Delicate

Non Violence, 1997, by Carl Fredrik Reutersward, Olympic Museum Park, Lausanne, 31-Aug-2008
Non Violence, 1997, by Carl Fredrik Reutersward, Olympic Museum Park, Lausanne, 31-Aug-2008
Non Violence, 1997, by Carl Fredrik Reutersward, Olympic Museum Park, Lausanne, 31-Aug-2008

More sad but tragically uncommon news from the U.S. yesterday; this time 20 elementary school children were among the murdered. Most stunning to me is that I’m not more stunned.

This is Non Violence, a 1997 sculpture by Carl Fredrik Reutersward at the Olympic Museum Park in Lausanne. I first saw this in August 2008, about two years after seeing another version (below) near The Göteborg Museum of Art. This morning it was the only image that fits Delicate, this week’s WordPress Photo Challenge theme. Delicate to describe the ‘debate’ about the ease of accessibility to guns in the U.S. And delicate to describe the bruised egos of politicians who continue to cower to the increasingly mad demands of the NRA and other guns rights advocates.

There’s nothing left to be said about a debate that’s long overdue.

Enhanced by Zemanta
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
You might also like
  1. Matt says

    What about the knife or sword as well? A man walks into a school in China and stabs 22 people. Because you know it was the weapon that kills and not the evil people who commit such atrocities.

    1. BobR says

      The man in China didn’t kill anyone. The guy in Connecticut murdered with precision and ease.

      1. Matt says

        Oh so its results and not intent that matters. Then a few years ago the same thing happened and eight students were killed in China oh but on 9/11 two planes were brought down with box cutters. No gun just box cutters. Evil finds away. If their had been an armed marshal crisis could have been averted. Punished the good while the bad just go on being bad that is gun control.

        1. BobR says

          I’m not suggesting that there are quick and easy solutions. Nor do I believe that guns should, or even could be banned in the U.S. at this point. (That train left the station in the 1980s.) But the NRA and gun rights advocates have been far too irrational for far too long. And politicians of all stripes have cowered down to them –and been bought by them– for far too long. At least some of the mass shootings in recent years could have been forseeable and as such preventable if certain precautions were put in place.

          The only thing we know for sure, right now, is that this rampage would not have been nearly as deadly if easy access to guns, and irresponsible care of those weapons, was taken out of the equation. So that’s the obvious place where the debate needs to begin to achieve the most immediate results.

          A very reasonable place to start would be to require annual medical and/or mental clearances, to require gun owners to purchase liability insurance, and have that liability cover all persons who might reasonably have access to the firearms in any home.

          >>Real<< operation and safety education is a no-brainer. Registry and notification for gun ownership isn't unreasonable either, especially when semi-automatics et al enter the picture. People want to know if sex offenders live in their neighborhood. Is it really that unreasonable to want to know if your neighbor has a small armory in the basement? Likewise we are all required to have instruction, a license and insurance before legally operating motor vehicles. And be of sound mind and body.

          Polls show that the majority of citizens in the U.S. believe in the right to bear arms. Fine. But rights come with responsibilities. And with consequences when those responsibilities are ignored or abused.

          We're not talking about knives, hammers or screwdrivers. We're talking about precision engineered machines designed to kill that in many cases are easier to obtain legally than a driver's license. I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

          1. Matt says

            Actually I can appreciate the difference between a gun and a screwdriver and I actually do agree that such reasonable precautions with semi automatic weapons should be considered. In most cases I see no real need for them. I do believe in the right to defend one self and property rather it be a burglar, murderer, or tyranny. Arms after all was sort of essential to the American Revolution. That being said, I don’t even own a gun myself. I don’t like them. Still though I believe the bill of rights is essential to the democracy in America and you remove one you might as well remove them all and let anyone including politicians walk all over you.

            Well thanks for the spirited debate. Have a good day and a Merry Christmas

          2. BobR says

            And to you as well! And thanks for stopping by. 🙂

  2. Jo Bryant says

    very pertinant

  3. yarnspinnerr says

    Legally guns can only be purchased after getting a valid license in India. Yet the illegal gun market flourishing …….. 🙁

    1. BobR says

      There’s no doubt about that, and it will likely continue to flourish. That shouldn’t however be an excuse for not trying to reduce the number of these tragedies. Sensible solutions, ones that can keep some guns out of the hands of at least some people, do exist.

      1. yarnspinnerr says

        Owing to the large market of antique and replica black powder firearms in the US, modern gunpowder substitutes like Pyrodex, Triple Seven and Black Mag3 pellets have been developed since the 1970s.

        The solution perhaps lies in extremely strict control of the crucial chemicals so that one may have the arms but NO AMMUNITION to use it.

  4. frizztext says

    a so important sculpture after all those school massacres …
    http://flickrcomments.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/school-shooting/

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.