我欲载之空言
北美时事历史纵横谈
前天拉斯维加斯一个露天音乐会发生了美国历史上最恐怖的枪击案，接近六十位受害者死在单一个凶手的自动高速狙击步枪下，同时还伴随五百人的受伤。对于这样的惨案，我本不想多谈。一是因为美国的群体枪击案实在太多，每次还都是一个套路，全国震惊，人民哀悼，默哀一分钟，大楼下半旗，等等，等等，但无外呼是政客无作为或相互指责一番，最后马照跑舞照跳，人都麻木了，等待下一次的屠杀；第二，控枪问题是美国社会的热点，各种深入浅出的大讨论无数，我自己也就几个月前的国会共和党鞭中枪事写过控枪的讨论，可以说该说的道理都说尽了。不过你是左是右是川粉或共和党粉或NRA粉，这次面对几十上百死者伤者的鲜血和冷血杀手自动武器居高临下突突突的扫射，如果还是没有反思，那再讲更多的道理也是多余。
虽说如此，我还是在昨天的首页上看到一篇实用妙文《遇到大规模枪击如何自救》，忍不住拿来分享品味。作者自称是在天安门64事件中枪林弹雨过来的，我先向您遥相致敬！任何一位当年在中国那场轰轰烈烈的民主运动中经过这个战阵的人，都值得历史的纪念。作者的亲身经历让他学会闻声而知凶险：如果枪身嘹亮，就说明子弹是奔您来的，赶紧趴下捂脑袋；而如果是开啤酒一样的砰砰声，那就是子弹在往别的方向跑，赶紧站起来逃命。要说这个指南够有帮助了，但还是有淳朴的网友打破沙锅问到底：就算平射可以预判，从32楼居高临下射来的子弹，如何是好？
对于这个艰深的问题，可能连作者也没有好答案，其实要我说这个问题早在15年前就有高人给出了答案。据说文学城网友大多是40-60这个年龄段的人，也许大家不少人听说甚至经历过2002年著名的“华盛顿狙击手案件”（DC Sniper）。当时两个神枪手在隐蔽中远距离居高临下对无辜的路人打冷枪，在短短三个星期的时间内打死10人，猜猜他们用的什么武器？您猜对了，凶器就是所有冷血杀手的首选，半自动攻击步枪AR-15。本次的赌城杀手steven paddock射杀59人伤五百，James Holmes在科州电影院发射一百发杀12人伤58人，加州ISIS亲友团雌雄双煞杀14人；奥兰多的Omar Mateen使用最先进的可隐藏的“二代”AR，杀49人；最令人心碎绝望的康州NEWTOWN小学，疯子Adam Lanza，5分钟内打掉150发子弹，屠杀20名小学生和他们的老师，这样精准的大杀伤力步枪是他们的最爱。
当年这个恐怖事件让美国首都人心惶惶，生怕高速上加个油就被开了瓢儿。于是就有弹道达人，安全权威，上电视献身说法心谆谆教导，给我的印象非常深刻，比如他们的一个建议是大伙走路不要走直线而要走“之”字形，英语叫zig zag，或者在正常行走时候突然来个神出鬼没的急转弯大回环，这样子弹就算长眼也奈何你不得了。我不禁感叹，枪林弹雨之下，人民群众的智慧是无穷的。
但是对这种智慧人民不领情反而一肚子悲情：你看看美国社会的枪支泛滥，都把孩子逼成啥样了，路都不能好好走了，要学螃蟹！这叫解决问题治标不治本。昨天共和党议长泡卵就赌城枪击出来讲话，又把什么用救治神经病立法来防止枪击的屁话巴拉罢拉重复了一遍，我感觉这和通过学螃蟹走路来防止中弹一样的愚蠢。神经病自古就有，现在有，将来也不会少，但是神经病能在社会上堂而皇之合法买枪的，也就美国独一份了吧？严格控枪，特别是象AR-15这样威力大精度高并极易自动化的攻击性武器，世界大多发达国家都能做到，比如欧洲的英法德，加拿大，澳洲，为什么美国做不到？
再回到64天安门事件，现在有一个说法“中国老百姓如果能够自由持枪，根本不会有64屠杀，生活在自由社会是有代价的”！ 64事件最初的说法是死了三千人，近年来数字慢慢下降到三百人，但是美国一年中死于枪口之下的就有三万人，这个“自由”的代价也太大了吧？我眼前不禁浮现出一个假想国，那是一个到处充满了仇恨和枪战的社会，wild west, 绝对自由，可是大家为了躲避冷枪，只好听从专家，在大街一个个走斜线，急转弯，或者拿大顶，翻跟头。这场面，往好了想，象武松打醉拳，往坏了想，象walking dead里那些跌跌撞撞摸爬滚打的僵尸吸血鬼。
我们不要生活在专制的社会，我们也不要生活在一个疯子的社会。
What you wrote befits your ID '女流之辈' incapable of logical analysis. "您的英文我研读了若干遍仍不明就里" Well, you should heed the admonition of your idol cng and better your skill of being a docile "guest" of this great country. The first step is to improve your English comprehension skill by taking a community college English as a Second Language class.
"Leave for God sake"? 黔驴穷其技，以泼妇骂街充数。
That is all you have left for your argument, parroting these racial (it is the Chinese American you have been talking about all along) epithet the likes of "go back to your country" and "go back to where you come from", isn't it? It is either some really pathetic last straw in your desperation for any comeback or a Freudian slip betraying your deep seated racial inferiority complex.
Apparently you have nothing to counter my argument except these irrelevance, self-contradiction and fulmination.
The only difference between a naturalized US citizen and born one is the qualification to be the President of the United States. How is that relevant to the duty of each citizen to support and defend the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment that each of us, you yourself included, has sworn his allegiance to? Irrelevance of your argument aside, even on the point of qualifying for being President, you are contradicting yourself. You are talking about Chinese Americans, that include the native born Chinese Americans. Are you stripping their rights to qualify as the President, because they are born "guests"? If this is not blatant racism, what is? That really goes where with "leave for God's sake", doesn't it?
And "guests"? You are out of your senile mind. By what power do you have the gall to relegate some citizens to second class or third class? Let me remind you --- in case you have forgotten the lessons you learnt when you applied to become a citizen of this great country ---
once someone swore his allegiance to the CONSTITUTION --- capitalized in case you can see this solemn word ---- becomes a citizen, he is the rightful master of this great country. The President and other government officials are public servants serving at his, the master's, pleasure. Each citizen has the rightful duty to ensure the government and its officials toe the line of the Constitution!
老兄最后一句话真是绝了。
To make it even clearer, I excerpt here the oath you took up when you became a citizen of the United States of America, by choice, I hope, to remind you your duty of being a citizen of the United State of America: I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. You are not swearing to support and defend the government of the US, but the Constitution. Doing otherwise, is as you say, treasonous. Surely it is our duty to ensure the government is acting in accordance with, not against, the Constitution. The threat to overthrow tyranny with arms is one essential means to keep the government in line with the Constitution.
@cng:
Are you talking about Chinese American or Chinese in general, including the Chinese in China? Your article and comment are confusing.
Judging from your response, you are talking about Chinese American. OK, let's talk about Chinese American then. Your argument still does not stand. Have our ancestors and contemporaries, in China, not suffered from tyrannies enough, from the likes of Qing dynasty and the Chinese communist party? Tyranny is tyranny wherever it is. In fact, it is all the better when tyranny is somewhere else than where you are, and some time else than when you are, so you have the luck to study and observe the horror from afar and think of ways to prevent it from taking place here and now.
Being a US citizen by choice, is to choose and swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, the foundation of this union. In case you have not done your homework when taking up your citizenship and read the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, I excerpt it here especially for you "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." In case you do not know what the word treason means, I will spell it out for you. Blatantly violating the Constitution is the very definition of treason.
Sure, most people abhor violence. There is unfortunately evil nonetheless in this world. There are people who think nothing of using violence. The Las Vegas massacre is a case in point. I do not think you are na?ve enough to think otherwise. There is always a tendency for government to overstep its bound. To make the union “more perfect” as you say, we need to use peaceful means. But all you have is toothless complaints and words, you are one weakling worthy of no respect. Peaceful means is a means only when it is backed up with credible threat of violence ensured by the possession of arms. Otherwise, the government will think nothing of trampling your rights and the Constitution will be but one toothless parchment. Indeed, “overturning ‘tyranny’by violence is the last thing you should even think of”. It will be the last resort, a credible and essential resort nonetheless.
Now, singling out the Chinese American citizens for divest them of the right conferred by the US Constitution because of some cockamamie excuse regarding their ancestry is by defintion 1) treasonous 2) racism.
cng 发表评论于 2017-10-05 12:34:17
回复 '零不是数' 的评论 : “说枪杀人的,为什么不控制人呢”
人无法控制，思想自由，人有当神经病的自由，但是不该有扫射他人的自由。
你说的是2012年的Sandy Hook. 不是有人说那是假的吗，我们的糊涂老川还赞过那人呢!
许多人活在Alternative universe, 连事实都不承认，或不敢面对，控枪何其难!
如今凶手用bump stock杀人59，GOP,连NRA现在都不得不同意禁止BUMP STOCK，早知今日，何必当初？
人类是如此愚蠢，只有看到同类被屠杀才会清醒一点？
"华人祖上没有奴隶主，跟着起哄拥枪反抗暴政，是属于被洗脑而不自知。" Are you serious? Are you saying slavery is the only source or cause of tyranny? The Qiang dynasty, the Chinese Communist Party are not examples enough? "被洗脑而不自知" You must be talking about yourself.
美国历史上拥枪反抗“暴政”,有两次，第一次，奴隶主要从英国独立，成功了，第二次，奴隶主保卫自己私产，失败了。由于这个历史原因，白人右派手里没大杀伤武器，不踏实，可以理解。
华人祖上没有奴隶主，跟着起哄拥枪反抗暴政，是属于被洗脑而不自知。
人无法控制，思想自由，人有当神经病的自由，但是不该有扫射他人的自由。
说到点子上了，夏威夷控枪最严，枪死率最低，为啥？海外孤岛，非法运枪不易。
Voiceofme的回复就是很好回应。不满意就走？你以为是在农贸市场买菜呢，入籍宣誓怎么宣的？
极右派的观点是：持枪自由，不能禁枪。包括极右派的共和党人，还有步枪协会，军火商等利益集团。
但是，现实问题是，已经在民间的几亿条枪怎么办？如果没有一个合理可行的办法处理这些枪，一切禁枪的主张，都像是不经思考的梦话。
禁枪的主要问题是：如果坏人有枪，而好人没有枪，那好人就是任人宰割，毫无还手之力。这是大众考虑的问题，而政客们富豪们因为有保镖，不需要考虑这些。
不久以前，主张禁枪的CNN女主播，在旅馆被黑歹徒持枪抢劫，甚至面临强奸和杀害的危险。多亏了有持枪证冰携带枪支的丈夫拔枪反击，不但救了女主播，而且打死了歹徒。从此以后，女主播公开说，谁再跟她提禁枪，她就直接开骂。
可能走中庸之道比较可行：严格审查购枪资格，严格打击军火走私，严格打击黑市买卖，严格控制和追踪枪支（给每一把枪都上GPS跟踪装置），特别是大火力和大杀伤力的枪支。
其他一些考虑：提高枪支的价格，加上智能化追踪，甚至给每一条枪加指纹验证，必须是枪主才能使用。
芝加哥今年已经枪杀500多人了(十倍于这次,大家都麻木),有几个破案?判死的为零(伊州没死罪).
控制枪会有效果,但最近提出来的具体的任何一条立法对那一年三万多人都是隔靴搔痒.全面禁止不可能.
下一篇讨论下这个。
================================
这类的局部禁枪用处不大，因为太容易把枪从一个城市偷运至另一个城市。真正起作用的是全国禁枪， 毕竟从海外偷运要难得多了。
比如 枪不杀人，是人杀人。 没有枪，人是不能这么大规模杀人的。 再说既然人是无法控住的，为啥不控制枪呢？
比如拥枪可以反暴政。 即使民众拥枪， 也无法和国家这个庞大的机器抗衡。枪能对付坦克？原子弹？
同意你说的， 人都麻木了。成家常便饭时，人们连震惊都没了。