Letters to the Editor
smartalec
Published Letters: 51 Editor's Choice: 4
-
What they said
[Read the article: I'm a small-town girl dreaming of the big-city lights]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think I've ever before seen a SYA letter that prompted a 100% unanimous response. There've been a few that came close -- but there were always at least a couple-three outliers, IIRC. That's not to say some contrarian won't post tomorrow; someone might. But isn't it interesting that, so far at least, EVERYone has the same take on this? That just might mean something...
My $0.02: as other posters have already suggested, w/r/t option #3: behaviors can change (though they rarely do so drastically, or without massive effort on the part of multiple players). But character rarely does. Who this guy is now is who he is going to remain -- and if you feel like this now, imagine how it'll feel twelve or twenty-three or forty-six years down the line.
Also: at 25, you've barely started to figure out who you really are yet, or, more important, who you are going to become. Locking yourself into this situation will drastically limit the options. The you-that-you-can-be, the you-that-you-should-be, deserve better than that.
Change can be scary -- but in the long term, not changing, when the situation is so limiting and unsatisfying as yours now is, would be even scarier.
Good luck -- and keep us posted; we'll all keep our fingers crossed for you.
-
Just so our lives are complete
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Phoned.
It.
In.
Okay, Mr. Scaife, can I have my money now?
-
The short story "Harrison Bergeron"...
[Read the article: Kurt's canon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...is canonical, if anything is. His most prescient work, and one of the most trenchant. In it, a complete moron becomes the President of the US. (Clearly, Vonnegut did not limit himself to fiction.)
It was made into a Canadian TV movie in '95, with Sean Astin (Samwise!) as the hero.
Apparently, Cypress Films is planning a DVD release.
-
as always
[Read the article: I'm almost 21. Should I buy some guns?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]there are all these really smart and eloquent posts that are saying just what I wanted to say, only earlier and more articulately.
But I did want to add my $0.02, a couple of random thoughts for the LW, should he read these posts:
1) If you can't be honest about your own motivations, then those motivations are suspect on that basis alone. If it were really the mechanical elegance -- the machining, the simplicities and intricacies of design, the precision construction, all that -- that you were really concerned with, you'd be buying collector watches, or model steam engines, or some such. All of those venues are machines in which the elements you claim to find appealing are in much greater evidence. So: why do you REALLY want the guns? If you were to void your body of testosterone for a week, would you still want them? If so, what does that mean about the validity of satisfying this craving (since your tone makes it clear that this is just that)?
2) As a couple of posters upthread have noted, guns are, in and of themselves, value-free devices, just tools. The value of any gun is only conferred by its use in given contexts -- who is wielding it, why, how, and to what ends. Nonetheless, it's also clear that guns are tools for one purpose only -- though that one purpose does have many ramifications. That purpose is to be able to kill something -- or someone. That is not to say they are only for killing -- that is incompete and inaccurate. But because they confer the ability to kill, they also confer power -- both the feeling of power, and its actuality.
Most normal humans (by which I mean "middle-class Americans") living normal lives will never be in any situation (other than hunting or target shooting, of course) in which a gun is a necessity (even most cops never have to pull their guns, let alone to discharge them). Given that you're smart enough to know this, you need to be especially careful in assessing your motivations; you have to ensure that you're not BSing yourself, or rationalizing.
But the conclusion of all this is close to inescapable: if you do want these toys for reasons that are not entirely rational and legitimate -- and it sure seems as if that might be the case -- then that alone is a reason not to give in to this craving, at least until you get deeper insights into those motivations.
In the 12-step or recovery world, it's usually frowned upon to judge other people's situations. One isn't supposed to be running around telling others that you think they might have a problem. You're usually expected to support people in thinking through for themselves whether they have a problem -- but not doing that thinking for them. That said, though, most people who don't have a problem rarely, if ever, have to ask themselves, "Do I have a problem here?" The very fact that you're asking the question makes a "gee, maybe yes" answer a lot more likely. So: the very fact that you want these guns so much, and that you're having to ask strangers for their input, suggests that you already know what the healthier answer might be, at least for now...
btw, in case this matters: me = middle-class white male who leans far left on most political, economic, and "cultural" (read: contra busybody sexual "morality" fascists) issues -- and who enjoys target shooting, has been safety trained, and would definitely own a weapon or two if I didn't live in a city that makes gun ownership an impossibility for anyone neither rich nor criminal
-
"wrong place, wrong time"
[Read the article: "I think he was just a confused kid"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That is such a loathesome expression -- I'm glad it seems to have shown up just once so far in this thread. I don't watch TV news, but I wouldn't be surprised if over half of the stories have someone parroting this cliché.
No innocent person is ever in the wrong place, unless they've knowingly walked into a war zone or a recognized high-crime area when they had the option not to do so.
It is of course always, and only, the murderers that are in the wrong place, no matter where they are.