Scioto County Commissioner Bryan Davis does not believe in gun reform. He has stated this position during commissioners meetings like the one on July 7, 2022. He espouses the view that prevention efforts to ease gun violence like “red flag laws do nothing to stop someone from going out, getting a gun, and shooting some place up.”
He surprisingly contradicts himself by also stating he believes “the core of the issue is mental health,” yet he opposes efforts to keep guns from those who are deemed to be a danger. Such a red flag bill – Ohio Senate Bill 351 – is currently being co-sponsored by all Senate Democrats and supported by Moms Demand Action Ohio, part of Everytown for Gun Safety’s grassroots network.
The red flag law process in Bill 351 begins with a petition from law enforcement, family member or household member to a state court demanding temporary removal of firearms from someone deemed to be a danger. After the petition is filed, the court will then hold a hearing with the concerned parties. If clear and convincing evidence is found, the order is granted to confiscate weapons, sometimes without any prior notice to the person in question.
David opposes the red flag and contends it is a threat to all gun owners. He says that “if you really want to zero in on the big issue, it's sin. It's sin in the hearts of man. That's period. That's it. That's where it all goes.” To emphasize his position, Davis adamantly raps on the table and states: “By goodness, I'll stand for the citizens of Scioto County and these United States and we shall not … the rights of a citizen to bear arms will not be infringed as long as I'm commissioner of this county.”
Of course, a person who commits murder with a firearm or a person with a gun intent on causing bodily harm to innocent victims is a sinner. I understand that. I feel few would deny this obvious outcome – someone who does this makes a transgression against divine law.
Yet, what obligation does a person have to stop gun violence as a moral problem? Rabbi Menachem Creditor – spiritual leader of Congregation Netivot Shalom in Berkeley, California, and the founder and co-chair of Rabbis Against Gun Violence – addresses this dilemma. Creditor, named by Newsweek as one of the 50 most influential rabbis in America, explains …
“As a rabbi, I cry at the erasure of so much life. I have organized for, marched with, and amplified Everytown for Gun Safety, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Americans for Responsible Solutions, and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. And yet, as a rabbi, I am enraged not at guns but at the casual violence afflicting our country, and the way we have grown immune to it. I do not accept the NRA's claim that "guns are not the problem," but I do agree that guns are not the main problem.
“Legislators seem incapable of compromise, and the frontlines of the culture war are bombarded by extremists who alternatively demonize gun owners and gun reform advocates alike.
“Is there anything to be done? Is there no way to make any change in a system of sustained violence that costs upwards of 30,000 lives every year?
“My claim is that my fellow faith leaders can bridge the divide between gun owners and gun reform advocates. This is a moral crisis, and it requires a moral response.
“Whereas elected officials and those employed to sway their decisions are driven by the market, faith communities of all stripes are driven to maintain the dignity of the Divine Image in every human life. Faith reminds us of our common humanity, can provoke that most human of responses to the needless deaths of our fellow citizens: compassion. Americans of all political leanings – gun owners, gun law reformers, mental health advocates – wish for the fulfillment of American Scripture, which includes in its promises a basic right: life.”
(Menachem Creditor. “Gun Violence Is a Moral Problem.” HuffPost. April 20, 2015.)
Rabbi Creditor goes on to speak of the great civil rights activist Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who once claimed that, when confronting great societal rupture, there is "no time for neutrality," that:
“... one of the lessons we have derived from the events of our time is that we cannot dwell at ease under the sun of our civilization, that man is the least harmless of beings.”
The very basic societal value of mutual obligation is our motivation to fight gun violence. And, Creditor says, “If we need more motivation than our national prophetic values, we might do well to consider the statistical reality – if we do nothing – that our streets, our churches, our children are all on the line.
Menachem Creditor concludes …
“My faith tradition promises that, one day, there will be a day on which "you shall lie down and no one shall terrify you." (Leviticus 26:6) That day feels woefully far from now. The only way forward, out of the sinful trap of passive acceptance, is a basic tenet of our common faith: the mandate to serve as our brothers' and sisters' keepers. The way forward is faith's call to remember that we are each other's best hope.”
(Menachem Creditor. “Gun Violence Is a Moral Problem.” HuffPost. April 20, 2015.)
Conclusion
Bryan Davis considers my blog “fodder” for misguided souls. He has denigrated my words as worthless diatribe unworthy of consideration by those in control of local politics. Yet, in doing so, he surely admits to reading it himself as he passes judgment on sinful behaviors and what he deems to be proper legislation. He will probably read this blog entry, and I hope he considers “sin in the hearts of man” as part of his own human condition. Let me explain.
Davis's very faith should motivate him to find compassion and the need to address the national epidemic of gun violence, not to offhandedly excuse the gun from the deadly equation and claim clubs and knives are just as deadly as AR-15s. Such firearms have no place in the hands of those whose mental capabilities, mature judgment, and … yes, Godliness … are lacking. To suggest that Democrats or liberals or whoever else is going to confiscate guns from anyone “they don't like” – and, he did say that – is ludicrous. Telling such a politically motivated lie is a sin in itself. He knows better.
To close, I support Bryan Davis's right to preach and believe what he wants. He most certainly does good both as a pastor and as an elected official. However, when he brings his views to the public square and clearly defends the Second Amendment with both religious fervor and nationalistic aggressiveness, he should reexamine his own definition of “sin” be that the wrongdoing “in the hearts of man” or in his own stubborn mind's refusal to acknowledge the worth of an alternate point of view.
My understanding is that the Bible never forbids a Christian from owning a weapon, but it does offer some principles to consider. First, Christians are called to be peacemakers
Second, a Christian should
only own a weapon for a purpose that would honor God (1 Corinthians
10:23). That suggests each person should reflect on his or her
motives for owning a particular weapon.
Third, a Christian
should abide by local laws, including gun laws. Romans 13 is clear
that governing authorities are from God and are to be obeyed.
Christians should carefully consider their motive and purpose in
owning a weapon, and local ordinances should be followed – I would
assume that means no resistance against reforms and clarifications to
the Second Amendment.
The Rev. James Martin, Jesuit Priest and Editor at Large at America, The Jesuit Review says …
“Simply praying, 'God, never let this happen again' is insufficient for the person who believes that God gave us the intelligence to bring about lasting change. It would be as if one passed a homeless person and said to oneself, 'God, please help that poor man,' when all along you could have helped him yourself.
(James Martin. “Why Gun Control is a Religious Issue.” America. July 22, 2012.)
No comments:
Post a Comment