Darkness Darkness, by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise | @MDWorld
June 19, 2015 Victor El-Khouri 3 Comments
I had wanted to write about the recent Jeff Ross special on Comedy Central, in which he goes to a prison and performs for the inmates. It’s a remarkably nuanced, political provocative show, especially for Ross (at least as far as my impression of him) and basic cable.
But, no. We can’t take a leisurely stroll through the issues of the American prison system, the judiciary, classism, racism and sexism and our American pop culture. Instead, some crazy motherfucker had to go and shoot up a church.
The alleged gunman, Dylan Storm Roof, is a young man who, for at least the last six months, has been threatening black people and wearing clothing with racist slogans. When he shot at the black people in the church, he said, “ You are raping our women and taking over the country.”
And yet, somehow, in discussing this tragedy later, Lindsey Graham, Rick Santorum and others who speak for the conservative parts of the Republican Party said that the attack wasn’t racially motivated, but an assault on Christians.
I guess, technically, that’s true. All of the people who were shot were Christians. However, if that were all that Roof wanted to do, he could have stopped at any of the hundreds — maybe thousands — of churches closer to his home. Instead, he drove four hours to the historic black AME Church in Charleston.
Already, we’re hearing about how “troubled” Roof was, and how he was a “loner,” and “shy.” I’m sure he was. However, if he was swarthy, if he was Muslim, if he was anything but a white man, he’d be described as what he is, which is a terrorist. I doubt it was very much fun to live in Bin Laden’s head, either, but I don’t forgive him, either.
I know I’m not Christian, so maybe I have no standing to talk about this. Maybe this gentleman who is on the Board of Directors for the National Rifle Association knows more about church services than I do. He says that the murders were the fault of the Reverent Clementa Pinckney, because in Pinckney’s other job (a state senator), he voted against concealed-carry laws.
Are Christian religious ceremonies more spiritual when the congregation is armed? Is that part of the communion of souls? Would guns have made that Bible class more meaningful?
Here’s something else I’m not: a person of color. I can do no more than imagine what it’s like to feel like I might be hunted just for going about my day-to-day business. I don’t know what it feels like when my local government thumbs its nose at the losses to my community.
As a Northern white person with a fair amount of privilege, I don’t have any conclusive answers for what can be done. Yes, mentally ill people should be identified and treated as early as possible. Yes, domestic terrorism should be taken as seriously as Islamic terrorism.
And, yes, we should each and every one of us get off our respective asses and try to do whatever we can to prevent this from ever happening again. Get involved with groups that demand responsibility from gun owners. Get involved with groups like this one that fight bigotry at the local level. For crying out loud, even writing a check is better than just shaking one’s head while sitting at the computer.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to follow my own advice.
Martha Thomases, Media Goddess, also suggests that donations to this organization will also promote a world without hate.
Sheila
June 19, 2015 - 7:11 pm
I think your humanity more than qualifies you to speak on the subject.
Tammy
June 20, 2015 - 7:33 am
Good column, Martha. We all must do our part, no matter what size, to stop this madness that’s destroying our society.
Wendy Schwartz
June 20, 2015 - 1:54 pm
The time has come for people of good will to go door-to-door and confiscate weapons. I have always been the person whom the NRA holds up as a lunatic lefty and now I’m asking for co-conspirators to canvas every place in this country where a gun could be housed. Even one more death by gun is unacceptable.
Martha Thomases
June 21, 2015 - 7:36 am
I think we should leaflet outside of gun shops, exactly the way the anti-choice people leaflet outside women’s health centers. Let’s show customers pictures of the shot-up victims and “educate” them about the ramifications of their perfectly legal “choice” to buy death machines.
Rene
June 21, 2015 - 12:14 pm
Some innocent questions:
– Where are all the people insisting that we use words like terrorism and terrorist to refer to this? Are any conservatives that refuse to say the T-words in connection to this incidents traitors and appeasers?
– When do we start rounding up all White Supremacist groups, disregarding civil liberties and even using torture if need be to keep civilization safe from these barbarians?
– So, do we invade Europe or what? I hear there are lots of White Supremacist groups there. When do we start targeting those?
– Are all white people required to say again and again that they’re not with Dylan Roof and his Apartheid-loving, Confederate-fan lunatics? And are any failures to do so with enough frequency and conviction grounds to accuse all white folks of being barbarians?
George Haberberger
June 21, 2015 - 5:50 pm
The time has come for people of good will to go door-to-door and imprison sociopaths.
The time has come for people of good will to go door-to-door and imprison psychopaths.
The time has come for people of good will to go door-to-door and imprison (in Martha’s words), crazy motherfuckers.
Those are the actions that would do the most to stop deadly shootings, but if Wendy Schwartz is so keen on confiscating weapons, I suggest she herself start on West Englewood in Chicago Illinois. And when she confiscates all the weapons there, she can start on East Garfield Park or Chatham.
See: http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/shootings
And Martha, you are certainly within you legal rights to take the action you suggest, (it is infinitely more reasonable and possible than Ms. Schwartz’s), but the example you cite is “Pro-Life people outside of abortion clinics” however false that equivalency may be.
R. Maheras
June 22, 2015 - 8:23 am
If one strips away all of the political grandstanding and posturing which invariably occurs these days after tragedies like this — especially the ones which take place during the first 24 hours, when no one has a frickin’ clue of anything but the sketchiest of details — here are the facts: No law or authority in the US could have stopped in advance this sick, deranged terrorist once he made his mind up to kill innocent people. Unless he publically stated “I’m going to Church X on such-and-such a date and kill people,” he couldn’t be arrested in advance. His hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. In addition, based on his profile before the shooting, there is no “responsible” gun law that I know of that that could have prevented his attack. His gun ownership is protected by the Second Amendment. (An aside for those who think a total gun ban would have somehow stopped this kid from carrying out his sick, premeditated mission — it would not have. He could have bombed the church, burned it to the ground, or run in there with a machete/knife, ala Boka Harim on any given day, or the mass stabbing deaths of 29 people in Chunming, China, last year. Haters always find a way to try and make their evil point.)
So unless one is for jettisoning the Constitution when tragedies like this arise, the bottom line is, if we want to live under the present Constitution and the personal freedoms it entails, there’s not a whole lot we can do to prevent it when a whack-job lashes out at his/her imaginary demons.
Rene
June 22, 2015 - 4:30 pm
Russ –
“His hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. In addition, based on his profile before the shooting, there is no “responsible” gun law that I know of that that could have prevented his attack. His gun ownership is protected by the Second Amendment.”
Isn’t it possible to require background checks for buying and carrying guns that include looking at a person’s associations and Internet history? If you are spouting a lot of hate speech in the Internet, you still can buy the guns, but you will be watched more closely. I understand that it’s already done for people with links to certain Islamist groups.
I understand that it’s a threat to privacy, but if it’s good enough to sacrifice a little of it to stop suspected Islamic terrorists, it could be extended to suspected White Supremacists.
R. Maheras
June 23, 2015 - 5:56 am
Rene — Our Constitution forbids such subjective arbitrary exclusions, and any lawyer worth his/her salt would have such a law thrown out in a heartbeat. As long as a person doesn’t make direct and specific threats to harm people, a white supremacist, radical Islamist, or a Flat-Earther has the same rights in the US as anyone else. Perhaps now you realize why many of us normal folks think the right to keep and bear arms is so important. We know that if a whack-job goes off the deep end and starts shooting, we can’t rely on the cops being there (they can’t be everywhere at all times, and by the time they usually show up, it’s to put a toe tag on the victims), so we have to fend for ourselves. The only solution is to change the Constitution, and that ain’t gonna happen in my lifetime.
Rene
June 23, 2015 - 5:40 pm
“Our Constitution forbids such subjective arbitrary exclusions, and any lawyer worth his/her salt would have such a law thrown out in a heartbeat. As long as a person doesn’t make direct and specific threats to harm people, a white supremacist, radical Islamist”
But it’s my impression that the US government HAS spied and kept tabs on plenty of people with suspected links to Islamist groups after 9/11. Was that unconstitutional? Couldn’t that be extended to white supremacists? Note that no one is being “excluded”, because the guy would still be able to buy the weapons, it’s only that government people would be keeping tabs on him
By the way, why is it that knives are insufficient? What are “arms”? Why can’t people, logically, demand the right to own rocket launchers and atomic bombs?