A Quaker Way Toward Ending Gun Violence
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 июл 2024
- QuakerSpeak is a bi-weekly video series. New video every other THURSDAY!
SUBSCRIBE for a new video every other week! fdsj.nl/QS-Subscribe
WATCH all our videos: fdsj.nl/qs-all-videos
___
Support QuakerSpeak and Friends Journal as a sustaining member:
www.friendsjournal.org/subscr...
Filming and Editing by Rebecca Hamilton-Levi
Music: We are Home by Four Trees
___
Transcript:
There's an old Quaker story, probably apocryphal (probably never happened) about a meeting between William Penn and George Fox. William Penn, at that day, was wearing the clothes and customs of the day, including wearing a sword, and it occurred to him to ask George Fox about this wearing of the sword. And he asked him, "How long should I keep wearing-- should I keep wearing this sword?" or whatever and the answer was, "You should wear it as long as you can," and after a while William Penn got rid of his sword. And the point was that Fox didn't say, "Yeah, I'm telling you as an authority that you shouldn't have that sword because we're trying to eliminate violence, not carry around obvious tools of violence." Instead it was, "the power of that decision needs to come from your heart," and I love that, and that sort of powers some of my approaches to this.
A Quaker Way Toward Ending Gun Violence
Hi, my name is Peter Murchison. I live in Ridgefield, CT, and I'm a member of the Wilton Quaker Meeting in Wilton, CT.
Gun violence prevention I think of as a big umbrella and "gun control" is a very small element in there. Gun violence prevention can mean that people have a change in heart and decide that they don't want to have a gun, that a gun doesn't make them safer, and to me that's the ultimate way to get there. If magically everyone decided they didn't need a gun anymore in the United States then the Second Amendment could still be there gathering dust on the shelf and it wouldn't matter because people decided how they want to behave.
A Personal Connection to Gun Violence
Well when Sandy Hook happened that's where we lost my nephew who's name was Daniel Barden, and that was the start of everything. It probably took four or five years before I actually started to get active about it, it was really after Parkland. In my head I write headlines for op-eds that I don't get around to writing and one of them is that Sandy Hook knocked us off our feet but the Parkland kids got us up off our asses, and I really think that the students from Parkland really showed the activism that could come out of those experiences and for me that was sort of the motivational inspiration to get started on something, so I did.
Is There a Quaker Responsibility to Ending Gun Violence?
Being a Quaker naturally leads to this kind of work in the sense that one of the fundamentals that we're trying to do is to eliminate violence, is to-- in recognizing and respecting that of God in every person, how can you take a person's life? How can you try to get along with someone in a way that is just coercive, with weapons to get your way? There is so much overlap between advocacy for gun violence prevention and what Quakers believe in. It's easy to make that connection and sometimes hard to do the work.
In this country, we have the privilege to say we're Quakers, we're pacifists, etc. and with that comes responsibility. In other words, there's hard work that follows. Being pacifist isn't easy (I'm not even very good at it) but with it comes the responsibility to take actions that make our society less violent and I just think we all need to get off the bench a little bit.
Getting Involved with Gun Violence Prevention Work
So if people want to be involved in gun violence prevention, again I would say just get started. The first thing to do is just to show up, the first thing to do is to look for where people are needed, but it just starts with participating. Every state also has groups that are working on gun violence and to go online and educate yourself on what's going on, and then from there try meeting with your legislators perhaps. Try meeting with other faith communities, and again just try to use your stories. Everyone has a story-- it doesn't have to be as tragic as the one that I came from, but stories move people and to get communication among folks that generally don't agree on things I think we have to move each other.
___
The views expressed in this video are of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Friends Journal or its collaborators.
Thanks Mr. Murchinson for your thoughtful and touching comments.
So sorry for the loss of your nephew.
I'm not a pro-gun, I don't own any, I've been a Quaker for 12 years, and I am truly sorry about your nephew. The situation is terrible and the schools are unsafe. But the fact is, the USA isn't like Japan or Ireland, where there are virtually no guns to begin with. NO meaningful gun legislation can be enacted without putting innocent people in prison, and unfortunately, our existing gun laws already do that. The truth is, NO meaningful gun laws (or any other laws, for that matter) can be enforced WITHOUT the threat, or actual use, of physical FORCE. It's an irrefutable fact that all laws and government authority are based on the idea that one central organized is empowered by the public to use force (i.e. commit violence) with impunity. So we'd be petitioning an organization based on legitimized violence to use courts & police to seize weapons, arrest & incarcerate. We'd basically be using people with GUNS to go take GUNS away from people who HAVE GUNS. If you're okay with that, consider: Strictly speaking, violence is defined as "the use or threat of PHYSICAL force". Simply possessing a weapon is NOT, IN ITSELF, an act of actual violence...but ARRESTING someone, or even threatening to, IS, UNDENIABLY, AN ACT OF VIOLENCE. If you're okay with using ACTUAL violence to prevent merely POTENTIAL violence, and you don't care who goes to prison, you're anything but "non-violent". I've done advocacy work since 2013, and I assure you, the gun laws we have already send people to prison that don't belong there (BTW, the USA incarcerates more people than ANY other country on the planet). The sad truth is, there is NO non-violent way to fix this situation, except changing public opinion. We are vulnerable, there are millions of weapons, ANYONE can buy one privately, and anyone who sends their child to public school in the USA at this point is basically guilty of child endangerment.
Anyone who wants power or control over someone else...is wrong.
I don’t think a lot of these folks understand. I own guns, I have and have had carry licenses, and I carried my gun with me, on a daily basis back when I thought I might need it. I had no special need for a gun, it was just that I lived in a big city that had bad neighborhoods, and I was marginally fearful. Now, I still own guns, still have the license to carry, but the gun stays home. I now live in rural Texas, and the threat level is very much reduced. And, I think my actions are typical of the great majority of gun owners. Hey, in the first place, no sensible person likes carrying a gun. They’re heavy and uncomfortable, not to mention inconvenient to manage in a lawful manner. So, I think all you anti gun nuts can relax a bit. It isn’t as if all of us gun owners are humping the durn things around all the time. We aren’t. I suggest y’all forget about the gun aspect of this problem, and start concentrating on the mental health and anger management aspects of identifying and controlling potential aggressors. That’s where y’all are most likely to do some good.
People have decided how they want to behave. Unfortunately, many have decided to behave badly
Unfortunately, due to this broken world, people who don't desire to do evil, must be armed to prevent or stop violence from those who are evil. Evil doesn't stop because of a lack of a specific tool. This is evident in the fact that the murder in a gun-free zone, also known as a school tragically happened.
While I love the Quaker heart pacifism is not a biblical idea. Jesus himself warned the apostles to our the apostles to arm themselves with swords because he was not there to protect them any longer. (Luke 22:36)
A few responses: This is a bit of a hot topic even today and from what I understand there is still scholarly debate on the exact "Biblicality" of pacifism. The Bible tells us not to murder, Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek, and Jesus Himself even practiced a lack of self-defensive behavior during his beating and ultimate crucifixion. In any case, general Quaker thought is not necessarily bound by the Bible (at least not today) as some Meetings no longer (or never have) rely solely on the Bible as a source of spiritual guidance. Even in my home meeting there are practicing Buddhists, agnostics, and people who self-describe as atheistic.
Balderdash. That's a common misinterpretation. He was warning them they'd be hunted like dogs, become outlaws overnight after He was arrested, and the free wine and open doors they'd been enjoying were going to be over. Think of the CONTEXT: The disciples weren't taking the situation seriously. Jesus was about to be arrested, and they just didn't "get it". He was telling them things were about to change, they would have to run, hide...they'd be scared, sp paranoid they'd be selling their very CLOAKS off their backs for a sword (and your cloak was your primary possession back then), scared shitless, despised just for being His friends. Jesus was ADMONISHING THEM for not seeing the big picture, and trying to warn them, but they had no "ears to hear". He told Peter to but the sword away when he drew it. Jesus was NON-VIOLENT. The sermon on the mount proves this.
When Jesus orders that, He does not say that they had to used them to their protection. It was just because of the compliment of the prophecy of Issaiah. The non-resistence from evil by violence is a command present many times in the Gospels, and it is the reason of quakers' pacifism.
Quakers interpret pacifism in different ways. To some, that pacifism just means to never start violence, but to defend in arms against it, which is entirely in line with Jesus' teachings.
Joel 3:10