So, the media frenzy begins.
There's been an odd number of stories about Koreans expressing their extreme sorrow and apologies.
I mean, it's fine and all - certainly I'm not suggesting that it's stupid for those people to express their condolences - but there's something about it that's a little odd.
It's the obsession that Koreans have with the fact that the shooter himself was Korean ("Along with profound grief for the victims and concern for Cho's family, many expressed fear that his actions would tar the entire Korean American community -- which has long been associated with such values as hard work, education and family unity."). I don't think there's any added shame because of the shared nationality. Remember all the stories after 9/11 about Sikhs and other non-Muslim Arab or Pakistani people getting harassed? Bigots aren't too finicky. Say the shooter was Chinese, and some people were harassing a Korean. Are they gonna stop when the guy goes, "Wait, wait, I'm a Korean!" Conversely, given this situation, if some Chinese or Japanese person is getting bothered, I hardly think the fact that they're not Korean is going to help. Asians all look the same to Westerners, after all, right?.
Second, as details begin to emerge, it's clear that this is a very weak case for pro-gun control people. Cho bought his guns early this year; the .22 on February 9th and the 9 mm a month later, on March 16th (per this article). And while advisors and students are all coming out of the woodwork to say what a creepy guy he was (as they always do, after such an event), he had no background, no history of violent acts, nothing that would have raised any sort of flag. Aside from a complete ban on handgun purchases, I cannot think of any gun registration law which might have prevented this. And even given a ban, it's possible that he might have been able to acquire two or more handguns illegally. In fact, from what I know of gun enthusiasts, that's part of the argument which they use to justify the purchases of guns for security; criminals will acquire them illegally, so citizens should be able to purchase them legally for their own defense.
Lost in the shuffle of this is the news that the Supreme Court upheld a 2003 legislative ban on partial-birth abortions. I'm not gonna get all crazy (as I'm sure both abortion-rights and anti-abortion activists are) about how this is the beginning of the end of legalized abortion in the US, but it's certainly a situation that people should keep aware of.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment