Two things may jump to mind.
First, who the hell am I to be speaking for the Son of Man and second isn't the answer clear, Jesus was a pacifist, he would want guns gone.
Well the first part is pretty easy to deal with, I'm not certain what Jesus would do but based on scripture I can harbor a guess.
Second, I no longer think Jesus was a pacifist. I think Jesus was extremely clever and understood violence better than most.
Ok, the foundation for this post is the Sermon on the Mount.
38 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
—Matthew 5:38–5:42 KJV
See, I've always looked at this as an expression of submission. Turn the other cheek, give your coat, and your pants, and your shirt, go the extra mile.
To my uneducated mind this was preposterous.
Scripture can take a hike, someone hits me I'm cutting them down. Someone tries to steal my stuff they better kill me first. Walk a mile.....kiss my ass.
See I always thought Jesus was dis-empowering people.
On the contrary my friends, Jesus was not only empowering people he was doing it in a way that was ingenious.
Wait till I explain, this scripture verse is actually the equivalent of..... Instead of giving someone a fish......teach them how to fish!
The context of the Sermon on The Mount was this.
Back in the day there were laws in Rome that allowed Romans to treat Jews like lesser humans.
Similar to what the Jim Crow laws did to African Americans, these laws were meant to create a second class citizenry.
But like I said, Jesus was clever. He didn't fight against Roman Law, per say, he learned them.
Once he did that he saw where there were holes and used those holes to empower the Jews to fight back in a way that would put the Roman perpetrators in a difficult position.
First: turn the other cheek. Back in the day the left hand was unclean so a strike from a Roman would always come from the right. A back hand by the right hand of a Roman to the right cheek of a Jew was perfectly legal and a sign of supreme disrespect.
Turning the other cheek then, would put the Roman in a predicament. An open handed hit or punch by the right hand of a Roman to the left side of a Jew was an open challenge and subsequently a sign of equality.
Second: there were laws that allowed Romans to take anything they wanted from Jews. A Roman wanted your jacket you had to give it to them.
Well, back in the day, public nudity brought shame on the viewer as well as the nude person so continuing to give your clothing to a Roman would shame him too, thus putting him in a difficult situation.
Third: back in the day there were very specific laws that allowed a Roman to make a Jew carry his stuff for a mile. Now these laws were very specific so a mile was the limit. What Jesus is saying is that when this happens walk two miles thus putting the Roman in a very difficult situation.
Clever, dare I say Brilliant!
Think of how this would have empowered people!
Ok this is the foundation for what comes next.
I think Jesus would handle Gun Control in a similar 'clever fashion'.
See gun control is currently presented by the powers that be as either more guns or less guns.
I think Jesus would look at this the same way he looked at the Roman laws, not try to abolish the law with a frontal assault but use the laws themselves as a way to empower people.
Guns are a part of American culture. Trying to eliminate them doesn't empower anyone, and free access to guns empowers the wrong people.
I think Jesus, when confronted by this dilemma, would tell a story.
Who among you does not agree,
That a path to happiness is Americas gift to thee?
Is not the right to protect thy family a foundation of happiness?
Does not America bestow the honor of protecting our freedoms on the warrior?
Does not the warrior, empowered by their sacred duty to protect and serve, do so with intelligence?
Are they not to be respected?
Why then do they treat their weapons so differently? Why then do they show their power by respecting the power of the weapon?
Is not the power of fire, nay, the power of the sun, worthy of respect?
Once there was a great warrior, revered by all in manners of fighting and wisdom.
Coming upon a town full of wiles and wit, he noticed children playing with fire.
Child he said, "why do you play with such a powerful thing"?
"Because it makes me feel strong," the child responded.
With that the child showed the warrior all the things he could do with the fire. In his bravado the child mis-used the fire and burned a neighbors barn.
Everyone in the town came to help but the damage had been done.
The warrior asked the child what happened?
The child didn't know.
The the warrior asked the child if he would like to learn how he the warrior treated fire and the child said yes.
The warrior then taught the child the foundations of how to respect fire, how to keep it, work with it and above all honor it.
The town, respecting the warrior, came out to learn his ways as well.
From then on the town treated fire as sacred.
Of course The Son of Man would create a better story, but I hope my point came across.
The gun control debate isn't about more or less, it's about respect and honor.
Fire is sacred, guns are sacred, warriors are trained to treat them that way.
I think warriors, especially those that are greatly revered like the Navy Seals, should make it a point to portray gun ownership as a sacred honor.
This would empower gun owners by reinforcing their love of guns but also create a culture where gun ownership was not to be taken lightly.
Why I think this path forward is clever is because I don't think the NRA would disagree with people treating gun ownership as sacred. I think they would embrace it.
Currently the conversation is about more or less, instead I think the conversation should be about sacred responsibility.
If the warrior class actively portrayed gun ownership as sacred I think others would follow and I don't think the powers that be would disagree.
ARMOR DOWN UPDATES
This post was guided by the 105th stanza of the Art of Peace, a book written by Morihei Ueshiba
Armor Down is backing Legislation "H.R. 3516" AKA "The Veterans and Armed Forces’ Health Promotion Act of 2013".
This bill will
• Expand the scope of holistic care education and research for signature wounds such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI).
• Establish complementary and alternative medicine pilot programs for mental health and pain management treatment for veterans.
• Create a grant pilot program to upgrade Veteran Service Organization facilities, expanding the reach of wellness services directly into economically strained communities.
Show your support for this legislation by signing this petition.
A new comedy on Fox, called Enlisted is really funny. Check it out.
Mindful Memorial Day is coming in May.