Means To An End? Left And Right Responses To Gun Crime Compared

Written by Chuck Gruenwald on February 27, 2018

Regardless of our religious, philosophical, or political beliefs, what we believe as individuals is created, formed, and reinforced by the words of philosophically like-minded and opposing individuals that we are exposed to either in the education system or by choice. In almost all circumstances, the words that express the thoughts of others are most-likely inconsequential until one has amassed enough personal experience to help define their intent.

Until I learned about the atrocities that were committed in Communist-controlled countries in the name of establishing and spreading Communism, “the end justifies the means” was nothing more than a phrase that I associated with Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin. When I realized that those who believe that the end justifies the means is a legitimate course for the accumulation of political power — as well as a method to dominate those whom they govern in the most personal aspects of their lives — those words had assumed a sinister, evil meaning. Those words, when used as a philosophical and political compass allow the believers to act without regard for the well-being of other people.

In the wake of the mass-murder in Florida in February, it has become apparent once again that a quote from Chicago Mayor and former Chief of Staff for President Barack Obama Rahm Emmanuel is rooted in the belief that the end justifies the means.

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste” fits within the philosophical boundaries of an individual who believes that the accumulation of power is worth the price that others will eventually pay, or that others have paid for, such as the survivors and the families and friends of the victims of a mass-murder.
Perhaps by uttering those words, Mayor Emmanuel has helped put in to context the now-predictable reactions of politicians, bureaucrats, and activists who embrace leftist ideologies that identify people with opposing opinions as somehow having contributed to the tragedy.

While news stories indicate a series of failures — from the seemingly non-existent family structure of the perpetrator, to incompetence on the part of the school system, as well as local and federal law enforcement — have resulted in this evil act, left-leaning individuals who embrace government intervention for every crisis have once again labeled those who lean toward conservatism as being complicit from the sidelines.

While the bulk of rhetoric from Democrat politicians and leftist activist groups will continue to place the blame on the “easy access to assault weapons”, those people will also publicly criticize conservative citizens for the usual, predictable reasons.

Once all investigations are completed and the mass-murderer is put on trial, the death penalty will once again become the subject, where those left-leaning political activists will claim that those who support capital punishment are blood-thirsty and look for any reason to execute their fellow human beings.

Using this logic, those who oppose the death penalty due to social justice-based reasons fail to realize that people who support the death penalty are actually opposed to the death penalty.

In the case of the recent mass-murder, there will be a trial. If a guilty verdict is reached, then one possible sentence is capital punishment.

When a human being is killed by another human being, one or more police officers must investigate the crime, and one of those officers must notify the family that a loved one has been taken from them in an evil manner. Not only does that family and the friends of the victim have to live with the loss of that loved one, creating a void in their lives that will never be filled, those police officers must live with the memories of investigating that murder, notifying the victim’s loved ones, and having to start the process of incarcerating the murderer.

Once the body of the victim is removed from the crime scene, a coroner must complete his or her part of the investigation via an autopsy. Once the coroner completes his or her work, the body of the victim is turned over to a funeral home, where the funeral director has the unenviable task of reuniting the remains of the victim with his or her family for one final time.

As the killer is processed in the criminal justice system, a prosecutor is responsible for the conviction of that murderer in the courtroom. In that courtroom not only will a judge and jury hear the technical details of the crime, but so will the victim’s loved ones, who may also be asked to share the pain of losing a family member or friend.

If the murderer is convicted, then a sentence is handed-down. If the sentence is death, then that sentence must be reached by twelve individuals who were asked to hear that case as a civic duty.

Once the convicted is put to death, the sentence will have been carried-out by a human being. In the end, one act of evil has changed the lives of countless others, including the people who are responsible for the death sentence.

The act of executing a human being is a punishment that should be reserved for the most heinous criminals, but would not be necessary if those criminals did not commit their crimes.

To avoid the death penalty, conservatives do not wish for the crime to happen in the first place, since the murder of a human being ripples through the lives of many more people. As for those who believe that the end justifies the means, the death of a human being is little more than a crisis that should not be allowed to go to waste.

photo credit: slimcloudy Hopes in Hands via photopin (license)

Born in Chicago and raised in northwest suburban Cook County, Chuck Gruenwald developed an unfavorable opinion of machine politics quite early in life. In addition to cars, electronics, law enforcement, and politics, Chuck enjoys writing, and is also a horse racing fan. He has recently written op-eds for