Armed and Dangerous in "Walter Mitty" Land

There is little that could have been done, I suppose, to anticipate and prevent what happened in the Denver cinema complex when James Holmes opened fire and killed twelve people, and injured many more. Where guns are easily available, it is always on the cards that someone mad or bad will put one to use in an ugly, dangerous, and random killing spree.


Could this have been different had Holmes' access to weaponry been more restricted? It seems incredible that he was able to amass a small arsenal, a Glock pistol, a shotgun, an AR-15 rifle, and, oh yes, another pistol, together with 6000 rounds of ammo, bought over the internet, without anyone, it seems, being aware of able to monitor this. For some of us who live outside the US, the love affair of many of its citizens with guns, and the strength of the pro-gun lobby, is bewildering.


The appeal to the Second Amendment as a way of legitimizing allowing citizens to be armed like modern combat troops is a case of poor "exegesis" and wildly mistaken interpretation, surely? The basis of that addition to the Constitution was the need for "a well-regulated Militia", and drafted when the US had no standing army to speak of, and citizens were armed with muskets and flintlocks, not the semi-automatic and assault rifles available today.


But it is the idea that more guns are needed for "self-defence" that is the most incredibly illogical of all. How often have guns been used in "self-defence" as compared with occasions when they have been used for criminal activity and random violence. The most recent case in which "self-defence" was trotted out, as I recall, was the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman in Florida in February. It does seem that Zimmerman was being beaten up by Trayvon, when he shot the unarmed young man. But this was a situation entirely of his own making. When he reported his suspicions to his 911 dispatcher, he was told to stop following Trayvon. He ignored this advice, and provoked an altercation. And who's is to say that the young black man, who had no idea I guess what Zimmerman was about, was not just as panicked. The case caused an uproar, fueled partly no doubt by Zimmerman's claim of "self-defence", as well as the suggestion that he had "racially profiled" Trayvon.


Nevertheless, in the case of this latest massacre, gun lobby supporters have energetically opposed tighter restrictions. As reported in The New Zealand Herald (26/07/2012; A17), when Colorado Congressman Ed Perlmutter pushed for tighter restrictions, "he received invective on his Facebook page from gun lobby supporters. One post read, 'If ONE person inside that theatre was armed, this situation would NOT have been as bad as it is'." And it is reported in today's paper (The New Zealand Herald, 28/07/2012) in an "opinion piece" by Paul Thomas, that "[t]here are influential voices arguing that the massacre whould have been curtailed if not for the ban on guns in film theatres. 'Had someone been prepared and armed', said a former Arizona state senator, 'they could've stopped this bad man.'"


"This assumes", goes on Thomas, "that when people used to shooting holes in cardboard cut-outs come under live fire, they will react like a SWAT team veteran." Indeed. And let's run the scenario as it is equally likely to turn out:
"My client, Mr. Walter Mitty, maintains, your Honour, that he intended to get a clean shot at the shooter. Unfortunately, it seems, it was at that moment that Johnny Appleseed chose to try and make his escape from the theatre, and he got in the line of fire."
Or, perhaps this: "After about 30 seconds after the gunman opened up," the witness said, "this other guy got out a gun and fired at the shooter. Unfortunately, his first shot wasn't on target and he hit Johnny Appleseed instead". And what, I ask, were the panicked cinema-goers to have thought when a second gunman started firing: that a hero had come to their rescue, or that the first gunman had an accomplice, or there was another madman in the house? And, if an armed policeman had been nearby and burst in, who would he shoot first?


Nonetheless, in "Walter Mitty" Land, people are queuing up to buy themselves a weapon. "At Rocky Mountain Guns and Ammo", reports the first of the Herald articles mentioned above, "there was a queue of more than 15 people outside the store when it opened on Saturday, and sales have since been brisk. 'It's been insane,' store employee Jake Meyers told the Denver newspaper, 'A lot of people are saying, "I didn't think I needed a gun, but now I do." When it happens in your backyard, people start reassessing - "Hey, I go to the movies" '."


Insane, indeed. Surely to goodness, a safe society is one in which there are fewer guns not more? What is needed is regulation of gun sales, and better monitoring systems. There ought to be ways, in this modern age of sophisticated weaponry, of devising sophisticated ways of recording who has guns, how many and what type. A requirement that gun owners, and purchasers, carry a card that has their photo on it and a swipe system that registers in a central database when they purchase from a store (rather like EFTPOS). Internet sales ought also to be logged. Anyone who is not up to mischief ought not to mind this "invasion of privacy": after all, we allow it for much else. But, above all, there is no need for ordinary Joe citizens to be buying semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 and AK47. When it comes to the Second Amendment, more attention ought to be paid to the phrase "a well regulated Militia", than "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms". If people now feel unsafe in shopping malls and cinema complexes, rather than rush out and buy guns, lobby and push for there to be more well-trained and prepared security personnel, ready and readily available to respond to such crises as happened in Denver. Yes, Mr. Senator, someone who is not only armed, but prepared, ready for such eventualities.


But better, by far, is to create a society less armed and dangerous. Less in love with the gun. Less "Walter Mitty"ish: bewitched by ideas of "heroes" who will be able to react coolly and calmly, instincts honed and quick, like the Hollywood heroes from Batman to Captain America, able to act in "self-defence" and in defence of the other innocents. But, it is only in Hollywood's Wild West (of yesteryear) where White Hat and Black Hat faced off and stared each other down for several minutes.

In the real "Wild West" it soon became apparent that the best recourse was to call in the Sherriff.

Postscript: For those who may not know, "Walter Mitty" is a mild-mannered man in one of James Thurber's tales who daydreams and fantasizes that he is the hero in several dangerous or challenging situations. In one of his fantasies, if I recall correctly, he is in a battle..."pockata-pockata..."

Reflections on Suffering

This Lent I decided that I would read two books, both written by people known personally to me, on their experiences of adversity and suffering. Here is a brief description of each book.

Rosella and Don Kvernen, Stroke Survivor: A Story of Hope (Minneapolis: Two Harbors Press, 2012).

This is a book about the process of rehabilitation and adjustment to life by a man and his wife after he suffers a “life-changing” and debilitating stroke at the age of forty. The stroke has left him with one side (arm and leg) permanently disabled, and inability to read, and speech and cognitive difficulties. Don had lived a full and active life, had gained a PhD in Psychology and practiced as a psychologist in his own business until his stroke in 1991.

As Don’s wife, Rosella, explains in the Introduction, the impetus to write the book came from him, but “[b]ecause Don cannot tell things exactly the way he thinks them in his mind, I have composed quotes for him with his approval and tell our story primarily from my perspective” (p. xvii). Rosella writes in a plain, straightforward manner: it is a style that is almost understated, which adds to the book’s impact. As it is a collaborative venture between Don and herself, she writes about how they both want to be transparent about the trials and frustrations that “life after stroke” has brought them.

Rosella shares honestly about her fears and pain, and also the adjustments that have been made, the learning that had to be done, and the professional help required. One has the sense that one reads the reflections of an essentially private person who nevertheless wishes to be helpful, especially to others who have suffered a stroke, or who care for one who has had one.

The book details the steps to such recovery as Don has been able to achieve. As they wish the book to be both an encouragement and a help to other survivors of stroke, the book provides quite detailed descriptions of some of the therapies undertaken to help Don, one such being the system used to help Don regain some facility with word recognition and numbers.

The book provides an insight into the struggles, the hopes and fears of someone who has suffered a stroke, and of those who care for such a one. It covers some of the mundane issues such as eating and dressing, through to issues such as concerns over finance, Rosella’s desire to help Don maintain his dignity and his embarrassment at not being able to do some things, the tensions that can arise between them, and the need each has for their own “space” and interests.

Rosella writes with honesty, but also humour. I laughed out loud at the story of Don waking one night in search of his paralyzed arm; he had been told by his therapists that he should protect it. ‘“If you lie on your arm or if it gets caught in something, you could develop serious troubles. You need to always know where your arm is and keep it safe.” One night not long after he came home from the hospital, Don suddenly woke me from a deep sleep, uttering, “Where’s my arm?!” At the same moment, I felt his left hand reach over to me, grab my left arm, and plop it on his chest. He found an arm; it just was not his’ (p. 40).

There are a host of anecdotes that give a very good insight and understanding of what it means to live with a stroke or to care for someone who has suffered a stroke. Each chapter ends with a check list of “what helps us cope and gives us hope”. These are practical and down-to-earth actions, or attitudes that build optimism and hope. Both Don and Rosella have chosen consciously not to allow the fact of Don’s stroke and what has entailed from that to make them bitter, but rather have chosen to take positive steps to address each challenge, and also to focus on other people. Moreover, while the book does not say a great deal about faith and God, they make clear that they know in this experience God’s peace, and that God loves them and will not abandon them.

Jeff Wisdom, Through the Valley: Biblical-Theological Reflections on Suffering (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2011).

This book is an honest reflection upon a time of intense spiritual, emotional and physical turmoil and difficulty. Jeff Wisdom, in July 2005, was diagnosed with a stage four cancer, Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. This entailed about six months of regular chemotherapy, a couple of bone-marrow biopsys, and a cocktail of drugs: it brought on many side-effects, some of the worst of which were pain, debilitating tiredness and weakness in his legs.

He writes about the experiences he went through, from the pain experienced in treatment, to the fears he had for his family’s future should he die, to his struggle with trust in the face of God’s seeming absence and the reasons for suffering. He also writes of the support and encouragement he received from friends, family, and especially Chris, his wife, and in some cases fellow cancer sufferers. As a record of a sufferer’s struggles, it is a rich and moving account. The book is further enriched by the inclusion, at the beginning and end of each chapter, of extracts from Chris’s journal, very personal and honest cries from the heart to God, and expressing her fears and struggles as she walks with Jeff through his valley.

Jeff writes “biblical-theological reflections on suffering” out of his experiences, and because they are not written in the abstract, they are most helpful and telling. Jeff honestly admits that he still continues to struggle with issues, and that he is less certain about some things than he once was. I found his writing about his sense of loneliness and abandonment by God at times during his illness to be very helpful. His reflections on the lament psalms are most perceptive and surprising. The fact that they provide a way of being brutally honest before God was not an unexpected insight, but a surprise was that Jeff speaks of his reticence in expressing his real feelings for fear of hurting those he loves. He wonders whether he refrains from an “honest expression of lament, because whether I admit it or not, I am afraid that this honesty would be too much to bear, even for God?” (p. 25). He affirms that God is fully able to bear our anguished articulation of pain and a sense of abandonment.

A challenging aspect of the book was Jeff’s sharing of his struggle to fully trust God, his desire to be in control of his life (though he also writes of the deep theological truth that we are not, cannot be, and that God is omniscient), and the “breaking point” when he released to God his family. He came to the point where he knew he must “simply and directly, but most importantly verbally, profess to God that I trusted him to care for my family if I were no longer here on this earth to provide for them” (p. 134).

Through his suffering, Jeff has learned to leave the “why” question with God. But he has observed many ways in which God has been at work in the experience, both in the way circumstances have come about, and in the support and encouragement received (sometimes very tangibly through financial support, or in the songs composed by a friend). He has also observed how God has worked through his experience of cancer in the lives of family and others.

Jeff writes that he would rather not have written this book. If it had been his choice, he would have rather not gone through this particular “valley”. But it has provided him with the impetus and the occasion to make a contribution to a biblical theology of suffering. He acknowledges it is not the last word. And he states that it is a personal word, refracted through his own particular experience of suffering. I think that it has the greater impact because of that.

I am grateful to these friends for writing these books. Although I feel as though I have been able to go through life with scarcely a "bump in the road" (as Rosella puts it on one occasion), the books deal with challenges that we all face: how to learn to trust God, how to cope with frustrations and set-backs, how to relate to others, especially those we love, and the challenge of being open and honest (as may be appropriate) about our fears and anxieties. These books also enable us to emphathise with those going through suffering or living with pain and disability with perhaps more understanding than might otherwise be the case.