I’ve been in the Army for 20 years now. I’ve trained with numerous weapons systems and served in combat for my country. I do this out of a sense of duty, honor and pride.
At the same time my grandpa was an educator, my mom Joan Johnson Thompson was a kindergarten teacher, my father was a principal, my god-parents Bruce and Trish were teachers, their daughter Beth is a teacher, my parent’s life-long friends Bob and Jenni were teachers, my aunt Marilyn Johnson Wetenkamp was a teacher, my sisters-in-law Claire Butler-Saur and Jodie McInnes Thompson are teachers, my cousins Nicole Knox and Susan Wetenkamp-Brandt are teachers, my wrestling coach Duane Wright was a teacher, my friends Kristina Davis Bonet, Katie Marie, Frank Lukasik, and Eric Dyck are teachers.
As a soldier I accept the consequences of my profession and willingly continue to serve my country. I’m not anti-gun, but after what happened in Connecticut I’d much rather open up a discussion on gun control than one focused on arming the people in my life who chose the challenging, but rewarding, profession of teaching. I hope that, as a nation, we find a better solution to these senseless tragedies than requiring the caring people who choose to serve our country as teachers to focus their precious time on gun training versus their true desire to educate our children. I don’t speak for any of my teacher family and friends and I know that several of them are hunters and gun owners, but I’m almost certain that none of them ever envisioned carrying guns as a job requirement and I sincerely hope that teaching never becomes a profession of arms.
I’m saddened by the fact that we, as a nation, have lost the middle ground. That we can no longer have a rational discussion on the important issues that impact all of us. That we are so polarized that after what happened in Connecticut or Colorado or Arizona you either blame guns or you blame mental illness and there is no room for practical, useful discussion unless you agree with one of these sides.
I paraphrase, but could hardly say it better, Edmund Morris who referenced 13th and 20th century logic — “The first essential for advancement in knowledge is for society to be willing to say, ‘we do not know.’ There can be no advancement in a society that only sees itself, and likes what is sees.”
I responded earlier to a post by a co-worker and friend of mine who attributed what happened in Connecticut solely to the ‘real issue’ of mental illness. If only it were so easy as to pin this solely on mental illness and not address guns in any shape or form...it’s not that simple though, this is more than just guns or just mental illness. It’s more than Republican versus Democrat. More than Bush/McCain/Romney versus the president. If it was as easy as institutionalizing people with mental illness or banning guns we’d have figured this out by now. It’s more than all of these things. There’s nothing pathetic about this. It’s only tragic and it’s time for all of us to sit back and reflect and put aside all of our differences and really think about how we want to be as a society.
I’m a soldier first and foremost and I love this country and have willingly stood in its defense, I support the second amendment and don’t believe we should ban guns across the board. But I’m also open-minded and tired of seeing kids being killed. I for one am open to talking about how we, as a society, overcome all of these biases and truly get down to the business of change. I want to be free to own a gun and go hunting. I want mental health care for veterans and civilians alike. I want our kids to grow up with teachers who don’t have to carry guns to protect the kids they devoted their lives to teaching.
Let’s not dismiss this as the pathetic rampage of a mentally ill kid who simply had access to a gun nor just a call to ban guns, but let’s all of us, really and truly discuss how we as a great nation can find common ground where we all are safe, happy and prosperous. I’d much rather see that than just digressing to a guns versus a mental illness argument.
Several days ago I posted about all the teachers in my life and how I hoped teaching did not become a profession of arms. In retrospect, I should have also posted about all of the people in my life who have chosen the honorable profession of law enforcement. Each day they strap on a weapon and willingly go out in our world to protect and serve.
I have cousins, friends and fellow soldiers who do this on a daily basis and who never ask for anything more than to go home safe each night. I respect each one of them and fully understand why most of them choose to carry their assigned weapon even when “off-duty.”
Maybe I represent that rare dichotomy of middle ground lost in America. I grew up with guns in the house (they were hunting rifles and shotguns). I took gun safety courses as a teenager and could not wait to go hunting with my dad, grandpa Thompson and uncle Guy. I joined the Army because college didn’t work for me. I fit in immediately to that culture. I served for 10 years prior to 9/11 and then, in 2004, got called to war. I spent all of 2005 in Afghanistan working with their fledgling Army. I was exhilarated the first time we got attacked, scared when we got RPG’d and failed miserably in an attempt to save an Afghan child, whose body was so swollen and infected I didn’t know what to do.
In turn I was failed miserably by the Army when I came home and struggled with the return to ’normal life.’ I self-medicated with booze and was mentally ill. If I had owned a gun in the summer of 2006, I would have blown my brains out. Instead I owned a yellow lab named Murphy who saved my life.
It wouldn’t have been the gun’s fault, had I owned it, and it wasn’t the war’s fault for where I was. It was a mixture of life’s events leading up to that point, and thankfully, I had Murph, Erin, Johno, my folks, friends, and ultimately, the Army to pull me through.
I guess I’m the middle ground. I can relate to guns and mental illness. I grew up as the middle child in the middle of Canada in the tolerant society of Saskatchewan. I see both sides, and respect them both, but it’s time for something different. It’s time to talk about some new gun controls. It’s time to stop throwing drugs at mental health issues and medicating our children like that’s the cure. It’s time to give the kids of today a safe environment to grow up in.
I have no idea what the answers are but I think I know what the questions are and I hope we start discussing reasonable alternatives to our current situation.
Terry Thompson was born in Brainerd moved to Canada as a child and now lives in Arizona.
Comments (69)
Add commentNew information
An AR-15, or the so-called "Assault Weapon", was not used in the school shooting. The shooter even tried weeks earlier to buy a rifle but was turned down in the background check. So he had to kill his Mother to steal her rifle.
Control all the guns you want. Those that want,
will find a way to get guns!
Common Sense vs. gun control and pills
This article distinctly emphasizes the needs of the current 'social deficit' facing our nation. Gun control and pills are not the answer to the shootings at our schools. Thank you, Terry, for your candidness. You are to be commended for your bravery in submitting this article. From your pen to God's ears!
Terry, I have one question for you
Did you vote for OBama?
Just yes or no.
My guess is that yes, you did...and that tells me all I need to know.
Let's all blog some hatred & blame it on the liberals
Perpetuity, I have one comment for you: Redneck
Thanks for an open and honest assessment, based on where
you've been in your life, Terry. Your many experiences earn you a seat of honor at the table as solutions are discussed.
WordSmith, you heard him say "gun control and pills are not the answer". I guess I heard it nuanced slightly differently -- that we should all set aside our many preconceived notions about the nature of the problem and solutions, and that everything should be on the table as possible solutions (including sensible gun legislation and exploration of mental health issues). He seems like a "both/and" type of problem-solver, not a "never/no way" kind of guy.
Perpetuity: I have one question for you: Why does it matter who Terry voted for, if he has a unique set of skills and experiences to help us all understand this multifaceted problem a little bit better? What if he voted for a combination of Dem's and Repub's over the past twenty years he's been in the Army (and once for an "independent" for good measure)? He sees a prickly problem and is trying to be open-minded about solutions. Are you?
Bob-hd: You've offered this tidbit of info before. Do you by chance have the link for verification? I had a hard time finding it. Thanks.
JG
Good post.
A mudshark sounds more red-neck to me!!
Follow the constitution
Johan, yes, follow the constitution. What does the 2nd amendment say?
Now answer the question: "What kind of militia?"
Clear it up any?
When the bulk of the populace
When the bulk of the populace rejects your bromides that is an indicator that "we, as a nation, have lost the middle ground."
JGalt: "Obey the Constitution" is a rather broad admonition.
Do you agree with Scalia in D.C. v. Heller, in which, among other things (not the least of which is an interpretation of 2A as bolstering right of self-defense, but not so much against a tyrannical gov't), the types of weapons a citizen may own are limited? If limits are implicit, where are lines drawn, and by whom? That's what the discussion centers on -- precedent already exists.
"Strict" gun laws in some major urban centers ignores the fact that these urban centers are surrounded by the rest of America, where the guns flow freely. Nice try, though. Propping up a straw man of some illusive over-arching "gun control" conveniently creates political division, but evades dealing with the problem of gun violence. Terry has the courage to say the problem is complex, there's a lot we don't know, and we need to buckle down together and find some answers.
Two words
Johan, nothing you wrote was in the 2nd amendment. What are the two words that answer the question "What kind of militia?" Your avoidance behavior is pretty common though.
If you wanna play the card of letter of the constitution, then abide by every letter and that includes...
"WELL REGULATED"
It's the Constitution, not a buffet. It's seems to me that if you refuse to be "well regulated", then you are waiving the 2nd amendment.
I'm all for gun ownership
I grew up on a farm in the back woods. Guns were a tool of the trade. I have no problem with the right to own guns.
But sometimes I do find the gullible paranoid dolts amusing... like when they are stimulating economic activity.
Johan, I'm thinking about buying a gun to protect me from a tyrannical government. What caliber of pistol would you recommend to keep me safe from predator drones?
That was a leap, JGalt! Who said we should "take guns away
from law-abiding citizens"? No one in this conversation is suggesting going to anyone's home and taking away anything (so your detour into prohibition and illegal drugs is irrelevant). Your immediate leap to "don't take my guns" is, quite frankly, a little paranoid. It also polarizes the "dialogue", because, again, that's a straw man no one's talking about. Terry was talking about keeping everything on the table (except for taking existing guns) as we try to solve problems related to gun violence. What would you specifically take off of the table, and why?(what grounds, that is)?
You didn't respond to my queries about the 2nd Amendment. Any comment? I'll check in tonight to continue -- gotta go play outside at Crashed Ice.
Drones aren't the issue
gang members with illegal guns, are.
Tell me, how are gun registration laws going to stop them from buying illegal guns off the alleys of LA?
How are mental health laws going to stop punks from buying guns out of vans in NY City?
How are gun laws going to keep drug dealers from getting their hands on illegal 50 caliber machine guns? Are you aware of how hard it is for LEGAL buyers to get one and what they have to do to get a license ?
I doubt you do, but I can tell you that new laws won't stop crooks from doing anything, but you can't tell a politician that wants to buy votes anything, all they hear is the sound of their bank accounts climbing and soaring so they can take 5 day So American vacations with their hookers.
AR 15 not used
You don't address why we are banning "assault weapons" when one wasn't used at Sandy Hook. No one is mentioning that, are they? You also don't address why law abiding citizens should give up their right to own an assault rifle because someone who was mentally ill killed a bunch of kids with pistols. He tried to buy two rifles and was turned down...imagine that. So, he killed his mother (a crime), stole her guns (a crime) and used them to shoot a bunch of people (a crime). So, that would make him a criminal, wouldn't it? If one person had a permit to carry at that school, it may very well have been a different outcome. Sadly, no one did. I respect that you served 20 years in the military, but this isn't about middle ground. This is the incremental loss of our Constitutional Rights in this country and we must draw a line in the sand. I have every right to protect myself, my family, and the general public from people who want to kill them. That has nothing to do with the Constitution and everything to do with my right to defend my life and the lives of others. I also have the right to defend myself against a tyrannical government. Hopefully, that need never arises, but if it does, the American people would already be at a huge disadvantage. If you don't think our government is untrustworthy, just ask the Native Americans, the black people in the south who were allowed to die of Syphilis, the people in Minneapolis who were sprayed by the military in operation LAC.
Could you provide some evidence
That the AR 15 was not used? Because most reputable news sources said that it was, along with Sig Sauer and Glock pistols.
Good job, guys.
I'm thinking Galt won't be back for a while, maybe never. Right now he's feverishly polling Gun-Rights forae, looking for a "comeback".
These guys are worried: New York just passed some (to the gun rights folks anyway) pretty strict firearms-ownership requirements. Already, the firearms blogosphere is screaming for open, armed resistance...if there isn't room in the jails for the millions of "law-abiding" gun owners, maybe NY will have to back down. These guys feel cornered and feel like they have no choice.
Tel the truth...does anyone REALLY believe that the Obama administration is in cahoots with some nefarious pan-national Islamic Jihadist organization whose ONLY goal is to disarm Floyd R. Tervo so they can take the world over, spreading misery everywhere?
Is the real truth something like "we can only comprehend certain realities...misery...rule by force...Us vs everyone else...therefore we assume the whole word works this way?
These tin-foille-hatte-brigade folks have been with us since the dawn of time. The internet gives them the opportunity to connect with each other more easily, and the opportunity to shout loud enough to lend the appearance of a major political movement.
The last election suggests it really isn't so; without gerrymandering I doubt we'd have a Repubby majority in the house, and if they continue to run headlong into the land of the lost, that will dissappear as well. As long as we have a two-party system, we need the tin-foil hatters in both parties to serve as guideposts to frame the debates that arise...mark boundaries, as if to say: "do not enter". But its must also bear repeating that they ARE the fringe, and DO NOT define the majority.
Thompson, above, does speak for the majority, IMO.
Perpetuity: here's a seldom-seen factoid for you:
During the 1930's through to the 1970's the NRA vigorously opposed the manufacture and sale of "Saturday night specials"...small, cheap handguns, based on the idea that they were responsible for most gun violence. The tide was turning for gun mfgrs in the 1970's...they were seeing stiff offshore competition for every market, and were privately appealing to the NRA to help with marketing as opposed to highlighting the differences between higher-quality foreign competition and the American offerings.
In 1970, the Walther PPK and S-W model 36 sold for about the same price, new...but there was a huge difference in percieved quality, as well as firepower: 9 or 10 rounds, plus one in chamber, depending on if it was a French Manhurin or Czeck, Argentine, Hungarian, Spanish or even Russian clone.
The gun industry had a valuable ally in LaPierre, who joined the NRA in 1977, and fully realized how valuable he was in 2001 when Geo Bush I famously resigned his lifetime membership...Gun and ammo sales went through the roof as the "patriots", fearful of Bush marching against them, stocked up. S-W enjoyed such a boost that they were eventually able to acquire the U.S. manufacturing and distribution rights to the Walther that had them running so scared a few years earlier.
So, to answer your question about
"how are gun registration laws going to stop them from buying illegal guns off the alleys of LA?"
They are not. Because the very organizations some of us depend on to ensure we are all armed, are working overtime to ensure we are ALL ARMED.
Yea, but
I have every right to stock my bunker full of all these weapons and ammo so I can ensure and enjoy my freedom.....
Sooo
Until someone pulls a weapon and starts aiming it, how can I tell a good guy from a bad guy? White hats vs. black hats???
How many
With over 300 million guns out there, how many will it take till I'm safe? 600 million? A billion?
"it wasn't an AR" is the new "birther" movement
This idea that the Conn. shooter did not use an AR clone "assault rifle" is just another dramatically and easily refuted piece of spin with an agenda behind it. Like the "Birther" movement, it's strange as it is so easily refuted that it works against the agenda of those promoting it. People think you are a quack, ignorant, or worse. Yet it continues to spread like wildfire, taking hold with those who wish it to be true.
It's not. You don't have to worry about trusting Fox or NBC or whoever you think is biased--just listen to the actual LEO's and the medical examiner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE0OT5od9DA
re: How many
It doesn't matter how many are out there. The answer is how many do you have and are you willing to use them!
Really, Dean?
That's an insult; suggestsing that the only people that matter are the ones that love violence, and want to kill others (and die, themselves) violently.
Some of us believe differently. And we are not inferior to you, nor will we accede to you.
Wow
More and more people with guns that are willing to use them makes the world a safer place.
Nor are we inferior
nor will we allow you to create ludicrous demands of us that want to own guns for any damned legal reason we want to.
Dean dont let'em
Worry you & I hope ya dont take the DWD philospher to serious. You're post would only insult a lib. They are great at changing thing's around you know!!! (edit there)
BTW Ey & this coming from the worlds worst speller-Me. To many s's there.
Suicide is Painless asks a rhetorical question
Suicide is Painless asks a rhetorical question, but one that makes a very cogent point.
Is there a point at which violence goes the other way? Where is that point? The best your side has is "Well, we're violent, and you gotta expect that".
When one side says:
"I'm worried about rednecks waving assault rifles in my face...we're not living in Afghanistan here"
your side says:
Really? Do you really think throwing around insults will prove your point?
*****
We get lots of flack from your side about being insidiously insulting. I admit it for myself, but I also think we have a point: if you guys say something crude and blunt like a cudgel, something poorly considered (even if it lights up the neurons in some people's amygdala) and something that batters everything in its path, what if we throw it back honed and polished, used with a surgeon's precision in a way that gets your attention...whose point is made? Who looks foolish? Who "wins"?
Do you really want that "win"?
For those who think this is a conspiracy...
http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495
There is no conspiracy here, just facts which have conveniently been forgotten or left out. I have not seen any of the other evidence, nor have I heard any formal statement by the police as to factual events of the shooting.
Old video
Old video. May or may not be trustworthy. Proud Rino's is more recent and seems more comprehensive.
Logic
The Fed's are probably running the show now so get ready for tons of mis-information!! eric holdem. Do I need to say more??
Mav has to be the best conspiracy theorist I know. 10 times better than his bud Jesse in my book. We have to ask his opinon??
Ey
I very rarely click on links. You mean to tell me that they cannot tell us what gun was used by now??? I watched Logic's & 1/2 of Bubba's. I dont keep up on this story but to me it smell's!!! In all honesty what gun was used?? If the public does not know for sure by now I am going to put Mav on this!!!
Bubba's said it was the long rifle but they did not exit. Hmm even with a hollow point & a child lets think about this?? A full grown man yes. A little one?? bubba's guy should have never been allowed to speak with the media!!! Very BAD!!