Why the same old gun-control answers aren’t comforting
As the father of two small boys, I’m as haunted by last week’s massacre in Newtown, Conn., as anyone who didn’t know personally the victims or their killer.
I have the same fears as all parents anticipating the long, potentially treacherous path ahead of their children in this broken world of ours. My fears are only multiplied by my doubts there are many real options for thwarting future slayings in other unsuspecting towns.
The two primary questions we ask after mass killings are: Why do some people act so heinously? And how can we keep others from doing so?
The first question invariably draws answers like: madness, isolation, social awkwardness or marginalization, familial dysfunction, a craving for fame (or infamy), the prevalence of violence in our popular culture, and evil pure and simple.
The second question typically brings suggestions for treating these mental illnesses and social failures. That, and gun control.
Guns typically don’t make the list of answers to “why,” only to “how.” They are but one means for mass killings — albeit the most common one — not a motivation. Yet, guns become our central focus in times like these.
I understand the impulse. How do we begin to treat the mad, and especially people, such as the Newtown killer, with only mild disorders? As important as it is for us to attempt to rebuild the American family, can we wait the years or perhaps generations such an endeavor might consume, when another mass killing could happen today? How, within the bounds of constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression, does one dial back the violence found in our movies, TV shows, video games and even music?
Whatever a killer’s motivation, guns seem to be his means of choice. Better to address that, right?
As keenly interested as I am in preventing the next mass public shooting, I see little reason to find comfort in gun control.
Consider the high school rampage in Columbine, Colo. The year was 1999, amid a decade-long ban on “assault weapons,” those firearms defined by nothing more than the minds of legislators who drafted the ban on them. (Indeed, the main characteristic common to the weapons banned then seems to be the likelihood one might have seen a similar weapon in a shoot-em-up, kill-em-up movie — an implicit nod to the overriding impact of our entertainment culture.)
One of the Columbine killers was armed with a pump-action shotgun (not exactly a semiautomatic weapon) he fired 25 times. He also fired 96 rounds from a 9-mm carbine while using 10-round magazines — the limit of choice for those who say 30-round magazines are the problem.
When New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg introduced his ban on sugary soft drinks larger than 16 oz., most observers recognized the folly of limiting the size of one drink when a person could simply buy two or more of them. Does no one else find it similarly illogical to think a person bent on mass murder won’t just carry multiple weapons with smaller mags, or that lives will be saved in the few seconds it would take an experienced gun handler to change magazines?
I raise these objections not to defend specific weapons or magazines with any number of bullets. Neither I nor anyone I know owns an “assault weapon” (as far as I know), and I have no particular affinity for bullets that come in sets of 20 or 30 or 40 rather than 10. While I generally support gun-ownership rights, I’m open to practical suggestions that can reasonably square with the Second Amendment.
Nor do I think the situation is hopeless, or as good as it gets. I do think we can make our communities safer. But I think the most effective solutions will be less comfortable — such as asking when it’s OK to invade the privacy of those who are dangerously mentally ill — and more expensive — such as ensuring there are armed guards or designated weapons-carrying citizens even at schools and other “gun-free zones” — than merely banning particular weapons and ammunition.
The lives of innocents deserve the fullness of our thought and attention, not old ideas that have been sitting on the shelf, waiting for a crisis.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
457 comments Add your comment
idependent thinker
December 20th, 2012
9:25 am
Excellent and thoughtful non political analysis of crisi we face in the proliferation of guns and their role in every day violence and mayhem.
1. Every citizen has a paramount right to be free of gun violence and that right is paramount to whatever right SCOTUS created for gun owners in Heller decision.
2. Parents are responsible for decisions they make with dysfunctional children as well as their families. teachers , friends and neighbors who cannot stand by in silence when a dysfunctional and antisocial child is not getting appropriate help and becomes a violent and dysfunctinal adult.
3. Paying huge amounts of child support or alimony does not rid you of that obligation as a parent.
4. Responsible parents do not allow their children to have violent video games and rap music.
5. Responsible parents do not home school disturbed and dysfunctional children but rather force the school system to hep and guide their child’s treatment and education.
6. Assault weapons have no place around dysfunctinal teenagers and young adults.
7. Glen Beck, prepping for tyranny amd economic collapse and gun collecting do not replace religion in finding faith and courage to deal with life’s challenges.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
9:28 am
But I think the most effective solutions will be less comfortable
Oh, absolutely. We need to start with our gun-hugging culture where people slobber over weapons. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve listened to people brag about their latest “toy” or elaborate their testosterone-soaked fantasy of gunning down a “thug” who deserves their special smirking justice.
Asking anyone to admit they’re indulging their primitive hind brain will bring screams of pure rage. But like drunk driving, it’s the only way to address the problem effectively.
kimmer
December 20th, 2012
9:28 am
People start pointing the finger first at firearms because that is way easier than addressing the true root causes.
TGT
December 20th, 2012
9:29 am
Which of these signs would be more likely to prevent another school massacre:
http://politicalarenadotorg.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/gun-signs-children.jpg
TGT
December 20th, 2012
9:30 am
Assault Weapon Ban Wouldn’t Work
Don't Tread
December 20th, 2012
9:31 am
How many mass shootings have occurred in a gun store (you know, that place where guns and ammunition are everywhere and readily accessible)? Google that. You’ll find lots of YouTube videos of the failures.
For that matter, how is anyone still alive in Switzerland? You know, that place where nearly every household has a full-auto, military-spec rifle (and plenty of ammunition to go with it) ready to go at the drop of a hat. They are completely awash in guns. They have shooting competitions for the kids (yes, the SCHOOLCHILDREN!) each year. Are these people insane? Wonder what the crime rate is with all those guns around? Worse than Chicago or DC, you think?
The fact of the matter is that nobody raised the right way and in their right mind is going to shoot dozens of people at random for no reason. Mass shootings are committed by people with some sort of mental problem. Some are afflicted with real mental disorders, and others suffer from parents failing to teach them right from wrong. Those kids who do not get enough parental attention, involvement, and direction will replace the void with television, video games, social media, the Internet, and drug use, and this is the end result.
Common Sense
December 20th, 2012
9:33 am
We need to stop looking for excuses and start taking the steps we need to defend ourselves.
To start invading people’s privacy to make of for the lack of self defense skills is not the solution.
You seem to have started down that slippery slope.
Turn around before it’s too late.
Funny how no one has come out and stated we need better self defense skills, despite the clear evidence that guns save more lives in the hands of good guys than they take in the hands of bad guys.
Get behind the good guys and see those numbers improve.
Just Saying..
December 20th, 2012
9:34 am
Kyle, after a couple of false starts, thanks for an honest look at the problem.
For me, I can’t accept that the weapon I was given in Vietnam in 1968 to kill people is the best selling consumer rifle in the America of my grandchildren.
Here are a couple of relevant articles I believe are worth consideration:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/12/18/1353811/australia-gun-control-suicides/?mobile=nc
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/the-nra-protection-racket.html?hp
MaryAnn
December 20th, 2012
9:41 am
A simplistic essay from a columnist who must maintain his right-wing stance on gun control at all costs. He completely fails to address the situation at hand i.e. a young man with mental health issues who likely wasn’t capable of amassing the guns necessary for the carnage he had in mind. What allowed him to commit these horrific murders is that the guns were there in his own home and readily available. Admit it, Kyle. Gun control won’t prevent all murders but likely would have prevented these murders. And that’s reason enough.
Darwin
December 20th, 2012
9:52 am
Blah blah blah. Same old right wing rhetoric. Ok Kyle – I got one for you. You conservatives claim that government should be out of our lives except for just a few things – and public safety is one of them. Right? Since this is one of just a few primary tasks for your conservative kind of government, what has it done to make us safer? To make our children safe? Here’s a couple of suggestions I’ve seen from the right wing. 1. Bring prayer back into the schools, We’re in moral decay. 2. Arm everybody. We no longer trust our instititutions as the police are now considered as inept as our justice, education, and postal delivery systems. We can’t wait for them to save us and get the bad guys. So, let’s just have the citizens duke it out in the streets. Somebody’s bound to get the bad guy.
Oh, and here’s #3. Bury our dead and live with it. It’s the price we pay for freedom and democracy. Let’s keep making more guns.
zeke
December 20th, 2012
9:56 am
10-4!
Kyle Wingfield
December 20th, 2012
9:58 am
Moderation, begun last night, has now been turned off.
Buzz Belle
December 20th, 2012
10:01 am
Haha. I thought your blog went up at 5:00 this morning (wondered why you were up so early!). I also wondered if everybody had abandoned you.
Sorry about that UGA game. (You were going to ban me forever) but if it helps, I am also a ND fan, so maybe we can get Bama back for you.
zinc
December 20th, 2012
10:08 am
Kyle…I agree in concept. I don’t think gun control is a simple as some make it out to be. But neither is the argument against gun control. Yes, Columbine killers didn’t use assault weapons. They were able to get around the AWB and use ‘everyday’ firearms. But just as the pro-gun lobby likes to claim the world would be safer if more people had guns, maybe….just maybe the impact at Columbine was lessened because the killers could get more powerful weapons. Just maybe.
For me the gun control issue boils down to a few areas that CAN be addressed. 1. An accurate, mandated registry of all guns (it will take a while). 2. Close loopholes allowing gun 2 gun sales, it has to be tracked, 3. Stricter punishments for gun owners who are careless with their weapons. If your weapon is used in a murder (like the school), I think you DO own some of the responsibility for not securing your weapons properly, 4. Eliminate of high powered (definition tbd) guns and magazines that serve no purpose other than to kill and maim.
These are just a start. I am pro-second amendment. I have owned rifles, shotguns and a pistol. All for recreational purposes I think there is a certain line that needs to be drawn on guns. It will be unfair to some, but in the end, something needs to be done.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
December 20th, 2012
10:14 am
amx: Maybe the NRA can do something.
——————–
Maybe parents can do something. Like instill a sense of self control in their children. Like establishing the idea of boundaries for their children. Like cultivating a respect for life in their children.
That would be hard though. So much easier to scream for the politicians to “do something”.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
10:16 am
Disappearing comments?
H.E. Pennypacker
December 20th, 2012
10:16 am
This age old tactic of using anecdotes to say we can’t stop every gun crime so why even try is one of the most common straw man arguments out there. No one is saying restrictions will stop all gun crime, simply that common sense restrictions will reduce what is the highest gun crime rate in a developed country in the entire world. Every peer reviewed study reflects this disparity in U.S. gun violence and at least a correlation between higher gun ownership and violence, (not counting discredited studies cited by this very columnist earlier this week).
Once again, the only valid argument one can make is that the current level of violence and death are necessary byproducts in satisfying the requirements of the second amendment. The Supreme Court has already stated that reasonable restrictions can be applied in interpreting the second amendment and we as a society must come together and decide if additional restrictions are a fair tradeoff for what all credible research indicates will be a payoff of fewer gun deaths.
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2012
10:18 am
Adrian – “The military, the police and milita should have guns, not individuals”
That is absolutely correct.
It’s also absolutely correct to say that, in this country filled with phallic challenged men, it will never happen.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
December 20th, 2012
10:18 am
We know that some of these mass shootings are copycats and/or driven by the sick need for fame our culture so highly values. So here’s a modest proposal: Let’s prosecute anyone who publicizes the name or likeness of the shooter and break the cycle.
If it prevents one child’s death, wouldn’t it be the right thing to do?
Just Saying..
December 20th, 2012
10:22 am
Some may find the comparisons in this chart, from today’s NT Times, useful:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/blow-on-guns-america-stands-out.html?hp
Del
December 20th, 2012
10:27 am
Well the gun control stupids are out in force and gun control stupidity will prevail during the Biden commission. The left wing will do anything and everything to avoid focusing the root causes of these tragedies like violence in movies, on television or contained in violent video games. Those products along with gangster rap that glorifies violence is off limits to the left because it infringes on free speech. Mental health will not be sufficiently addressed beyond lip service because of our culture of political correctness. The easy way out although it won’t address the root cause of these tragic events is to infringe on the rights of millions of law abiding collectors, target shooters and sportsman with feel good legislation banning firearms along with onerous restrictions on firearms generally.
Kyle Wingfield
December 20th, 2012
10:31 am
Yes, Aesop, when all you do is attack other commenters, your comments may well disappear.
H.E. Pennypacker
December 20th, 2012
10:35 am
Del,
That all sounds great, but do you have any data that supports your assertion that mental health and video games are the cause of the great disparity in U.S. gun violence and mass shootings?
I would be willing to suggest that every other developed country is less violent because they better treat their mentally ill, (the brain is like any other organ, it is prone to failure), but they are less able to go to their Mother’s gun cabinet and pull out an AR-15 and act on their rages. Here is a great summation from the below link:
Only an idiot, or an anti-American bigot prepared to maintain that Americans are four times more murderous than Britons, could possibly pretend that no connection exists between those figures and the fact that 300m guns are “out there” in the United States, more than one for every adult..
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21568735-only-drastic-gun-control-could-make-big-difference-small-measures-can-help-bit-newtowns
Dunwoody Granny
December 20th, 2012
10:36 am
The same old gun control answer I keep hearing this week is “Nothing can be done.” And you’re right, I don’t find that comforting.
My dad worked for Lockheed. At some point the company decided its corporate goal would be to build the best, most reliable planes in the world. So they began a program called Zero Defects with the aim of producing planes with, well, zero defects coming off the line. How many parts are in a plane like the C5A? Hundreds of thousands? How can you ever imagine building a plane that has absolutely no mistakes, absolutely nothing wrong with it?
The thing is, you certainly can’t build such a plane if you don’t imagine it.
I work for a power company. We have lots of employees whose jobs involve inherently risky activities. They do a lot of driving. They go tromping through heavy underbrush full of snakes and bone-snapping holes. They work in high places. They work with heavy equipment. They work, yes, with electricity. The company decided that any accident in which an employee was hurt or injured was one too many. It instituted a program called Target Zero, an intense focus on safety. Although we haven’t entirely reached the goal of no accidents, we’ve cut the number of accidents substantially.
Yes, it’s probably unreasonable to think America can ever reach a point where no one is killed by guns. But we will certainly never get there by declaring the problem intractable and doing nothing. The annual death rate from vehicle-related accidents in this country is 36K+. The annual death rate from guns is 31K+. Considering vehicles are essential in daily life — to transport people and goods — while guns are not, I think the number of gun deaths is a problem.
I don’t think there’s any one thing that will be the answer. I think we’ll have to chip away at this problem from a number of different angles. But we’ll never get anywhere if we just keep rejecting all solutions because none of them is perfect.
MarkV
December 20th, 2012
10:38 am
While Kyle’s article might be called relatively reasonable, there is still enough of inconsistencies and dubious arguments to comment on.
“The year was 1999, amid a decade-long ban on “assault weapons,” those firearms defined by nothing more than the minds of legislators who drafted the ban on them. “
Here Kyle repeats the ridiculous argument, made on this blog before by others, that the (ignorant) legislators “defined” the assault weapons when they “drafted the ban.” Actually, such technical definitions are made by professionals, who also have the major role in “drafting” such legislation.
Kyle’s follows up,
“Indeed, the main characteristic common to the weapons banned then seems to be the likelihood one might have seen a similar weapon in a shoot-em-up, kill-em-up movie — an implicit nod to the overriding impact of our entertainment culture.”
can only be taken as a tongue-in-cheek, otherwise it would have to be called ridiculous.
Another argument, that some mass killings (such as Columbine) have been executed with arms other than assault weapons is only a notch above the idiocies expressed on the blog earlier, such as that the Newtown murderer could have used bare hands. Even if there had been no mass killing with assault weapons, have we so little reasoning ability that we would have to wait until it happened? Are no instruments and substances of death and destruction banned even if they have not caused mass killings of children?
(It would be interesting to see Rafe’s take on this issue, after he went on the very outer limb claiming that what was possible also was probable.)
MarkV
December 20th, 2012
10:41 am
Del @ 10:27 am
“Well the gun control stupids are out in force and gun control stupidity will prevail during the Biden commission. “
It is gratifying to see that we have clairvoyants commenting on this blog.
LaKeisha Jackson
December 20th, 2012
10:46 am
Have you ever noticed that…the same people who squawk the loudest about how we need to make sure that the mentally deranged can’t get their hands on firearms…are the same people who squawk the loudest about how we must let the mentally handicapped kids be mainstreamed with the normal kids so they won’t feel bad?
Del
December 20th, 2012
10:47 am
H.E.P,
The data is available all you need to do is examine the common profiles of the perpetrators of these mass murders. Lanza was consumed with violent video games as were others who we’re addicted to various forms of violent video products. Their mental profiles are similar. You mention 300 million guns in the U.S. population, how do you think legislation can be crafted to prevent underground trafficking of so called and mislabled assault weapons along with various accessories? Unless we focus the root causes of these tragic killings, they’ll still occur and no amount of gun control legislation will curtail it.
A dad
December 20th, 2012
10:48 am
Having read the above posts, why don’t we, for once, for the sake of decency, and to honor those beautiful children and brave adults whose lives were tragically and senselessly taken in Newton, try and engage in some honest, intelligent discussion about what to do about guns? For the record, I am conservative. I own guns. I have never shot anyone. I could never think of shotting anyone unless it were to stop them from seriously harming or killing my family or anotehr individual. The problem here, folks, is not guns. It’s us. All the statistics about countries and guns and gun-related violence can be spun this way and that to achieve whatever end the quoter wishes. Let’s start close to home with Kennesaw. Everyone there has to own a gun but Kennesaw is not some open season, wild wild west city. Matter of fact, someone please let us know the last time anyone was shot in Kennesaw. So that starts nibbling away at the position guns are bad. Guns are a product, a tool, a thing. Even fully loaded, safety lock/no safety lock, automatic, semi-automatic, 30-round magazine or single shot, a gun requires an actor to place it into motion. That is a fact folks. A starting point. Yes, the simplest solution seems to be take away all guns. “only the police and military should have guns” or something to that effect. Folks, the U.S. is not the only manufacturer of guns. Please admit that criminals do not buy their guns from sporting goods stores. As for gun shows with no background check, yes, I think we ought to look at that practice, but I stray. I think everyone will admit to some degree that society has changed, especially if you’ve got a number of decades under your belt. We live in a culture of violence fostered to create profit. Gangster rap and the attendant lifestyle – dress like one, carry a gun and shoot anyone who “disses” you, even pull a gun at the slightest provacation to get “respect”. Video games and movies with graphic depictions of being shot and body counts that stagger the imagination (case in both, both the Columbine shooters and this Lanza maniac watched ultra-violent video games. Coincidence?). And finally, yes, taking God and prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, Christmas (it might offend someone), the Ten Commandments (someone please tell me which one of the 10 is really that bad) out of our schools. These are merely symptoms of a decaying society, and Newton, Columbine, Aurora, etc. are the result. Mental health should be a major focus, as in not stigmatizing but rather seeking to understand and identify those who are at risk. What are the answers? Start first with identifying what are the problems, the precursors, the indicators. Guess all I’m arguing for is not an over the top reaction (ban all guns, post police or military in all our schools, lock up the loonies) but to use this tragedy as otivation to enter into honest and thoughful (intelligent would be nice, but we are talking about DC) discussion about this very real probelm. And for tonight, regardless of political ideology, religious affiliation or belief/non-belief, race, creed color, orientation, whatever, everyone, all of us, hug your child tonight. Look in their eyes, tell them you love them. Talk with them. Listen to them. Turn off the tv and spend time with them. Invest in them. And if we do that as a nation, as a culture, perhaps such tragedies as Newton, Aurora, Columbine, Oklahoma City, etc. may not be repeated. Imagine….
CC
December 20th, 2012
10:48 am
This is a very, very good column, Kyle, and there have been some excellent comments posted. The problem isn’t the guns and the solution is not stricter gun control or the banning of private ownership of weapons. It is far too easy for many people to blame object(s) for our failures as parents, role models and as a society.
The people who would attempt to convince you that guns are the issue would just as gladly sell you oceanfront property in Arkansas.
Dusty
December 20th, 2012
10:53 am
Very thoughtful introduction today, Kyle. Seems you would like us to THINK of solutions. I”ll try.
But first I think we should judge the present situation. There are many gun laws already in place for protection. We cannot get rid of all weapons.
Few mentally ill people are a threat to society. Many of them simply withdraw away into a quiet world of their own or kill themselves in despair. Some of them are from the military suffering from wounds of war physicaly and mentally. All are suffering people who do not need the blame of assassinations placed upon them.
So now #1–SECURITY.
We have improved securithy for air travel to a fine point. School systems should have security systems just as effective as air travel. Surely experts can develop systems which stop intruders from buildings in every entrace including windows. It can be done and will be on spot protection, not catching someone at a gun show or stealing home protection guns. It could be developed with local police and school departments.
Let us not waste time on historical “protections” and new laws. We should advance immediately with electronic engineers and security specialists. Are not our children just as important as airline passsengers?
1)We now know how how to get people safely on airplanes without firearms or weapons. I think we should study those procedures andget children in school safely.
Americans want to keep their guns and they have the right. Enforce the many laws already in place to
MarkV
December 20th, 2012
10:56 am
Curiously, Kyle asks the right question (”As important as it is for us to attempt to rebuild the American family, can we wait the years or perhaps generations such an endeavor might consume, when another mass killing could happen today?”), adds the right fact (“Whatever a killer’s motivation, guns seem to be his means of choice.”), and then makes the wrong conclusion: “Better to address that, right?” (sarcasm). “As keenly interested as I am in preventing the next mass public shooting, I see little reason to find comfort in gun control.”
The fact that what Kyle calls “rebuilding the American family,” or changing what Kyle calls shortly “why,” and others might call changing the culture of violence, would take years or perhaps generations, does not lessen the importance of doing it, but certainly is not a good reason reason to abandon what can be done more quickly on the issue of “how.”
Dusty
December 20th, 2012
10:56 am
Well, I missed the my last word. Suspense!!
ClydeFr0g
December 20th, 2012
10:57 am
Make It Happen;
“Why defend guns? In Japan in 2008 11 people were killed by firearms. In US in 2008 12,000 people were killed by firearms. Murder rate in Japan per 100,000 is 0.3 in the US 4.2.”
Did you see what happened in New Orleans when Katrina hit? And did you see what happened in Japan when they were hit with a tsunami, earthquakes, and a nuclear disaster?
Notice any differences in the way the people behaved? If not, you are blind or in denial.
If so, do you think that has one single thing to do with guns being legal or not?
Is it *possible* that there are some key cultural differences between the US and Japan that can’t simply be explained away with guns being legal or not? For example, Japan is almost exclusively populated by Japanese while here in America we have an extremely diverse population.
MarkV
December 20th, 2012
11:04 am
While I disagree with Dusty more often than not, I fully agree with her idea of an important part of the solution, as far as schools are concerned: improved security. Security based mostly on technology. In the short run, I would even support armed guards, before the other security techniques can be perfected.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
11:05 am
Guns? Ok…..Just don’t take my rocket launchers and tanks.
K, thanks. Bye
yuzeyurbrane
December 20th, 2012
11:08 am
Unfortunately for your reasoning Kyle, the old ideas to which you refer have worked quite well in other industrialized democracies. The problem is we have never given them a good faith try here. I recommend that Kyle and those who might be interested in serious solutions read Nick Kristoff’s column in today’s NY Times.
quick work break
December 20th, 2012
11:08 am
Surprised you brought up Columbine as an example of how the assault weapons ban didn’t prevent a tragedy. But Columbine was the exception to the overall clear decline in mass shootings during that period. In an alternate universe where there was no assault weapons ban term, the trends would make it logical that there would be an unnamed number of lives that would have been lost. Was the ban worth it to save them? I think so.
Politico
December 20th, 2012
11:10 am
Del
Not a huge control advocate but need to ask you something.
You don’t seem to want much if anything done in terms of gum control because a very small percentage of those who own guns do something stupid with them, but want something done about violent movies and games because a very small percentage of people who watch them do something stupid.
Is that right?
So you are for tightening 1st amendment rights, just not the 2nd?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
11:10 am
What’s interesting is that the US is still really just the Old West.
We’ve added more people and faster transportation/communication. But we are still “pioneers” and “outlaws” and “snake-oil salesmen”, “travelin’ preachers”…(Oh, I guess that is covered under ’snake-oil salesmen”.).
And we’ve added faster shooting guns and more guns in general.
Dusty
December 20th, 2012
11:11 am
ClydeFrug
I disagree with your premise that diversity is the cause of gun “illegality”. In fact, I see no connection whatsoever.
The diversity of Americans has brought forth one of the greatest countries in the world. It is a well of new energy, ideas, and appreciation of our freedoms.
We need protection ideas, not discrimination.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
December 20th, 2012
11:12 am
Awesome! Now let’s hope it works both ways….
The problem with the mental health angle is that the libs will use it as an excuse to disarm everyone, they’ve got lists of legal gun owners, courtesy of the background checks. They’ll just put all that into a database and the next time you get stopped for being 5 mph over the limit, let’s commit this looney to a mental institution.
Nope, we live in a world where force is the only real clear cut solution to those who wish to harm the many. What good is it for them, load up with all the hardware and ammo only to be blown away as soon as they walk through the door?
We got Air Marshalls now we need Hallway Sheriffs.
resno2
December 20th, 2012
11:13 am
Knee-jerk feel good legislation is not going to do anything except put a feather in the cap of those championing it, and letting it forever be known who wrote it by having it named after them. Obama want’s the solution on his desk by January, and he’s appoint the same guy (Biden) who worked on the last ’scary looking gun’ bill to make this one happen. What’s the rush? How about do it right instead of trying to force something through that will only make the anti-gun advocates happy, and likely do NOTHING to solve the problem.
SBinF
December 20th, 2012
11:20 am
Also, who’s going to pay for this expanded mental health treatment? We already have a major political party in this country that doesn’t even believe that access to healthcare should be a universal right.
Ralph Christian
December 20th, 2012
11:22 am
Assault (i.e., military-grade weapons) do not belong in the hands of ordinary citizens. They are not legitimate weapons for protection or self-defense but are designed to kill or maim in numbers. After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms. Read the results of this action in the following article. COMMON-SENSE GUN CONTROL LAWS WORK!
http://m.injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.full
ClydeFr0g
December 20th, 2012
11:23 am
Dusty;
“I disagree with your premise that diversity is the cause of gun “illegality”. In fact, I see no connection whatsoever.
The diversity of Americans has brought forth one of the greatest countries in the world. It is a well of new energy, ideas, and appreciation of our freedoms.
We need protection ideas, not discrimination.”
That WASN’T my premise. I didn’t say that diversity is the cause of gun “illegality” (what does that even mean?). I made a very clear example to show how the cultures of Japan and the US are very different so comparing gun violence in Japan vs the US and blaming it only on guns is a false correlation.
I for one believe that diversity is America’s greatest strength and the number one reason we have become the most successful nation in the history of the world, but you cannot deny that there is also far more tension in a diverse population as opposed to a homogenous population.
You are basically looking for an excuse to jump down someone’s throat so you read with tainted vision.
Now, talking about discrimination….
I see comments about requiring insurance for guns just like cars (incidentally cars are not a right granted by our Constitution, guns ARE) and various measures to make guns very expensive either through fees, taxes, etc. This will have two effects: make guns only legally available to the wealthy (and thus denying lower-income people their right to defend themselves, their families, and their homes) and driving lower-income people to purchase weapons illegally so they can afford them. It will NOT prevent criminals from obtaining weapons.
Dearie
December 20th, 2012
11:23 am
Excellent column Kyle.
A Dad 10:48 am ~ enjoyed and agreed with your comment
JamVet
December 20th, 2012
11:24 am
To think that we can effectively lock down all of our schools, places of worship, work and entertainment and everywhere else against these sociopaths is sheer folly.
We are arguably the most free society in the history of mankind.
And that includes an enormous upside AND down.
The fact is that we have a violence addicted society in this country and the power brokers in the violence industries will NEVER allow any type of effective screening of gun owners.
So get used to more slaughters…
JDW
December 20th, 2012
11:24 am
@Flynn..,”What’s interesting is that the US is still really just the Old West.”
I would argue that we are worse off…what was it the new Sheriff in town did to “clean up” in the Old West…why he banned guns of course.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
11:26 am
You can always buy your kid body armor from http://www.amendment2.com