From the Trigger Through the Barrel and out the Muzzle

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






While Darwinism purports natural selection as being the fundamental basis of evolution, in practice, evolution seems to be a process that involved wars and battles pervasive across the globe and as an aftermath, the human race evolved into a civilization, grouping into sundry states and countries. India fought Pakistan, American states fought the civil war, Russians had internal skirmishes and China and Japan relentlessly tried infiltrating one another.

But does this grim look at our history lend an excuse for the all-consuming violence that prevails today? Is this what the unabashed criminals, who propagate evil while wielding a gun, tell themselves before pressing the trigger?  I hope not, because then even the residue of waning belief in goodness which lies at the bottom of the crime-ridden world we live in presently, would collapse.

The hushed corridors of the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, the sable nooks of the Century Movie Theatre in Colorado or even the tainted walls of the Sikh temple in Wisconsin all cry for action, not sympathy. Then why is it that there is an on-going debate on whether any appropriate action should be taken or not?

Why are there parties that tergiversate on the subject of gun control and advocate possession of guns? Should there even be an argument? The answer is both yes and no. Yes because through the magnifying glass of an emotional mind, these crimes point directly to only one perpetrator: the shooter. And what is the catalyst if not the gun.

Now coming to the more complex delineation – the answer no.

According to some, in fact, a wide margin of people, gun possession doesn’t always translate into deadly intent. People purchase firearms for a range of reasons (no pun intended). The most ubiquitous one being self-protection. Yes, he who holds the gun has the last word, but not if you have one of your own. However, while this is a potent reason, it also serves as an excellent front for anyone who is harboring a more pernicious purpose.

The most unintelligible reason of buying guns, at least to me, is “interest in firearms”.  Renowned Indian actor, Sanjay Dutt has been battling against the Supreme Court of India due to illegal possession of arms and suspected alliance with terrorism associations and the underworld for over two decades. And he is losing. His close friends and family claim that he’d always had odd proclivity for guns and bought them just to feed his interest. This, however, doesn’t make him a terrorist or a crime lord. His only crime is having uncanny hobbies.

This makes us question the political prohibitions on gun possession. Are they austere or altruistic?  Does this gun control also apply to the soldiers of the force who are constantly carrying? If not, wouldn’t that consign the “control” in the term “gun control” completely to the government?

I know this blog has been fraught with questions, questions that nobody in the true sense has an unequivocal answer for, but it does make one think and reflect on the unpublished poem “Revolver” by Carl Sandburg that says at the very end:

And nothing in human philosophy persists more strangely than the old belief that God is always on the side of those who have the most revolvers.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Comment

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




From the Trigger Through the Barrel and out the Muzzle