A SIG Sauer P220 45 ACP semiautomatic handgun and four rounds - these are jacketed hollow-point rounds made by Federal.

Their Blood Still Cries Out: A defense of executive action on gun violence

Share this story!
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

By Eric Blauer

 “How can your empty clichés comfort me?
    All your explanations are lies!” -The seventh Speech of Job 21:34

I think of this verse when I read and listen to the arguments and defenses from the pro/con gun debate voices that are sounding out after President Obama’s executive actions on gun violence.

I am a constitutionalist, white, middle class, male, a conservative, a gun owner. I drive a truck, have a Duck Dynasty size beard, married to the same woman for going on 26 years. I am a pastor, work with refugees at our Community Resource Center and lean right of the libertarian center. Even though my demographic is viewed as loathsome pedigree by many in the media, I am not an anomaly. I support President Obama in the addition of these steps to add reasonable accountability in the sale, safety and security of firearms in our common life.

I do believe that our constitution gives us the right of gun ownership and I oppose measures often presented that try to make it a privilege, instead of right.

Even though I think this is essential to understanding the power of our constitution and American life,  I’ve grown tired of the narratives of inflated fear and blame that end in more  political stalemates. Each new tragedy has sunk us deeper and deeper into the quicksand of inaction. We’ve opted for watching one another die instead of demanding a realistic, constitutional honoring, plan of action for reasonable measures of control.

I think this election cycle is going to be a surprise for both sides of the political aisle. People are going to stand up for sanity and safety and elect leaders who will govern accordingly. Our nation, communities and children deserve more than deadly indecisiveness or ideological mania from either Donkeys or Elephants.

Good job Mr. President, I think the future will give you credit for attempting to do what you thought was best for our country in the face of countless lost lives whose blood still cries from the ground.

About Eric Blauer

I am Frederick Christian Blauer IV, but I go by Eric, it sounds less like a megalomaniac but still hints at my Scandinavian destiny of coastal conquest and ultimate rule. I have accumulated a fair number of titles: son, brother, husband, father, pastor, writer, artist and a few other more colorful titles by my fanged fans. I am a lover of story be it heard, read or watched in all beauty, gory or glory. I write and speak as an exorcist or poltergeist, splashing holy water, spilling wine and breaking bread between the apocalypse and a sleeping baby. I am possessed by too many words and they get driven out like wild pigs and into the waters of my blog at www.fcb4.tumblr.com. I work as a pastor at Jacob's Well Church (www.jacobswellspokane.com) across the tracks on 'that' side of town. I follow Christ in East Central Spokane among saints, sinners, angels, demons, crime, condoms, chaos, beauty, goodness and powerful weakness. I have more questions than answers, grey hairs than brown, fat than muscle, fire than fireplace and experience more love from my wife, family and friends than a man should be blessed with in one lifetime.

Visit My Website
View All Posts

Check Also

Unpacking the word “Queer”

Why are many young people using this word to describe their sexuality rather than “gay” when it used to mean “weird”?

9 comments

  1. Hi Eric. (Almost didn’t comment.) I am firmly against debating (let alone arguing or fighting) about the ‘gun issue’ in America until we demonstrate a capacity for rational holistic dialogue.

    Please view my comments as in contrast (versus opposition) to your view.

    I have found myself angry that my president is angry about this issue.

    I want more from the man and yet must acknowledge that my own frustration is irrational.

    I voted twice for Obama.

    He let me down twice.

    But in order for him to have let me down we must have let him down.

    To me a president’s most important job is always to motivate robust dialogue in the Capital.

    Some say it’s been impossible for him because of racism or hate.

    This is not logical; if true, he could not have been elected.

    No other president has had to deal with an electorate driven by insane media in their pockets.

    (The iPhone arrived in 2007.)

    Obama threw in the towel on dialogue long ago and chose to spend the capital of my vote on forcing the will of his own view. It is my view he risks great long term damage in so doing.

    To me, it doesn’t matter if the reasoning for his executive orders are sound or not. The simple fact he is acting unilaterally makes the actions unsound in our structure of governance.

    To me, my president choosing to act in such a manner neither honors the loss of life at the hands of madness nor addresses the dialogue required to root out causes of such madness. From where I sit, I see Obama’s actions as inflaming our madness.

    Donald is right. Likely, he means well. However, without America behind him, his actions divide.

    Eric, do you recognize a candidate who can bring sanity to our national conversation?

    As always, thank you for standing strong in the fire.

    • Thanks for the comment Riff and offering up some good thoughts and feelings. Part of my intention in sharing this post was to show that there are conservative evangelicals that can give props to the President as well as jabs. The debate environment is so noxious and toxic these days that nobody can seem to say anything good or supportive of others in different idealogical or political camps and that just builds barriers instead of bridges.

      I’m also trying to show that presidential candidates need to see that independents are potential votes too. There is a great mass in the middle that’s open to being convinced on issues and plans for the future under new leadership.

      Personally I almost always, (minus his immigration policies) find Rand Paul saying stuff that is reasonable and responsible.

      Here is his astute and concise response to the dangers of executive orders:
      http://youtu.be/P-pSboOoYSg

    • Actually, executive actions have dropped off considerably as a political tool, but are absolutely built in to the system. Obama has used fewer per year than any President in the last 130 years. So it’s not like he’s going crazy. Also, I would disagree about having America behind him. From what I’ve seen of the gun control actions, they mostly involve expansion of background checks and enhancements to make sure that can be carried out. Americans are overwhelmingly in support of this. In fact, even Wayne LaPierre argued in support of universal background checks in the late 90s. And then the NRA apparently realized they could get away with entirely opposing any kind of gun control at all, and took a wild and forceful shift to the right. The degree to which people support gun control of course varies, but I’ve not seen anything in what he’s doing that doesn’t have the support of the majority. The reason it’s controversial is because of the NRA and the politicians they own, as well as the scoring of political points that Republicans seem to think they get every time they oppose Obama.

      • This is a hot button, highly charged — I would say, dangerous — issue. It’s an issue I feel all Americans aught consider with great reverence. We’re talking about the safety of our children. That said, I’d say executive orders ought be measured not by quantity, but by individual context. This is analogous to a republican president making an order curtailing abortions. Obama has taken this debate to the media as an admittance of failure to govern with fellow elected leaders. It would appear only WE have the power to take back this CONVERSATION from the theatrical spotlights in our pockets?

        • I think part of the gun-policy problem in the U.S. is based on the fact that the NRA used to represent the views of the majority of its members and now doesn’t. The majority of NRA members currently support universal background checks, but the NRA doesn’t. Middle ground can’t be found if the top brass ignore the bulk of the membership. This seems like a conservative version of the problem, often highlighted in conservative media, of unions not representing their membership.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *