Okay, I’ll Comment On The Mass Murder

I want to say up front that I do not own a gun, and there are no guns in my house/home/life. I do not feel that I need one. That is my choice. I am totally against the government telling people what they can own, what they can put in their bodies, whether they can have an abortion, what drugs they can take, who they can marry and on and on….

Let me be clear here. Piers Morgan is a complete dick.

The argument for gun ownership does not always make sense, but the argument against it always makes no sense.

The idea that there are gun free zones does make them targets. Nobody seems willing to discuss apples to apples on this issue. I feel safer knowing that grandma could and would shoot the bad guy in the back of the head if someone were to go postal in a shopping mall.

Yes, it does not make intuitive sense but if there are to be guns, and there will be, it makes sense that honest citizens have the right and the means to protect themselves. Piers argues a stupid argument… that regulation and prohibition will fix the problem. Prohibition has NEVER worked for anything… EVER.

Prohibition creates black markets. This shooter did not obey the law. Future such wack-jobs will also not obey the law and if there is a black market they will use it. Prohibition will not solve the problem. There is no single solution answer, only options to try to see if they work. Different cultures which are gun free are not applicable to this situation no matter how much you might want them to be. Most of the gun owners in America are Christians. Work that one out. Prohibition does not work. Please work to find an answer, but do not suggest that laws will fix it.

So please stop thinking that prohibition will fix the problem.

  1. “Prohibition has NEVER worked for anything… EVER.”

    Generally i agree with this, but gun regulation did work in Australia. From what i understand its also worked across the UK. As an outsider looking in i can only say the US obsession with weapons is as baffling as it is quite evidently unhealthy.

    Either way, i do hope you guys pull through this as a stronger nation.

    • Well, it will get figured out. One thing I know is that Americans will fight with each other until there is a common threat at which point they will all turn and fight that threat and there will be peace for a bit till they remember what the previous squabble was about.

    • Joe ‘Blondie’ Manco
    • December 21st, 2012

    As an Australian I admit I’m not very close to this debate personally. This is clearly and uniquely an American problem. If you were saying these things about the state of Australia I would be in complete disagreement with you. Gun enthusiasm is not part of the Australian mindset, and gun control/regulation is something that most of us are happy with. Frankly I’d be very nervous in public if I knew most people around me were concealing a gun.

    However, trying to view the situation from an American’s shoes gets a little trickier. On the one hand things have gotten so out of control that a simple prohibition law would do little (or make things worse, possibly) but on the other hand surely a more gun-free society should be the ideal?

    In that case, why not use other free and democratic Western countries as an example? Their stability and overall happiness are often referred to when mentioning their lack of religiosity, legalised euthanasia, gay marriage rights etc so why not in the context of gun control?

    My only argument for gun onwership is that guns are a part of mankind’s history and in the sense that they can be appreicated for their historical value, construction, aesthetics etc. they are as valid a collectible as any other.

    My 2 cents, for what they are worth.

    • Thank you for commenting. It is an American problem. The wild west only happened here. The question of gun ownership is addressed from the very beginning(-ish) and will remain a part of American culture for a long time. It would be difficult to remove every gun from every house/building without making things worse. The conservative and Republican groups would clearly not have any part of it. It would create a black market and be as difficult to get rid of as the war on drugs has been. It is true that criminals won’t obey those laws anyway. School shootings are clearly in violation of the law. Asking everyone to be nice won’t work either. Do we need assault rifles? Probably not. Criminals are banned from owning them and it is illegal to use any gun to kill people. Will banning assault rifles fix the problem? No, it stands some small chance of minimizing damage in such cases, but it won’t make the problem go away. The culture has to change before gun control will do any real good, then you don’t need gun control anyway. I’m quite happy in the society where I live and it might be estimated that as many as 1 in 3 or 4 people are carrying a gun where ever I go. I have never seen them, but you find out that so and so carries etc. There is no gratuitous gun play or show. It’s like a big secret most of the time. In the county where I live there has been no gun crime for several years. I can find only two instances, and one was a homeowner protecting life/property from a break in, and the other was a jealous lover issue.

      That is maybe not typical, but that it is possible indicates rather strongly that gun ownership is not the problem, guns are just tools in this way. It is culture and anger/depression etc. that lead to misuse of dangerous tools. (guns, knives, cars, et al)

      I agree that there is a problem, but it is not the tools. It’s not simply the USA either http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html

      Ask the question: If this guy had not gotten an assault rifle, but had 2 revolvers and a back pack full of quick loaders would the damage have been tolerable? If he only killed 12, would that have been better? No? What if he was only able to kill 4 kids with a machete? Would that be acceptable? There are many who think a more acceptable answer is the criminal being shot in the head before he gets to attack anyone. If you can’t have police on every street corner, letting responsible people carry their personal weapons is a substitute. That’s the thought anyway. There are places where this is shown to be effective though I doubt it would always work out well 100% of the time. It’s a complicated problem and there is not one single easy answer. Humans, it appears, are a violent species. I think that last part is the part that needs to change. What are the ways to solve that problem?

  2. It is my understanding that civilian gun ownership was preserved, at the time, as a means to keep the government in line. Naturally now,the government’s arsenal of weaponry could not be opposed by the weapons owned by individual gun owners.

    • While that is true, have you seen the problem America has with limiting the number of big SUVs and trucks? They tried to take away alcohol and are trying to take away drugs. Americans don’t really respond well to that kind of thing. I think that some gun limitations and lots of education is an effective combination, or should be. There is no quick easy answer though.

  3. Okay here we go. I own several guns, I also own a Bushmaster which I bought at our local wal mart, that is correct. I have a concealed permit.
    I have shot a man who tried to car jack me, he lost his left kidney. He was on parole , only been out of prison for six months.
    Morgan is a dick.He should keep his mouth shut.

    I am truly sorry those small children lost their lives, if I could fix it I would.
    The boy had mental problems, his mother new it and she did nothing, although she was going to have him committed but for what ever reason she did not. She paid the price as well.
    Things like the mass shooting this does not happen often, and I am not sure if it could of been prevented no matter the safety..

    Parents are not allowed to be parents any longer, parents can no longer discipline their children. Most parents would rather buy their kids an Xbox, or give them money to get out of the house. Kids are driving Hummers to high school today.
    I do not own a 30 round clip for my bushmaster. I carry a 44 magnum when I am out. in 15 years I have used it once, during the car jacking, and I have been in altercations and have never pulled my 44 or even thought about it.
    The Government does not have the right to tell me what I can own and what I cannot.
    What I am against are the gun shows where anyone can buy a gun without a back ground check.

    Why do I own a bushmaster well I wanted an AR 15 but the Bushmaster was much cheaper and a better gun for the money. All my mags are ten round clips, I see no reason for a thirty, but to each their own.

    The killings at that school could of been prevented, had the mother taking steps long ago. She knew her son was ill and unstable.

    • You are right, though I think you make one or two common problem points. There are those that will tell you it could have been prevented if it were not so easy to get guns. I think that idea is wrong and that whether he killed 20 with a gun or 2 with a knife, arguing about the weapon is missing the point entirely.

      Parents are allowed to be parents, but limiting the violence of parenting has shown that nearly no-one is good at parenting. This has always been true, but pure violence brought with it a certain respect for authority and the way things are. It’s unavoidable in that scenario. When you have to teach it rather than instill it, things are different.

      There are rogue random sick people everywhere. They are broken and need help. Their weapon of choice is of no matter. The people who equivocate on this issue are trying to tell you that two deaths are okay if it prevents 20 others from being dead. This is bullshit from start to finish. It is not okay that anyone has died and the real problem started years before any guns were in the picture. This is what most people don’t want to admit. Shit happens, people are broke, and tragedy will continue to happen no matter what we do unless we can find a way to spot and help those people who are broken. A prime example is the soldiers returning from war with PTSD and nobody is really trying to help them. They are bombs that could go off at any time and nobody gives a shit because it costs money. This mother loved her son more than she loved those people who died. That is all that can be said of this. Shit happens. Hiding all the guns won’t make it not happen. They want to limit the damage by hiding the guns so the broken mind has to use knives or something. Why not limit the damage by lifting the gun ban around schools? To me it is six of one and two threes of another. In an ideal world no one would need guns. We’ll never live in that world. Not those of us who are alive to read this right now.

      Nietzsche was more right than wrong and nobody wants to hear it. We do not live in utopia. Shit happens. Deal with it. We are about 6 meals away from chaos. For all that we’ve accomplished, if you shut down the science or machinery we will descend into chaos and violence. These shootings are simply reminders that we are not quite as advanced as we would like to think. You only need a web browser to find stories of people who will kill to get a next meal.

      I suppose that anti-gun folk would rather the culprit poison the school food? Kill hundreds rather than use a gun to kill 20+ people. Arguing over the number of victims and weapons used is inane useless bullshit. The problem was and is not the gun, it is that there are broken people everywhere. They will use the weapon they think most useful to their purpose and will not obey laws in the process. Banning guns creates a black market and it will get used by broken people to do as they wish… no matter what good intentions anyone has. Pretending you can stop people from being broken is just hiding your head in the sand. Shame on those that do that.

      • Bravo Bravo I agree with you 1005

        • I don’t like that people were killed. I’d shoot the bastard myself, but things are as they are. Mulling this over with talking heads and riotous anger will not fix the problem. I have no patience for those that are speaking loudly and are not willing to address the real issue. Free health care could have prevented this. Removing the stigma of needing ‘help’ could have prevented this. The very people that want to hide the guns as a solution are the ones that want to prevent people from having access to the health care that could have prevented this in the first place. This is what happens when you give the airwaves over to idiots and tell people to trust them. The very sad truth of all this is that the shooters were/are broken people who need help. Not because they chose to kill people but because they are broken in the first place. If you ignore the problem until other people get hurt who is at fault? Is it the shooter or the society that prevented that person from getting free help in the first place?

          Can you tell I’m tired of these idiots claiming to know the answer and that the answer is blaming the tool? It’s the same crowd that think women deserve to get raped if they don’t dress like Mennonites.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: