how did the gun-response become real?
where in the whirling psyche of being
does the impulse of gun usage
become rationally real?
what self dialogue has gone on and on
that answers to one's emotional inner rage
where acting out has crossed human respect boundaries,
where the scale of valuing another is minimal,
where the pain and isolation felt
demands outer world reality response,
where the sense of the story
takes on character qualities
as if thriller movies are real
and this one is just one more in actual time?
when does the math of victimhood
exist in factor-ten of raised response
and how does one's personal yet private pain
translates into this factor ten equivalency delivered
as if a death tag is the eventual answer required.
for all the common elements that a society provides,
why are most of them taken to emotional heart
that then bare witness to tragedy made evident,
the isolation of self-dialogues that lead to shootings,
the weight of paybacks seen as first-person acceptable.
that we have to first know of another's pain
by tragedy's account and the lateral damage concurring.
where in the psyche of being does gun usage reside
as if this is a form of mortal tag
that lines are crossed
that demand death-dealing response?
how distorted a perspective to feel so absolutely alone
where these acts are also a poorly written suicide notes delivered in the first person
with actually consequences in play?
where in the cohesion of culture did we get this so wrong,
where the rules of reaction go overboard in response,
where the sense of self is so in denial played upon,
so much personal instability as if not to be a self to recover,
where a life of victimhood has its own heroes in play?
are we of a culture
that proceeds with this undertow profoundly happening?
are we of a species that can't help itself in this need?
we make fear the king of the religious mountain at heart
and then deny it ever actually exists
except by recall and tragic account.
so what is a gun a metaphor for?
what is behind the say that guns speaks?
when did we make that noun of an item
a devastating verb?
when there is gun-play involved,
how has our emotional terrain
always had this as a viable option?
there must be a free-fall of pain for this usage to occur.
human emotions run such a vaster terrain
then rational mind is prepared to encounter.
surely no one is claiming insanity for gun usage
yet no one has come up with a viable solution to the cause.
a culture of isolation can be just like that,
unable to express, claim, respond, and mend
as individuals or even as a group in need.
a gun is a great cross to bear or to bare.
both versions can meet in such devastating ways,
in just one person's private hell delivered.
a gun is a secret religious symbol for all in fear.
mortal is the baptism.
and rest in peace or die in hell,
the prayer used
for moving on . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment