GUN COUNTRY: THE DIVISIVENESS OF FIREARMS COVERSATIONS

Image result for GUNS IN AMERICA

“My 2nd amendment says so.”


It has only been a few days since the mass shooting in Las Vegas which claimed the lives of 58 people. And already political pundits are in conversations surrounding gun ownership. Should we be able to own them or not? Should the ownership of guns be based on the caliber of weapon? Because a lot of people have no problem with handguns. But when it comes to higher caliber weapons, that’s when the conversation intensifies. And the guns of choice that causes such controversy are the following: AR-15, AK47, Tech9 Uzi, M16, and the 50/60 caliber rifles. These are weapons that can pump out multiple bullets in just seconds. Some ask, why do you need to own a gun with such force. Others say why not because it’s our rights. Well, both people for and against to an extent would be right. Well, how so?

On the side of the gun control people, there is some logic to additional control on top of the already gun control. Number one, there should be to some extent, psychological background checks in order to own firearms. Your mental health should come into play when owning a gun. Any mental instability should raise a red flag. Now, even if the person seek help and they are in a better mental space than prior, they should still have a tough time attaining a gun. Another rational argument is that it is an amendment, but the time period in which the document was written is totally different than today. In the times of the second amendment being written, they intended for people to own the guns of their time period. The second amendment also was to keep an additional checks and balance over the government so we wouldn’t be subject to abuse from the system. But if the government wanted to stop you in today’s society, your highest caliber of rifle couldn’t stop them.

As for the gun owners in America who feel their rights are being infringed upon, they have a different point of view. They understand the background checks, but guns that are killing people everyday in America are not by legalized owners. A lot of the high statistics are aimed at the inner city communities where guns are used in gangland battles. And politicians are using that statistic to restrict gun owners, while not addressing the problem in these communities. And a lot of these guns used are stolen anyways, so background checks don’t work all the time. As far as the second amendment, the fore fathers did think of the guns of their time. But using that logic, the guns of their time was muskets, but the guns of our time are higher caliber rifles. We also have the right to protect our homes and families just as well as the public figures of America. Considering the homes invaded on a daily and nightly basis are the homes of the average Joe.

In the end, political conversations have been going debating this issues for years. Nothing is going to happen because for the most part, gun ownership is seen as more of a conservative viewpoint. And even with the country switching between liberal and conservative, conservatism in America still reigns supreme. And as long as we have a large country-municipal-township-America and a smaller metropolis America, gun ownership will be around. Meaning, a lot of people against gun ownership usually live in major metropolitan cities. But America is not a metropolis, it’s a lot of towns and cities you have never heard of. And as long as they exist, we will see gun ownership in America.


https://faheemjackson.squarespace.com/ (PERSONAL WEBSITE)

https://www.facebook.com/fjacks063 (FAN PAGE)

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_n_0?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Afaheem+jackson&keywords=faheem+jackson&ie=UTF8&qid=1492966094&rnid=2941120011   

@theefaheemjackson Instagram

@2320howe Twitter

LOST HOPE = LOST LIVES: WHY SO MANY SUFFER BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS OF A FEW

Related image

“When the actions of one effects so many.”


Last night, America was hit with breaking news coverage of another mass shooting. This time in Las Vegas when a gunman opened fire on a crowd of people attending the concert of country music recording artist Jason Aldean. What people at first thought to be fire works turned out to be gun fire. The shooting was coming from one of the hotel windows of the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Resort. The assailant targeted crowd of people who were at the Route 91 Harvest grounds, which is located across the street from the hotel and casino. This morning the news has now confirmed fifty people dead and over four hundred wounded. Now my topic today is why must the actions of a few dictate so much of our daily lives? Because I can already hear the critics against so much of the second amendment. Should we be having these discussions instead of honoring the victims?

My first view is of the actions of a few. So many of the laws we put into place are always in response of a few people. And when I say the few, I mean 10 people who affects the lives of 10,000 others. It shouldn’t be allowed considering 10:10,000 is of such low significance. But when you see the aftermath of these ten people, then you’re able to somewhat understand. Because last night the person who did this was responsible for hundreds being affected. Now think if 10 people were assailants last night. Which is why we are forced to change the way we all live. So, does this mean we need stricter gun laws in the United States? Because like I stated in the paragraph prior, you can already hear the arguments being made over gun control. And should we observing what has taken place last night?

Now, those that are not into the political debate will say it’s too early for such comments. But we have no choice but to discuss this as well as why this shooting has taken place. We are already in a very socially and politically charged climate right now. So who knows what the reasoning for the shooting could be. But since the assailant is dead, we will not, at least for the time being, know why this took place. But we can all agree that we are living in a very divisive country right now. From the crisis in Houston and the Caribbean stemming from the the hurricanes to the politically charged protest in the NFL. But in the end, when life is at stake, or life is lost, it stalls so much in society. And in this landscape when there is chaos, we come to each others’ aid. But, above all, in the future, I only hope we can decrease the chances of these incidents like what took place last night in Vegas from happening.


https://faheemjackson.squarespace.com/ (PERSONAL WEBSITE)

https://www.facebook.com/fjacks063 (FAN PAGE)

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_n_0?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Afaheem+jackson&keywords=faheem+jackson&ie=UTF8&qid=1492966094&rnid=2941120011   

@theefaheemjackson Instagram

@2320howe Twitter

LOCKED and LOADED

Image result for gun seizure

“Where did they come from?”

The above photo which shows guns lying out on a table are not in preparation for a gun show. This is not a manufacturing plant either. The guns above are of many firearms seized from drug/gang raids by the police. The topic of illegal firearms have been on a lot of people’s minds lately. Well, actually, guns in general have been a long debate in this country for some time. But when we discuss the illegal guns nowhere is it more prevalent than in inner cities across the country. Why do inner cities get so much attention. Well, that’s where the disproportionate amount of violent crime where guns are used occur.

Then a way to combat might be the suggestion from various political figures, such as the use of “Stop and Frisk.” This was a policy implemented in the city of New York to combat crime. Now during this time people said crime declined. Now did it, yes, but there was blow-back. Why, if it worked? This is why because the criminals were not being stopped. It was everyday citizens who have done nothing wrong. So my best guess as to why the crime decreased is because criminals saw the tactics and slowed their firearm carrying.

Now, a politician might say, hey, they are thinking twice. So what the people were innocent, at least criminals thought before carrying. Well no. Well why no if the crime went down. This is why; yes the criminals think twice, but what happens is people who are innocent get disgruntled. And when that happens even when the crime decrease, you lose respect from the community. Once this happens, anytime the police need assistance on bigger cases, they are unable to come to this same community because the relationship is ruined. So in other words, you decreased violent crime, but you inadvertently made criminals more powerful. So now, they don’t need to carry guns, they have more willing cooperation from the people.

In addition, the policy was deemed unconstitutional considering it only targeted certain minority groups. But guns are still an issue. Let’s say for instance Stop and Frisk worked how the city wanted it to work. Then guns would constantly be removed from the street. But you run into another problem. Eventually the citizens would want to know where these guns are coming from. And that’s when the plot thickens. Because how does a kid from the housing projects shy of his 18th birthday manage to get a hold of military style weapons?

Here is when the idea of corruption comes into play. There aren’t any gun manufacturing plants  in inner cities. So how does a teenager from an inner city get his hands on guns ranging from handguns to assault rifles? Well, the reply is that they are stolen. Well, let’s analyze that fore a moment. A handgun could be stolen or illegally purchased. But purchased from who? Who are guys in the street getting their guns from? But also, how are assault rifles being funneled into inner cities? You keep throwing out Stop and Frisk all you want, eventually you have to answer the question of where do these guns come from?

I had a guy in middle school brag to me once about how he owned a gun that belonged to a police officer. That’s odd, police firearms on the streets. Then I started thinking about why guns are in the inner cities. Drug dealers need guns to perform their jobs. How do they do so without guns for protection? Then with a mixture of guns and drugs, we now have to now create a budget for FBI and DEA, as well as the ATF. Men are placed in prisons all over the country and private cooperations capitalize off the inmates. And there you have it, an entire production line.

Yet all it will take is for one of those guns to be used in the death of an innocent White male or female, then you’ll see the FBI and ATF work to try to look like heroes. But once that happens it has to be for good. Meaning, bye bye narcotics, bye bye privatized prisons. And that’s when the illusion becomes real. To say we need to Stop and Frisk without working to keep guns from coming in, in the first place, is like saying three buildings constantly keep catching on fire just water them down. Eventually, people are going to want to know what is it about these three buildings that keep catching on fire.