SENZAVENTO.IT

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. First amendment to the US Constitution – “Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, and Petition” – Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791 (Note: The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights)

An interview with D.V. – By the Editorial Board.

So, here we are, three weeks later. First of all, allow me a personal question… We all know your name, but, for our readers, how can we call you? Can “senzavento” (English: windless) be good for you?

Well, first of all, I’d like to thank you for having decided to grant me the honour of a personal interview. Now, replying to your question, you can call me D.

OK, D. Could you kindly explain us what D.V. stand for? Do they represent the initials of a name? And what’s the reason why of your nickname “senzavento”?

Well, I don’t wanna give you a deep explanation of everything, for my safety and for yours, as well. Regarding the initials by which I’m used to signing my articles, you may consider the Latin formula “Dei Veritas”, or better, based on the norms of Latin grammar “Veritas Dei” (English: God’s Truth). Referring to my nickname… Have you ever seen a sail, during a dead calm? A horrible vision of what it could be and of what it is not. When I began to write, I swear to myself to blow in every single sail, “pushing the wind” of knowledge and reason, to the benefit of every interesting and apparently “windless” cause, that I could find on my path. That promise allowed me, till today, to analyze lots of political, economic and social matters, to reflect on them and to share my opinion with my readers. In fact, I strongly believe that our Society and our Community cannot grow up without comparing ideas and different points of view.

So, we can say that your main intent is a sort of continuos brain storming, with and among the people. Is it correct?

Yes, you gave a perfect interpretation of my intent. “I think, therefore I am” and “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” are the keys to understand my state of mind. 

What is your favourite newspaper?

Well, I’m used to inspiring myself, by reading The Washington Post, the New York Times and The Economist.

Recently you wrote an article called “Son of a Gun”. It analyzed the Gun Control debate which is flaming the US, starting from the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution. We know that you had a strong discussion on a social media, with the American people. What’s the outcome of your article? 

By your question, you give me the opportunity to say, one more time, that I still consider the US the land of Freedom and Opportunity and that I respect the American people. Regarding the debate that I had on Facebook, it’s not easy to summarize every opinion by a singular answer… But I can easily say that due to aggressive words used by some guys, I got that the Gun Control dispute is helpful to describe the nervousness which is dividing their land. 

Can you give me an example?

Well, during a debate session, I said that “They, the people” have to consider that one law is not necessarily a righteous and “perfect” law, only because, 250 years ago, someone decided what’s the best for them, today. Someone replied to me that the right to keep and bear arms is not a law, but a “human right” given to him by God, many years ago. The same guy asked me: “Are you saying that God is wrong”? That’s incredible! Obviously, I said that I cannot judge the Lord but, at the same time, I said that it’s never a good idea to talk about “rights given to us by God”. In fact, in my opinion, or better, in the opinion of some fools from the Islamic State in example, that choice could justify extremism and fundamentalism. Jesus said: “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”. When people will realize/remember the above, maybe we’ll be able to discuss about smarter human laws. 

So, we can say that your readers were strongly devoted to their origins. Don’t we?

Yes, absolutely. They were used to talking about their founding fathers with respect and admiration. Even if, sometimes, they did not know their own History. 

What do you mean? 

In example, regarding the “well regulated militia” they had a wrong perception of the amendment. They do not consider the idea that who wrote the US Constitution referred just to the possibility that the British Empire could suddenly decide to attack the American people, after they declared their indipendence. They preferred a misinterpretation of their Constitution and they did not consider they are living in a “modern era”. As during the centuries the US built itself as a State, becaming also the most powerful country in the world, in my opinion “the well regulated militia” have no more reasons to exist, neither as a “potential” citizen army, nor as a law prescription.

Do they understand that you are not an American citizen?

Well, if I must give you a percentage, I can say that just the 5% of them, understood that I’m not from the US. 

What was their reaction, when they got it?

Well, usually they said: “if your are not American, who cares about your opinion”… Also: “the 2nd amendment is not your business (…) bastard commie”… And also: “fascist”! I don’t like bad language but I’ve learnt lots of swear words… Anyway, I consciously accepted to be in the line of fire. I have a thick skin.

This means that you revealed your political roots. Didn’t you?

No, I didn’t. I’m not used to talking about my political ideas with a stranger. Whatever my political view is, I’ve often been called “liberal”. They didn’t know me, but, as I focused my attention on a questionable matter, I got a “label” on my forehead. It was funny.

How did you react to these offenses? 

It’s simple. Regarding their ideas about “business”, “rights” and “freedom of speech”, I suggested asking all the people abroad, that “citizens” like  them decided to educate… From the Middle East to South America, there are too many examples. I do not accept lessons from such blind men.

Did they make any comparison between the US and the rest of the world?

Yes, they did. The most common opinion was that violence and crime rate raised in those Countries that decided for a gun control, or for a total ban of firearms. As you know, based on Statistical datas, that’s not true. In the same time, they do not consider that the majority of EU Countries do not allow to keep and bear guns or rifles, without a prior sanity examination. There are stringent safety measures and it’s not easy to buy weapons, except for hunting. One of them, literally said as follows: “in Switzerland every is required to have a firearm at home & trained. There’s not much crime. Because everyone knows there is a trained gun owner there. The main reason there’s so much crime here (in the US) is the illegal weapons. There will be more crimes removing legal guns”. A wrong comparison… Due to its neutrality, he forgot that Switzerland has Armed Forces based on conscription. That’s the reason why the people are well trained… And that’s the reason why the people have rifles at home.

Did they claim their rights, due to historical differences with the other Countries?

Yes, they did. Lots of NRA readers attacked me, trying to justify the Second World War as the result of a hypothetical firearms ban… In their opinion, Germans, Italians and Japanese were obliged to accept their Tyrannical Governments, because they could not fight against them… I replied that they had a wrong vision of the facts. Maybe they studied on “different” books… Moreover, I reminded them that before the Third Reich, the Nazi Party built itself in Germany like a popular militia. It’s a fact that the Wehrmacht (the official German Army) was flanked by the Schultstaffeln (the SS) which, as you know, were used to “appointing” perfect “arian citizens”. Also, in Italy, Fascist blackshirts reached the Power as Representatives of the People. Last but not least, regarding Japan, it’s a fact that its own history was exactly the root of the problem. I mean: Shōgun, Emperor, Samurai and so on… They created a “fighting society” that in the end, justified the war as its “first commandment”. 

Are you favorable to a total weapons ban? 

Well, I’m favorable to a prior sanity check. In fact, I think that a mental state examination could be helpful to avoid risks for us and for our children as well. It’s incredible that lots of people do not understand that the possession of assault rifles is not a normal thing, in a Democratic country… Because in a Democratic country the people trust the law enforcement agencies without pretending to defend themselves, or their families, by personal weapons. 

As you know, the Prohibition didn’t work; the outlawing of drugs is not working, as well… What makes you think that a weapons ban will work?

Regarding the Federal Government, we know that several readers believe that their right to be armed is a “guarantee” against Tyranny. What do you think about that?

Well, I was shocked to know that they are obsessed with Washington’s (alleged) abuses. They are scared to be overpowered by an  unjust Power/Authority. Meanwhile, I explained to myself, in example, the reasons why of the shooting of Oregon protester… I’m sure that if SCOTUS unanimously decided to amend the whole bill of rights every “patriot” should be ready for another civil war.

What’s your opinion about the freedom of speech.

As you can imagine, it’s one of the most important “brick” of our society. Without freedom of speech there’s no Democracy and there’s no Liberty as well. Sometimes, during my discussions I talked about the 1st amendment, as a provocation. I’m well advised that US Constitution refers only to American citizens, but it’s my right to say what I think is wrong in its prescriptions. So, as I strongly believe in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I repeat: it’s my opinion that the 2nd amendment is a very old rule which is not a good one for the XXI Century. 

What do you think about President Barack Obama? Did he react properly to the problem?

Well, I cannot judge a lonely man against a whole Nation. I can just say that I heard lots of words… As you know, nothing’s really changed since Michael Moore directed “Bowling for Columbine”…

Is there any comment that impressed you more than the others?

Oh, yes. There was a guy, James C., that accused me to write for money… He talked about “Paid Government sleaze”… I’m still checking with my bank, among my entries, but my deposit did not increase yet. LOL.

Did you receive any threats?

Well, unfortunately, some guys threatened me, instead of talking in a civil and polite way. I’m pretty sure that the FBI has already taken note of their “opinions”…

Do you wanna send a message to your readers?

Well, among the readers who approved my position by supporting me during the debate, one said: “if you will notice conservative people in the USA have a lot of trouble with facts so they just make stuff up or get their “facts” of a John Wayne movie. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so sad”. Following his lesson, I want to say that I have lots of friends and colleagues that “confirm” his inflexible opinion about conservative people, in the US. On the other hand, I’m very pleased to have lots of friends and colleagues which confirm my opinion that from Boston to LA, there are lots of smart, good and beautiful people.

Our different visions depend on a cultural divide between Europe and the US. Obviously, I have not the right to say that my vision is better than theirs, but, it’s a fact that what usually happens on the other side of the Ocean appears a little bit strange to Europeans’ eyes. So, OK, in the land of cowboys the Government cannot annoy its citizens, but, maybe, citizens could open their minds, by accepting to reconsider some “human rights” (the 2nd amendment, in example), for their safety and for the safety of their own community.

God bless America… God save America from its “sons of a gun”.

By the Editorial Board.

P.S. Special thanks to Jimmy H., Embry L. W., Glenn S. and Ronnie D. L., for their precious support.