Is your Gun a Tool, a Weapon or a Stand-In for Something
Else?
[I
thought I was done with my Violence Series, but this topic question came up.[i] For more in the series go
to Violence in Entertainment]
Listening
to those defending their supposed right to keep guns without any hint of
regulation, I begin to wonder what purpose that gun is intended to serve. Is their
gun a tool, a weapon or a stand-in for something else?[ii]
A
tool is an implement, usually held in the hand, used as a means of
accomplishing a task. It is an extension of the arm of the user. It expands the
ability of the user. You can dig without a shovel, but it is more efficient with
a shovel. A gun can also be a tool. It expands the user’s ability to hunt or
defend oneself.[iii]
A
weapon exists to inflict damage or harm on living beings, structures or
systems. A stick, hammer or fork can become a weapon, though the word weapon is
really reserved for those devices designed and constructed with the sole intent
of inflicting damage. A difference between a tool and a weapon is the potentiality
to do harm. It is a potential that not only expands the user’s ability but also
lives outside the user.[iv] A
favorite phrase is: “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Yes, in all
but the rarest cases the gun will not fire itself. Yet, this statement
minimizes the inherent power and potentiality of a weapon. And, the more
lethal, the more firepower the more inherent power the weapon has. [v]
A
weapon contains the potential to inflict harm beyond its parts. Pistols, Rifles
and Assault Weapons become a stand in or a symbol for much more. This symbolism
is what is at stake in the gun control debate.[vi] The
right to bear arms, own a personal arsenal of guns, or National Rifle
Association’s insistence on absolutely no gun control has more to do with symbolism
than real threat. The other sides’ assumptions about guns and gun owners are
also mired in thick symbolism.
Guns
make you feel powerful. There’s no way to get around it.[vii]
When you hold a gun, the power transfers to you, changes you. It goes beyond the
boost a tool gives to a user. The potential power of a gun is perceptively
transferred to the gun user. This tool power and potential weapon power conjoin
with a symbolic power amplifying the user’s psyche. You feel more powerful,
invincible and dominant. You feel in control. You feel an increased sense of
individuality, independence and sovereignty. You are master of your world.
This
country was taken by force from those who lived here before. The possession of firearms
was important to the Europeans ability to conquer the Native Americans. The
United States were born when citizens used their fire arms to overthrow a
repressive government. We were brought up on the Patriot myth along with the
myth of the lone gunman. He had his horse, his pistol and rifle. This gave him
independence and power. Guns become an emblem or token of being in power and
independent. Having powerful guns and an arsenal of weapons inflates the
individuals sense of his own self worth and power.
While
we might not have an immediate need for a well regulated militia, the
Twenty-first century has hazards that demand the hoarding of weapons. Leaving
the Modern era and venturing into what is coming Next, structures and norms
that developed from the advent of humans through the last four centuries are
breaking down. Power structures that have been firmly in the hands of the European
male are shifting. The transition from the agrarian to the industrial has lead to
the new knowledge age and is transitioning again. Women and minorities are
finding equality with the white patriarchy. This is particularly frightening to
previously dominant white, Anglo-Saxon, rural males. Dramatic change encourages
the challenged to hunker down and defend their rights. The feeling is that their
group is being marginalized in this society. The hoarding of guns compensates
for a perceived loss of power and autonomy. The fear is that the change will cause
their very death. It is working on a mythic level that is unconscious to those
who are experiencing it.
Rising
minorities and women are also arming themselves. The guns become their tools to
force the change more quickly.
The
lack of a clear Rite of Passage for our youth is also adding to the obsession
with guns and violence. Our youth, both male and female, no longer have a trial
to transition from children to adults. While it is hard to advocate for universal
military draft or another war that conscripts the majority of youth, in the
past the military aided in this transition in the same way primitive societies
set Rites of Passage for their adolescents.
Change
is coming. The Destroyer archetype is active. In our mythic journey, we must
all take a turn as the Destroyer. The Destroyer ultimately brings about change,
growth, metamorphosis. And yet, change is initially met with fear and fighting.
When confronted by the need to change there are a couple of ways to dance with
Destroyer. One way is through personnel destruction leading to addiction to
food, sex, alcohol or drugs. Another way is through subjugation to a higher being,
belief or religion larger than you. Another way is to identify with the
Destroyer by embracing weapons. While the call is to embrace the change with
acceptance and humility, the journey through the Destroyer Archetype contains
levels of personal and societal destruction. An association with weapons feeds
the journey through the Destroyer. The hope is that the individual journeying
through the Destroyer Archetype accepts mortality and change before being
destroyed.
If
these very real fears were not active, we have compounded the fear and the supposed
solution by becoming expert at selling the power and titillation of guns. It is
easy to indict the entertainment industry for ramping up the symbolism of firearms.
However, I think the greatest culprit might be capitalism and its favorite
squeeze, advertising. We sell guns as freedom, manhood and individual strength
with the idea of guns. We have become expert at selling the symbolism of firearms
to ourselves.[viii]
Years
ago, I picked up a .357 Magnum Revolver. I remember thinking, it’s so heavy. It
was. It was so much more than tool or a weapon. It had power and holding it, I
had power. It was a symbol and stand in for something else.
[i] This
post has a lot of endnotes. I tried to keep the argument barreling forward
without running off on tangents, but this issue is so complex I kept veering
off. Below are whole sections that I removed from the main:
[ii]
I wrote this next bit for a
previous post, I re-post it as an endnote since it is fundamental to my stance
on this topic: Ok, the
Second Amendment to the Constitution states:
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.
What I
don’t get is that the Second Amendment doesn’t actually allow individuals to
freely own and possess Arms. It allows for well regulated Militias to keep and
bear Arms. The Bill of Rights doesn’t give me the right to have an arsenal of
guns that are not regulated. However, I do have the right to participate in a
community Militia with the sole purpose of maintaining a free state. This gives
the militia the responsibility and authority to own and store arms, which would
include guns, rocket launchers, tanks, F-16 fighter planes, and possibly nukes.
These are to be used against enemies foreign and domestic, including a
tyrannical government if necessary. (The bar for a Tyrannical Government would
have to be one that defies the rule of law. Which no matter how much I hated
the outcome of Bush v. Gore or the Tea Partiers want to accuse Obama to taking
away their government, we haven’t seen the breakdown of the rule of law.) To
protect our freedoms, our militias should be as well armed as our army. You
might remember that the Revolutionary War began when the British sought to
capture the armories at Concord and Lexington. The Civil War was fought by
armies made up of state militias. I don’t want or see a need to have a gun in
my house, but I would support and pay monthly dues to arm the well regulated
Culver City Progressive militia as a deterrent to an overreaching government
that would take away our freedoms.
In
2008, the Supreme Court made a decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller.
It reinterpreted the Second Amendment to allow the individual’s right to keep
and bear arms outside of participation in a militia. In my opinion this decision
was one of the most egregious examples of the Court revisionism. It was a five
four decision written by Scalia. While he accuses liberal justices of activism,
he rewrites the Bill of Rights claiming he knows the mind of the authors.
We have
to get a license for practically everything we do that could cause harm to
others, why not firearms? A safety class, test, insurance and penalties for
misuse would be in order. Those Congressmen and the NRA who ignore the term
“well regulated” are the ones misreading their beloved 2nd Amendment.
[iii]
For a hunter, the gun is a tool to hunt. If the task is to
kill the deer for food, a rifle is an efficient tool. While some folks want to
ban hunting (and I feel that hunting with a long bow evens the playing field
and makes it more sporting), few people argue with the utilitarian use of
firearms. Of course the weapon should have a reasonable utilitarian function. We
don’t allow fishing with explosives. An assault weapon with a hundred round clip
seems to be unreasonable when hunting deer. If you need that kind of firepower
to kill a deer, you might work on our skills before hunting.
[iv] As a director of plays for the theatre,
I was taught and quickly learned that a weapon, a gun or a knife, became another
actor in the play. Once introduced to the stage, it either had to be used or
had to be removed. A person couldn’t carry it or it couldn’t just sit on a
table without drawing constant attention. A weapon holds presence. The saying
goes: Don’t bring a weapon onstage unless you plan to use it.
[v] A weapon is in some sense neutral in
that it can be used for good or bad, and yet in either case its purpose is to
harm and destroy. Exponentially, more gun deaths occur in the home from
accidents, self-inflicted wounds and shootings by family members than intruders
being shot in self defense. When you invite a weapon into your home you embrace
the power of that weapon and accept the risk it will be used against you and
your family.
[vi] This
is an idea that I care about, but it worked its way out of the main narrative: I think guns
should be more well regulated. The right to own a gun should be considered a privilege,
a right that can and should be revoked if the citizen does not use it responsibly.
We already have many laws that support this idea. We do this in most states
with criminals and the mentally unstable. Those who reject any gun control like
to say it is a “right to bear arms, not a privilege.” They try to differentiate
owning a gun from driving license or a getting a license to hunt or fish.
I believe our rights are privileges with responsibilities. Freedom
is taken from those who cannot obey the laws in the form of being sent to
prison. This expands past the 2nd Amendment. The rights of Free
Speech and Religion should be afforded to all who respect the rights of others
to have free speech and freedom of religion. This is my problem with some recent
Supreme Court rulings, especially the one that upheld the Westboro Baptist Church’s
right to protest at the funerals of American servicemen. They are the radical
group that believes that America’s support of Gay rights is damning our
country. At the foundation of their religious belief is there very insistence that
others cannot hold their own opposing beliefs. I appreciate that barring speech
is a proverbial slippery slope, but in America I believe you should be afforded
free speech only when you respect the free speech of others. Similarly, my
decision to not have a gun in my home should not impinge on your right to
responsibly bear arms, however your right to own guns shouldn’t impinge on my
right to life and liberty.
[vii] It’s
funny, as theater person most of my experience with guns has been with props,
often real guns made safe to shoot only blanks. There is even a power when you
hold an “impotent” weapon. Doing different plays, I’ve worked with flintlocks,
muskets, a blunderbuss, shotguns, rifles, M-16s, MAC 10s, AR-15s, AK47s and all
manner of pistols. They each hold a different power, but it always felt as if
it transferred to me. Holding real weapons blend a mixture of excitement and apprehension.
The idea that you can pull the trigger here and something can explode over
there is cool, like the first time I rode a bike down a hill or drove a fast
car. Guns give an experience of power.
[viii] This is the advertisement for the rifle that was used in the Sandy Hook Massacre:
[viii] This is the advertisement for the rifle that was used in the Sandy Hook Massacre:
