An Ohio man, clearly still infuriated with the Brown’s handling of Johnny Manziel, has taken his letter to the editor to fancy his position to reduce gun deaths in America. His suggestion? – Shift gun deaths over to assisted suicide deaths.
This idea, if not heard before, would make Wayne LaPierre grin ear to ear. If the NRA to shift one of its salient thorns, modestly speaking, they would need to double the size of their war chest.
Speaking without anonymity, the author, R.B. Williams of Columbus, said, ‘ If the Ohio legislators would pass “end-of-life” legislation, the number of gun deaths could have a dramatic reduction.
For the terminally ill, facing a long, lingering, painful, costly and hopeless decline to a certain end, such legislation could provide a welcome option to that of using a gun to commit suicide to avoid such a given future.
It also could also result in freeing up needed bed space and medical costs, and reduce the need for long-term care costs needed through government agencies’.
There’s a lot to love about this article, but let’s just back up for a moment.
I came to the conclusion that I cannot vehemently oppose the death penalty without opposing any unnatural forms of death. I am sure not to be alone with this question – it’s one I have the hardest time reconciling.
I watched, ‘How to Die I Oregon’, a movie that follows people through their final journey and it exposes what is inherently wrong with the dying with dignity laws – it’s an express lane to death. Sure, that sounds extreme, but really, it’s not. They do follow a women who is aggressively fighting stomach cancer and has a loving family that she refuses to quit on. She hangs on as long as she determines to be possible. She has no interest in dying. However, there are more instances in which it’s clear that the subject is in a rush to check out. The first person they follow is a man who is little more than a crank. He is surrounded by his friends in an atmosphere that could only be described as a party. As soon as the doctor prepares the elixir, he grabs it and sucks it down with a voracity that required notice. While the man was suffering, he had his faculties and he was not bed-ridden – he just wanted to die.
This is the point of alarm for me. This legislation, if left with little oversight, is a petri dish for corruption. What happens when a state runs a cost/benefit analysis and can determine the savings found if some die with dignity to be beyond nominal? What happens when the lone remaining matriarch to a hefty fortune becomes nothing more than ill? Maybe the heir-apparent wasn’t too keen on mom in the first place and is one elixir away from a retirement that includes umbrella drinks?
Don’t think that could happen? Look at Flint.
The author opens the door for this to occur, offers a more pragmatic explanation, albeit, more callous; ‘It also could also result in freeing up needed bed space and medical costs, and reduce the need for long-term care costs needed through government agencies’. What he’s saying is, if we’re running short on beds, kill the people who appear the least healthy.
While you may support this legislation, St. Paul said a lot about the dignity through suffering. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul said, “I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me…who loved me and gave himself up for me”. “Far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world…Henceforth let no man trouble me, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus”.
Whether or not you share the religious position, you have to be somewhat uneasy about a poorly regulated law designed to kill its people. While it appears to be a zero-sum game when it comes to deaths, the NRA and gun lobby would boast a significant reduction in gun related deaths, however, when backed out to a macro view, through impropriety, more deaths will occur.
Peace be with you.
Follow me on Twitter @ryandavidprice