took an immense amount of courage for him, January 16, 2013, to confront our nations culture of violence, particularly the fringe – it’s really only a fringe – which worships the unrestricted “right to bear arms” – all and any kinds of arms.

(The Second Amendment, ratified Dec. 15, 1791, says this in its entirety “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.” The reader can, of course, choose which words to emphasize…or ignore…in that amendment.)

President Obama, his supporters, advisers and the Secret Service, know the personal risks of what he did yesterday.

I believe President Kennedy, and I know Martin Luther King, knew the risks of witness for a better society and world. They both fell to rifle shots from hatred, 1963 and 1968.

Any of us around then – I was a school teacher when the announcement over the intercom came that President Kennedy had been shot in Dallas – know more than we want to know about how hatred and threats such as we are now seeing spewed by folks tend to trickle down to madmen who are more than willing to do the dirty work of killing the messenger. The NRA is, I believe, wittingly facilitating this hatred.

The vast majority of us, I believe, are with the President on his initiative to change the sick system which enabled Newtown and other tragedies.

But we can’t be sitting quietly in the background in our circles as this debate moves forward.

We need to supportively encircle the President and help him move forward in the many ways available to us. We need, particularly, to support our legislators who support change, and encourage those who are reluctant to see a civilized world in a different way than through a gun sight.

Yes, this is a complex issue.

Personally, I don’t own or plan to own a weapon, but neither am I anti-gun for the traditional uses I grew up with. Gun ownership is a privilege with great responsibility. Sadly, legislation is about the only way to increase responsibility.

I see something of a continuum in the debate which is now officially beginning.

At one end of the continuum is true religious model, best stated in the “beat their swords into plowshares” citation (Isaiah 2:3-4). Arbitrarily, I’ll call that end zero.

At the other end is the “man’s home is his castle” philosophy which, played out to its illogical end, allows anybody to do anything with any killing device. I’ll call that ten.

Somewhere in between those poles is common sense in a “free State”, as stated in that Second Amendment.

We are – all of us – the “State” referred to in that Second Amendment. We are “the people”.

The collective “we, the people of the United States” share responsibility to “insure domestic Tranquility” (the Preamble of the Constitution), and tranquility doesn’t come at the end of a gun.

(On that continuum, above, I’d put myself at a four or less.)

Our World is our Castle.

We all live together in that Castle. We depend on each other; not only on ourselves.

Get involved, and don’t quit. Be willing to negotiate, but carefully. It is hard to negotiate with someone who refuses to negotiate.

On this and other issues, learn both sides and stick with it. It’s a crucial issue at a crucial time.

Here’s the complete U.S. Constitution: Constitution of U.S.001

Recent previous posts on this topic are here, here and here.

UPDATES:
From Will:
Some blogger yesterday had a great juxtaposition of King and Obama: “I Have a Dream” vs. “I Have a Drone.”

Dick, to Will: Yesterday, I seem to recall, the President mentioned that there had been 900 or so gun deaths in the U.S. in the month since Newtown. Perhaps you could tell me how many deaths from Drones in the same month? How many Iraqis died in a typical month in the Iraq War when it was raging back in the good old days of 2003-2008? How many war dead in Afghanistan in a typical month?

The United States is a nation that almost worships violence. And the gun issue is a perfect place to intensify the conversation on the role of violence in our society.

The President is already on record asking Congress to help adopt rules for use of Drones. It isn’t as if he’s been silent.

Over 50 years ago I edited a small college newspaper, and I’ve always been intrigued by this item we printed in one issue of the paper, sometime in 1960-61.

(click to enlarge)

Viking News, Valley City (ND) State Teachers College, May 24, 1961

Bruce, Jan 17:
Excellent blog.

I concur with you in that it took tremendous personal courage for Obama to take his position on gun control. The president’s life is always in danger for any political act he does, but this one is exceptionally dire. If he is successful in facing up to the NRA and it’s rabid fringe followers, his life will be at risk even after he leaves office. That is the level of emotion on this issue. It may be equivalent to Lincoln and slavery, which brings me to an article I read in the last couple of days on the 2nd Amendment. It’s point is the 2nd was ratified to preserve slavery. I think it goes to ” the man’s home is his castle” doctrine. That is the basis for a person has the right to protect his property with violence, if necessary. The most valuable property in the 18th century in America, when the Bill of Rights was ratified, was slaves. Slavery was legal, and there were slaves in all of the states. The national economy depended on the institution of slavery. In order for the Bill of Rights to be ratified the south needed a compromise which protected their property(slaves) from abolitionists thus preserving their police state(slave patrols). I think, Tom Hartmann, the author of the article, has a good analysis. Protecting the institution of slavery was at the heart of the 2nd amendment. With the Emancipation Proclamation, the 2nd Amendment should have been eliminated. There was no longer a reason for it except for protecting the profit of fire arms manufactures. I can’t help but think it’s exceptionally poetic that it’s the first “Black” president that is facing down the gun lobby. I think it scares the hell out many. In the Tarrantino movie Django, Django must remind many, unconsciously if nothing else, of Obama. It’s a very violent movie, but I recommend it, especially after you read this article.

Another lobby that is as powerful as the NRA is AIPAC. Obama is standing up to that lobby, too. He is putting forth all his political might to show down these two lobbies. With the nomination of Hagel, he has pick a fight with AIPAC. He has brought it out into the light, and now with the backing of Senator Levin(MI) a powerful supporter of AIPAC, he may have won that fight. See here.

The president has guts and resolve. That is what makes him dangerous to the forces that these two lobbies represent. Liberating the country from the oppression of these two lobbies is no small feat, and as you have stated, we need to help this president and protect his back.

Posted in Community, Guns, Peace & Justice, Politics, President Obama | No Responses »

#676 – Dick Bernard: The Gun “Conversation” one month after Newtown.

Monday, January 14th, 2013

This is the one month anniversary of Newtown CT massacre. It seems a good time to look back, and ahead.

The day of Newtown – it was a Friday – I wrote a blogpost in this space, which was also carried in the local Woodbury Patch. There were 45 comments on that post. They speak for themselves.

A few days later I did a second post, with some recommendations. It is here. I included in the post the following graphic, which is very pertinent at this point in the conversation about guns.

(click to enlarge)

Handout from a circa 1972 workshop.

This old graphic demonstrates a general truth: if you seek change – good or evil – after a crisis, there is a narrow window of opportunity. If you wait for the perfect moment to act, the opportunity is lost, since people have a short attention span. Both heroes and villains need to pay attention to this.

I could give many examples from both good and evil, but these would deflect attention from our need to act on this issue, now.

There are so many opinions already out there, another one may seem superfluous, but here are some very brief thoughts:

1. Attempting to introduce more arms into any setting, especially schools, is insane. More weaponry simply introduces more possibilities for more tragic mayhem. If one only considers schools, in the United States there are about 14,000 school districts, 133,000 schools (ranging from one room rural, to immense structures serving thousands); with 55,000,000 or so students and perhaps 5-6 million staff, mostly teachers.

Solving this problem with more lethal weapons is no solution.

The NRA attempted to exploit post-Newtown hysteria on this.

2. The National Rifle Association (NRA) does not deserve the power it attempts to exercise.

It is useful to learn about the NRA. Here is an article that seems to summarize the bases well, though not from the official NRA perspective.

NRA claims to enroll about 4 million members at $35 dues. This translates into approximately one NRA member per 60 adult Americans, and by no means do all NRA members subscribe to the credo of the current leaders.

If we look at NRA leadership as it is, rather than what it pretends to be, it is nothing more than a “skinny 90 pound weakling” who, exposed, is no more powerful than the exposed Wizard of Oz. It has only the power the rest of us choose to give it.

NRAs big money backing may talk, but only possesses the same single vote influence that every one of us has with the people we elect to represent us. We have the power on this issue, if we choose to exercise it.

3. Those who demand the right to be armed and dangerous are fools, exposing their short-sightedness and, yes, impotence.

I am trained in firearms – Army years. But I’ve never owned a gun, and I have no intention to get one now.

In a ‘gunfight at the OK Corral’ I would be un-armed and dead.

I don’t need to go to the OK Corral, but if I did, and I was killed, my problems would be over, but my well-armed assailants problems would just be beginning.

Last I looked we have little laws in this country which frown on murder. And we have technology with which to find murderers that wasn’t available during the OK Corral days.

Someone lethally armed is potentially more a danger to him or herself than to any intruder or the hated government.

I don’t need to list examples. They abound.

The struggle for sanity in gun ownership is by no means over. It is just beginning.

Be on the court.

It is your legislators, national and state, who will have to enact the policies that are needed. They depend on you.

UPDATE:
from Peter Jan. 14:

Well since you put it that way…

Just guessing you should strengthen the connection between NRA-fear and legislators. They are the ones who are afraid of NRA, because it looks as if it can get them un-elected if they don’ play along. Also it would be well to look into the history of that, has anybody been un-elected by the NRA? Cause they sure have swung a lot of weight in DC. Power in DC is a very individual matter. Relationships between less than three or four people can have the effect of thousands of votes. NRA is probably as hollow as you say, but to let the air out of them you have to expose this, and that means revealing the actual mechanism of how this (tax exempt!) outfit pulls the strings it pulls, and what those strings are made of.

I don’t actually believe the rank and file membership does a whole lot in the way of lobbying. Lobbyists are all presenting themselves as representing a lot of voters, or a lot of jobs in your district. But day-to-day they don’t really have to trot them out. It’s like the filibuster.

Dick, to Peter, and all: If one feels they have no power, they have no power. We are far more powerful than we think we are; and the adversary is far weaker than it would admit it is….

From Phyllis Jan 15:
Good article! I honestly think most of our senators and congressmen are wimps/weaklings when it comes to the NRA. I wish they would all get a spine!! They cannot answer yes or no, but dance around a question when it comes to gun safety. So they get a F rating from the NRA, who really cares….and what does it mean to have the A+ rating??? Does that make them a better person?? Just asking….

Posted in Community, Guns, Peace & Justice, Politics | No Responses »