The right to bear arms

[LitNetIsGreat]

Even without guns, those who are determined to kill children and make schools as graveyards will have machetes to use. If that happens, it will be clearer to us that the problem is not about guns but the desire to kill children as a social statement that bothers and to create havoc at schools out of revenge on a society that "others" and does not listen.

Well I don't want to get into a discussion about guns (so you might say why bother reading and replying...) but really, I don't see the killing of children as a 'social statement' at all - go wear a different coloured T-shirt if you are into that. I just see it as some ****ed up individual with easy access to weapons. All I can say is that I'm glad the UK doesn't have a so called gun culture. This country also has its fair share of idiots but at least they can't pick up semi-automatic rifles (or whatever) down at the local supermarket.

[Volya]

I have tried to think about this problem with a clear head and with an open attitude to both sides of the argument, and it seems clear to me that there are a few points we can make that summarize the issue rather well:

• There will always be crazy murderers in the world, and they will always murder people no matter what rules and regulations we put in place.
• Although guns are not the CAUSE of these murders, they do allow murderers to commit these atrocities more easily.
• If we ban guns or restrict the amount of guns available, this may reduce the amount of deaths but it will not solve the problem.
• Part of the problem lies in the loss of community values in western culture, and the 'glorification' (for want of a better term) of these massacres by the mainstream media.

Therefore the answer is not to act on our first impulse and ban guns, the tool seemingly responsible for the atrocities that have occurred recently. What is required is a change in the way people look at life. People need to realize that the most common reason for these events is the mental instability of the murderer. It would also appear that often in the past, these killers have been social outcasts at school or in life as a whole. For example in the most recent shooting at Sandy Hook, the killer was described as a loner. If somebody in his class had befriended him rather than shunning him, then the shooting may never have happened. I am unsure whether the murderer did it in the moment or he had had these feelings for a while now, but either way if somebody had been there for him to talk to him and realize when he was going to snap (for it seems the mother wasn't great at that), then those school children could be alive right now.

Now I'm not saying these killers are innocent, or merely victims of society. They are still the ones who 99% of the blame should be put on. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't blame ourselves as well.

Then the other part of the problem: the media. Each time a killing like this happens, it hits the front page of every big newspaper in the world. All this does is prove to other people out there that if they go out and do this, they will become famous too. This needs to change. There should be less focus on the killer and more focus on the innocent lives lost. What seems most appalling to me is that often newspapers will produce little time-lines and maps showing what the killer did and when. This is clearly only there to feed the sick curiosity that the average reader has, and if nothing else only serves to give future killers a guide to how to do it.

P.S
I have no comment on what level of regulations we should put on the sale of firearms since it seems to only fuel the fires and distracts from other issues that are at hand.

[miyako73]

Well I don't want to get into a discussion about guns (so you might say why bother reading and replying...) but really, I don't see the killing of children as a 'social statement' at all - go wear a different coloured T-shirt if you are into that. I just see it as some ****ed up individual with easy access to weapons. All I can say is that I'm glad the UK doesn't have a so called gun culture. This country also has its fair share of idiots but at least they can't pick up semi-automatic rifles (or whatever) down at the local supermarket.

Maybe this incident in China will give you a hint.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...-knife-attack/

Also, if not of literature on which I had clung to for solace and calm, I would have killed all my classmates in grade school for calling me a faggot (although I was a transsexual girl) and bullying me to the hilt all day long and all my teachers for not doing anything to stop them. An othered person who has been persecuted for so long will think of everyone and everything as his enemies and those include his family, his friends, God, the society, the world, the universe.

[Sancho]

Today the NRA told it how it is, and blamed :-

The Media,
Video Games,
President Obama,
Gun free school zones,
Hurricanes,
Sports stadiums,
Celebrities,
Foriegn aid,
Movies,
Music Videos,

But definitely not guns.

The press anticipated a conciliatory statement from the NRA, but they came out with pistols blazing, fighting like cornered rats. Uhh, do cornered rats fight with pistols blazing? Well, in this case - yes.

Anyway, that statement by the NRA tells me they're running scared.

[Alexander III]

I have tried to think about this problem with a clear head and with an open attitude to both sides of the argument, and it seems clear to me that there are a few points we can make that summarize the issue rather well:

• There will always be crazy murderers in the world, and they will always murder people no matter what rules and regulations we put in place.
• Although guns are not the CAUSE of these murders, they do allow murderers to commit these atrocities more easily.
• If we ban guns or restrict the amount of guns available, this may reduce the amount of deaths but it will not solve the problem.
• Part of the problem lies in the loss of community values in western culture, and the 'glorification' (for want of a better term) of these massacres by the mainstream media.

Therefore the answer is not to act on our first impulse and ban guns, the tool seemingly responsible for the atrocities that have occurred recently. What is required is a change in the way people look at life. People need to realize that the most common reason for these events is the mental instability of the murderer. It would also appear that often in the past, these killers have been social outcasts at school or in life as a whole. For example in the most recent shooting at Sandy Hook, the killer was described as a loner. If somebody in his class had befriended him rather than shunning him, then the shooting may never have happened. I am unsure whether the murderer did it in the moment or he had had these feelings for a while now, but either way if somebody had been there for him to talk to him and realize when he was going to snap (for it seems the mother wasn't great at that), then those school children could be alive right now.

Now I'm not saying these killers are innocent, or merely victims of society. They are still the ones who 99% of the blame should be put on. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't blame ourselves as well.

Then the other part of the problem: the media. Each time a killing like this happens, it hits the front page of every big newspaper in the world. All this does is prove to other people out there that if they go out and do this, they will become famous too. This needs to change. There should be less focus on the killer and more focus on the innocent lives lost. What seems most appalling to me is that often newspapers will produce little time-lines and maps showing what the killer did and when. This is clearly only there to feed the sick curiosity that the average reader has, and if nothing else only serves to give future killers a guide to how to do it.

P.S
I have no comment on what level of regulations we should put on the sale of firearms since it seems to only fuel the fires and distracts from other issues that are at hand.

12 pages of discussion and this seems to me to be the most intelligent post so far.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Maybe this incident in China will give you a hint.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...-knife-attack/

I gather your point is that that people who want to make a 'social statement' will do so regardless of guns (though in the article all those who were attacked by the knife survived). However, the 'crime' that seemed to lead to the idiot on the bus going nuts was that his girlfriend left him or some such altercation. This has nothing to do with a society that does not listen. Such day-to-day things happen everywhere and in every culture and every culture there are always going to be a small minority of psychopaths. I'm just pleased that in my backyard these people can't pick up guns as easy as they can pick up a pack of sausages.

I think the easy access to guns in the US is ridiculous, but it is not my culture or country so it's not really my problem or right to pass judgement. It is also rather like the alcohol Vs drugs debates though because guns, like alcohol, is already out there which makes it all the more difficult to contain or regulate.

In your particular case, I'm sorry for you - that you were surrounded by such small minded individuals, and had to put up with that. Personally I can't stand such pig ignorance or those who follow the crowd so much that they haven't got the brains to think for themselves. However, such a thing is not limited to one culture or another and happens everywhere over any sort of difference from that particular social group.

Certainly you had every right to bonk them on the nose or to take a more sophisticated Gandhi-like approach to dealing with the issue but most likely you wouldn't have done anything more than that because thankfully it is only a rare psychopath like the ones above that goes completely of the rails when faced with particular emotional stress.

[miyako73]

Let me speak as a trained anthropologist.

In anthropology we see human as the center of anything--may it be media, economy, politics, sex, family, culture, society, or community.

Guns, violent computer games, internet, media glorifying murder, etc. are just peripheral or superficial elements. At the center of those elements are people with murderous desire. You can take those elements away, if that desire to murder remains among those people, nothing will change. So, the problem really is: why do they have murderous desire?

It's like a person having an infection that causes his wounds, rashes, boils, etc. You can treat his wounds, rashes, boils with cream and ointment, but if you don't treat the infection which is the center of it all, new wounds, rashes, and boils will manifest in other parts of the body.

[miyako73]

It can be argued maybe his girlfriend left him because he was poor. Why was he poor? Because he had no education. Why did he not get an education? Because only the rich could afford college? Why is that so? Because that is the reality in his society. Man is a social animal; anything he does or does not do can be traced back to the society in which he belongs.

[LitNetIsGreat]

It can be argued maybe his girlfriend left him because he was poor. Why was he poor? Because he had no education. Why did he not get an education? Because only the rich could afford college? Why is that so? Because that is the reality in his society. Man is a social animal; anything he does or does not do can be traced back to the society in which he belongs.

I'm sorry but that's just nonsensical.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Double post.

[islandclimber]

That knife incident from China was brought up many times the day after as an argument that guns aren't the problem, as he would have just used a different weapon. What no one mentioned, is that although 22 children were injured in the attack, not one died, and he was detained. Whereas in Connecticut, 28 died. That is an enormous difference. Of course guns don't float along through the air and pull their own triggers at random, neither does any other weapon. Yet, comparatively speaking, it is less likely to a ridiculous degree that a knife or a sword or a crossbow could kill the same numbers as a gun, anywhere near as quickly. This is just logic. Guns make it easy for people who go crazy to do a lot of damage. The idea that if everyone had a weapon we would be much safer is so absurd its amusing. Look at the gun homicide rate in the United States. Of developed nations it is far and away higher than any other. The lack of gun control in the United States and the types of firearms available to the general populace, these things are terrifying. The right to bear arms is absurd and outdated, and is bred into America from its revolutionary beginnings. I, for one, am glad I live in Canada, though less so of late as we ideologically attempt to march our way into a better understanding with our neighbour to the south.

[miyako73]

Yes, in that incident. But there were school attacks (in China) in the past that had many casualties.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/wo...anted=all&_r=0

[miyako73]

I'm sorry but that's just nonsensical.

It's nonsensical because you don't see the issue as a whole.

[islandclimber]

Yes, in that incident. But there were school attacks (in China) in the past that had many casualties.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/wo...anted=all&_r=0

Yes. I would never suggest a knife cannot be used to kill. And 5 or 6 dead is still awful. Yet all is relative. And the ability to kill dozens in minutes is much worse. Besides that. It is much easier to defend oneself against a knife than a gun. Or to try to stop the person. If, as an adult, you try to stop a knife wielder, you may get stabbed, cut, etc. or you may succeed. With a gun toter, you are best served to just run or hide.

Of course, weapons aren't the root cause of the problem, yet at the same time, certain weapons just make it easy to kill. And they help to ingrain it within a culture that violence is how problems are dealt with. Handguns and assault rifles are for nothing else; they serve only human upon human violence. No one hunts with a handgun or an automatic weapon. So why are they so accessible? Who are these people defending against?

[miyako73]

so, you mean guns should be banned because 6 deaths from a knife is better than 22 deaths from a gun?

Why not go further? Why not ask why those people kill and how they can be helped so there will be 0 death?

Don't get me wrong. I'm also for banning guns. I just think it's useless to ban them if the real problem is not taken care of. If those murderous people kill again with machetes, are we going to ask for the banning of machetes? Weapons are not the problem; those murderous people who use them are.