The (armed) elephant in the room
After much thought, I’m going to tackle a rather sensitive subject: guns.
In recent local news, a middle school student was shot and killed by her abusive father; the next week a high school student fatally shot himself accidentally. The president cries every time he talks about gun control, and the right-wingers scream “Second Amendment!” as they clutch their armories like mothers with their children.
I can’t tell you in one or two words where my opinion lies, because it’s complicated. I’ll refer back to this loveable old chestnut:
...because the truth doesn’t lie solely in opinions that simply state “ban guns” or “every kid should have a gun.” You can’t look at a CNN graph and surmise that guns are the only problem, or even the main problem, that the US has.
It’s far bigger than that. Compared to the rest of the world, the US also has a problem with teen pregnancy, homelessness, car accidents, incarceration, pollution (we’re second to China), and poverty (compared to other developed nations). We’re also consistently above average when it comes to infant mortality rates, fire fatalities, and reported sexual assaults. Does this mean that we should more tightly regulate money, cars, and sex? (Uhm... don’t answer that.)
The common thread here is a problem with our society as a whole. A well-adjusted society should be able to own and use firearms responsibly. A maladjusted society uses this tool inappropriately. Firearms are extremely helpful in certain cases such as hunting and national defense. True, they are more often used for homicide or suicide...but while they’re an easy option most of the time, they aren’t the only weapon used to kill.
The question isn’t “why aren’t we doing something about the guns;” the question is, “why do many people place such little value on human life?” What is so damned great about ISIS that makes people want to join them? Why do people enjoy movies like Kill Bill, shows like Dexter, and games like Grand Theft Auto? Our society is so flooded with depictions of violence that as a culture we think nothing of it.
If you take away all of the guns, those who are intent on killing will find another way: knives, hands/feet, blunt objects, and bombs. Would dying at the hands of some lunatic with a pipe bomb be less a tragedy than dying at the hands of a lunatic with a machine gun?
Another thing I’d like to point out is that “gun control” is not the same as banning all guns or even certain types of guns. The goal of gun control is to keep firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. But there are multiple problems with the current system: first, this assumes that people are obtaining guns domestically by legal methods; second, it assumes that the person is obtaining the gun for him/herself and not another person (intentionally or accidentally); third, it assumes that the buyer’s prior history of nonviolent activity indicates that nothing is going to happen in the future. It also assumes that the system responsible for tracking criminals and lunatics is uncompromised, up to date, and actually being used at the time of the sale.
That’s...a lot to go wrong.
Let me back up a moment and return to an earlier statement about taking away all of the guns. We both know that won’t happen and can’t happen, because a.) they’re already out there en masse and it would be impossible to confiscate/recover all of them; b.) only a fool would think that a government which completely bans firearms would not hoard some for themselves; c.) gun manufacturers, as well as retailers, make a pretty penny on gun sales, and so have very deep pockets and dedicated lobbyists; and d.) gun rights advocates like the NRA also have deep pockets and dedicated lobbyists. Funny thing about lobbyists: they are folks who are paid by a corporation or organization to petition congress to pass laws that are favorable to that corporation/organization (or to dispute bills that are unfavorable to the same). The latter two make money hand over fist and use a small percentage to ensure that they continue to do so by manipulating the lawmakers of the country.
It would be great if the solution were as simple as educating people about the actual destructive power of firearms - real life damage, not Hollywood damage - and requiring that a person desiring to purchase a firearm must complete an educational course (at that person’s expense) that includes a practical segment proving that s/he knows how to use (as well as store) the weapon appropriately, properly, and safely. Or if we could impose stricter laws regarding the manufacture and sale of ammunition and its components. But the sad fact is that until we find a way to turn around our whole society, we’re just going to keep running in this same circle.
In recent local news, a middle school student was shot and killed by her abusive father; the next week a high school student fatally shot himself accidentally. The president cries every time he talks about gun control, and the right-wingers scream “Second Amendment!” as they clutch their armories like mothers with their children.
I can’t tell you in one or two words where my opinion lies, because it’s complicated. I’ll refer back to this loveable old chestnut:
...because the truth doesn’t lie solely in opinions that simply state “ban guns” or “every kid should have a gun.” You can’t look at a CNN graph and surmise that guns are the only problem, or even the main problem, that the US has.
It’s far bigger than that. Compared to the rest of the world, the US also has a problem with teen pregnancy, homelessness, car accidents, incarceration, pollution (we’re second to China), and poverty (compared to other developed nations). We’re also consistently above average when it comes to infant mortality rates, fire fatalities, and reported sexual assaults. Does this mean that we should more tightly regulate money, cars, and sex? (Uhm... don’t answer that.)
The common thread here is a problem with our society as a whole. A well-adjusted society should be able to own and use firearms responsibly. A maladjusted society uses this tool inappropriately. Firearms are extremely helpful in certain cases such as hunting and national defense. True, they are more often used for homicide or suicide...but while they’re an easy option most of the time, they aren’t the only weapon used to kill.
The question isn’t “why aren’t we doing something about the guns;” the question is, “why do many people place such little value on human life?” What is so damned great about ISIS that makes people want to join them? Why do people enjoy movies like Kill Bill, shows like Dexter, and games like Grand Theft Auto? Our society is so flooded with depictions of violence that as a culture we think nothing of it.
If you take away all of the guns, those who are intent on killing will find another way: knives, hands/feet, blunt objects, and bombs. Would dying at the hands of some lunatic with a pipe bomb be less a tragedy than dying at the hands of a lunatic with a machine gun?
Another thing I’d like to point out is that “gun control” is not the same as banning all guns or even certain types of guns. The goal of gun control is to keep firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. But there are multiple problems with the current system: first, this assumes that people are obtaining guns domestically by legal methods; second, it assumes that the person is obtaining the gun for him/herself and not another person (intentionally or accidentally); third, it assumes that the buyer’s prior history of nonviolent activity indicates that nothing is going to happen in the future. It also assumes that the system responsible for tracking criminals and lunatics is uncompromised, up to date, and actually being used at the time of the sale.
That’s...a lot to go wrong.
Let me back up a moment and return to an earlier statement about taking away all of the guns. We both know that won’t happen and can’t happen, because a.) they’re already out there en masse and it would be impossible to confiscate/recover all of them; b.) only a fool would think that a government which completely bans firearms would not hoard some for themselves; c.) gun manufacturers, as well as retailers, make a pretty penny on gun sales, and so have very deep pockets and dedicated lobbyists; and d.) gun rights advocates like the NRA also have deep pockets and dedicated lobbyists. Funny thing about lobbyists: they are folks who are paid by a corporation or organization to petition congress to pass laws that are favorable to that corporation/organization (or to dispute bills that are unfavorable to the same). The latter two make money hand over fist and use a small percentage to ensure that they continue to do so by manipulating the lawmakers of the country.
It would be great if the solution were as simple as educating people about the actual destructive power of firearms - real life damage, not Hollywood damage - and requiring that a person desiring to purchase a firearm must complete an educational course (at that person’s expense) that includes a practical segment proving that s/he knows how to use (as well as store) the weapon appropriately, properly, and safely. Or if we could impose stricter laws regarding the manufacture and sale of ammunition and its components. But the sad fact is that until we find a way to turn around our whole society, we’re just going to keep running in this same circle.