Some thoughts on gun control
Well, my usual "blame the Democrats for the Republicans" schtick isn't gaining much of an audience these days, so I thought I would press a topic that did have an audience; gun control. I don't think this is a pivotal issue for the human race at this time; capitalism is more important as something to debate right now.
There are plenty of situations, historical as well as present-day, in which owning a gun would be a good thing. If you were a resident of Nicaragua under the regime of Anastasio Somoza y Debayle (ruling from 1967 to 1979), for instance, it would be good to have a gun. The regime of the Somoza family was brutal and corrupt; at some point the opposition FSLN recognized the necessity of armed overthrow. So, yeah, if you lived in rural Nicaragua and your life was threatened by Somocistas or "Contras," you'd want a gun.
Similarly if you were Black and your life was threatened by neo-Confederates in the South, you'd want a gun too. There are plenty of examples of this sort of thing, as I said in the last paragraph -- situations in which you would need a gun because people around you have guns and they want to kill you. There is, then, such a thing a gun rights, but gun rights are historically and geographically contingent, dependent upon situations in which self-defense meant or means gun ownership.
If there are no guns anywhere in your environment, however, then there is no need for gun ownership or, indeed, gun rights. Creating such situations is the intention of gun control. To some extent gun control has created such situations in, for instance, Australia.
However, the US is the world's biggest weapons dealer and "defense" spender. And so there are a number of pieces available through the Internet (here's the BBC one) claiming that Australian-style gun control wouldn't work in the US. I suppose the reasoning common to those pieces is that people here in the US don't want to give up their guns.
But wouldn't it be nice if the US, y'know, demilitarized? I imagine it would. This idea of American demilitarization is given further credence by the standard arguments against gun control here in the US, which are universally lame and almost always based on the idea that angry white males with guns can be heroes in shoot-outs with other angry white males who kill the defenseless and are thus villains. Thus the counter-proposal that schools should be further militarized to prevent mass shootings. Or the idea floated by our reality TV-star President that we ought to arm the teachers, which Andy Borowitz skewered nicely. And this proposal that the government ought to spend more on "mental health" instead of taking away people's AR-15s (assuming that the school shooters are all deranged and insane) might be worthy of examination, except that the whole society is, in some qualified sense, insane, so yeah. They're just looking for a way of blaming it all on a "few crazies," while keeping the whole society crazy.
So that might be a worthy goal -- demilitarizing America to make it more sane. Big defenders of the Second Amendment in America often serve as evidence of this goal's worthiness, with their silly fantasies of how their gun ownership will amount to anything good. Maybe under the current regime they can go on the "Winning Shootouts With School Shooters" victory tour if that's just what they dream of doing. I suppose that if you're a defender of the Second Amendment you might have an excuse if the home you own is prone to home invasion robberies or if you're Black and live in a gang neighborhood or if you are being targeted by racist cops. I don't see any all-encompassing reason to support gun control, like I said above. But if demilitarizing America makes it more sane, I don't see why not.
At any rate nothing drastic is going to happen, perhaps not without a Constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court decided in 2008 in (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)) that gun ownership for self-defense is one of those "penumbral rights" implied in the Second Amendment, much as the right to an early-term abortion is a "penumbral right" under Roe v. Wade as decided in 1973. Still, in this same DC versus Heller case, the Court decreed:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
So go protesting students -- maybe you will get the sanity you deserve.
![Share](/sites/all/modules/addtoany/images/share_save_171_16.png)
Comments
Gun owner here for sensible gun control
I live in a rural area, and like many, but by no means all, of my neighbors, I own a gun, a shotgun. You see a raccoon doing the hokie pokie in your road at 2 in the afternoon, there's no one to call and you are on your own. Damn straight you take care of it. Too much at stake for humans and animals to do anything else. I am not, and no one in my family is, a hunter. But I've had one car totalled by a deer, and many people round about have been injured in deer vs car encounters. The forests here are being destroyed by exploding deer populations, probably a synergistic climate change effect. Local hunters are responsible and God bless 'em. But no deer hunter needs an AK 47. And no one with a violent history should be able to own a gun. Hum. Now that I think about it, maybe no one who lives in a city should be able to own a gun.
Are you sure your exploding deer populations --
At any rate, ecosystems are typically organized by their predators; see e.g. Cristina Eisenberg's The Wolf's Tooth. This is why it's important to defend animal predators. Rodent poisons which travel up the food chain, for instance, kill off your rodent predators, and so suburbs can end up with serious rat or squirrel problems. If you have a rat or squirrel problem, maybe you want that raccoon around? I'm not sure that's why you have a deer situation, though. I suppose you could kill them and eat them.
"A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy." -- Luigi Mangione
@Cassiodorus It won't matter much
Actually, I have mixed feelings on this subject
Which is probably weird for someone who has never owned nor shot a gun. Well, I did once shoot a paintball gun at a tree (and missed).
The argument we hear from the NRA and gun rights politicians is one of a good guy with a gun can win over a bad guy with a gun. We all know that is pretty much bogus. It reverts back to the wild west mentality. Yeah, let's have shootouts at high noon in the middle of downtown to settle all of our differences. /snark
The second argument I have been reading from conservatives is that if we regulate guns, then the government will eventually take our guns away from us. And then we will have no defense against the tyranny of the government. I honestly believe this is the real fear of the guns rights advocates but one that is unrealistic.
The unrealistic part is not that the government may want to take their guns away from them. But the unrealistic part is that they could defend themselves against a tyrannical government with their guns.
I am very much in favor of gun control. First thing is why does anyone need a gun that can shoot dozens of rounds without reloading? This does not fit the good guy with a gun versus the bad guy with a gun scenario. It is well known among hunters that if you cannot hit your target with a second shot, you have no business hunting. So this does not fit the hunter scenario.
Bottom line, I am for regulating the purchase and licensing of all firearms. Second, any weapon that can fire multiple rounds without reloading should not be sold to the public.
Third, I love the term you have used to describe gun control and that is "demilitarization." Words mean a lot and this term is an excellent starting point to bridge the emotional gap between those who wish some form of gun control and those who believe in none.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Yep, this
"But the unrealistic part is that they could defend themselves against a tyrannical government with their guns."
No gun is going to be able to stop a drone that is dropping tear gas or other chemicals on protesters like the ones that Israel used against the Palestinians this week. Or any of the militarized equipment that is being built just in case people decide that they've had enough. This ship has sailed on us.
I don't think gun control is going to change very much because the problem isn't just having access to them. The discussion that needs to be held is why kids are feeling that they should kill their peers? What has changed since the days when kids had their guns in the back window of their truck and they didn't shoot people. Other countries where people have access to guns aren't experiencing school shootings. Then again they have access to so many social programs that we don't.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
This, exactly!
Yes, gawds forbid we address the social issues that lead to mass shootings and prevent it from happening in the first place!!![Dash 1](https://caucus99percent.com/sites/all/modules/smiley/packs/kolobok/dash1.gif)
(Also, gun humpers tend to get really upset when you suggest that they're a lousy shot if they need a semi-auto for hunting.
)
This shit is bananas.
I'm betting that social issues are a big part of the problem
There weren't many massive shootings a few generations ago that I'm aware of. Not like what's happening these days. Definitely not school shootings. Columbine was the first that I know of. The other thing to look at is how many of the shooters were on antidepressants? One if not both of the columbine shooters were on them as was the kid that did Sandy hook and the one who did the movie theater one. Many antidepressants have a warning not to prescribe them to their age group.
But the way that our society has declined the last couple of decades, I'm thinking that this could be a reason for the shootings. Jmho ..
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
No, you're right.
No, the vast majority of these shootings seem to be young racist white boys, or older racist white men.
I think it was Rick Santorum who said these kids should learn CPR, that would be more effective than the protests. Really, CPR for a (likely fatal!) gunshot wound?! Good grief, why do I have to share a planet with these people??!
This shit is bananas.
@Daenerys
Actually, it just occurred to me that the problem is that they don't want to share the planet with us. Or, apparently, any other unpatented life-forms...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
This is interesting.
There was a very telling graph-type listing on Wiki of US school shootings by year, showing when school shootings started to appear with increasing frequency, how many school shootings occurred each year and whether in the earlier grades, high school or college/university, in some cases, one of each in the same year, but generally not more than one in each of the same 'class' of students, so to speak. Most often, there was one listed, not every year, but overall increasingly closer to this over recent decades.
I'd had that list copied and observations made on a comment I was working on, but at the rate I'm (not, lol) functioning, the thread was dead long before I'd finished; I kept that thread with the comment up for some time, in case another suitable thread to put it on came up, but although FF generally keeps these saved for me, that was one of the 'hold-over' ones that vanished overnight even though another unfinished one might remain on another page. (Many household chemical exposures really mess me up, making everything difficult, and we have people staying who use a lot of artificially scented personal products which are often inescapable even in my room. This doesn't help...)
At any rate, went looking for that list just now, but the 'list of school shootings' and any related Wiki pages I've now found on this are all arranged differently with nothing remotely suitable for tracking the years when this phenomenon began/increased and all else important to easily seeing the patterns is no longer available on anything I can access.
Efforts to get into any older Wiki or other pages potentially having such lists get me automatic redirects elsewhere with (at least two different) pages (having the same set-up but different names) showing various links, one of which looks suitable (which are also difficult to actually back out of) and warnings - purportedly from FF, that the page should not be accessed because of malware which may delete data from my computer - appear. (Quite possibly faked, but some agency - albeit not necessarily 'agency' as in 'spooks' - went to the trouble of setting up redirect pages and who/which I suspect likely has access to a lot of malware. So, not pushing it for what would likely be another faked-up page anyway.)
Naturally, (air freshener/perfume heavily accumulates outside my door, leaking in; able to actually taste it even in here; throat & lungs are fried - shockingly, it turns out that getting adequate air helps with thinking) I do not recall the dates and other data... but do recall that as I went over it at the time, the more strongly I suspected that, once again, the usual suspects - spook or other manipulation of some sort, using the mentally/emotionally vulnerable (and perhaps discouraging preventative action, as we see time and again in these 'terrorist stings' - and policemen huddled outside schools while people die) - may be involved in any number of these incidents. The Psychopaths That Be and their lackeys certainly have no problem killing children as well as adults to achieve agendas, whether power or profit is concerned.
As we know, they work to get and keep people scared, angry and, ideally, incapable of reasoned thought in order to ensure that they're divided and riled up in opposing directions over 'gun rights'/control as a distraction while further stripping human/Constitutional rights and increasing militarization, the further loss of faith in government, and of the principle of public-protective law and order (especially as expressed in public-protective regulation of potential predators), as an institution, to promote the 'dog eat dog/every man for himself/might is right' ideology that best suits those who've stolen most of the 'might' in all areas and need the people to blindly accept this in order to make it stick.
Violence is the first resort of those incapable of anything else - like reason. Naturally, the psychopathic turn first to force, when they feel it serves their purpose, and often just for fun.
Bringing us back here, yet again (Emphasis mine):
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Operation_Gladio
To relinquish control to 'their betters' rather than demanding democracy and a government of, by and for the people with equal rights, treatment and opportunity for all.
Having corrupt elements in government/the judicial system who ignore Constitutional public protections cannot obviate the principle of public-protective law or the inalienable rights of the people; they are contravening Constitutional public protective law, breaking their Oaths of Office, on the upholding of which their legitimacy rests.
TPTB have essentially nothing but propaganda and often-stolen public wealth and power which was never their 'right' to steal; if the people ever stop going along with the con, it's 99 to 1%.
Edit: for one of those sneaky Russian letter-typos; there are probably more of those Source of All Ebil Comma (since Russia is no longer Communist) bastards on here, too...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Drawing a line
There is a line despite the NRA...you can't have a grenade launcher nor an atomic weapon. Where do you draw the line? Seems 30 round clips cross the line...and weapons designed for killing humans....and so on.
Seems to me it is our violent culture and nature. As I said in my essay today, why is it we don't see the relationship between the violent nature of our war (and sports) culture and gun violence. When we are the country perpetrating violence around the world is it a surprise that we reap what we sow? We, by our nature, reflect the society in which we live.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
This comment!
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
The story is not about gun control as much as it is about
gaining control to fix education, healthcare, infrastructure, the redistribution of wealth; the youth movement impresses in this way!
Out of retirement into the breach, again; let's go. Lede on children!
Well --
"A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy." -- Luigi Mangione
Nope.
That's one I'll need you to prove.
Deer don't eat forests.
If you have an exploding deer population, it's highly probable that humans have destroyed the predators.
Yes, it's true that your gardens or flowers may have suffered a high causality rate because of the deer.
But they don't destroy forests.
.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
you can start with the NationalForest Service report in 2004
No one needs to own jewelry or face paint either...
I am a gun owner. The older I get, the more I like the idea of having a loaded gun in my home. The Swiss have high gun ownership, and they don't run around killing each other. In an empire building nation loaded with invading armies, killer police, thieving bankers, and numbing inequality of all kinds, killing each other seems to make sense.
I am highly respectful of just how dangerous guns are, and how fatal and life-destroying one mistake with a gun can be in the blink of an eye. I am pro gun control. No military type weapons, million round clips, or bullets that explode. I absolutely support background checks, waiting periods, and no fucking carry of any kind unless you are guarding and transporting the crown jewels or going from home to the shooting range.
The outright banning of guns is like the outright banning of abortions, pot, gambling, drugs and alcohol. Just because you don't want it, don't approve of it, and some people can't handle it, doesn't mean you get to restrict those that do and can.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
@dkmich Vermont I think, has the
What a coincidence!
The father of the Orlando shooter, who had a TV show on Kabul television on a network owned by the CIA turns out to also be an FBI informer.
But there's nothing to see. Just like Uncle Ruslan of the two young men involved in the Boston bombing was involved in running a support network for Chechen rebels. He used the address of Graham Fuller, who is a "retired" high level CIA muckety muck who is given credit for the idea of Iran-contra. Curious how people involved with covert acts on behalf of the FBI and CIA have children who commit such awful crimes that capture the headlines and get us all scared.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/us/noor-salman-pulse-trial-fbi-informant/...