Making a Killing Making a Killing
______________________
Some brief thoughts on the issue of gun control in America.
There is a problem in modern society allowing for grandiose spree gun killings. While the complicit are multitudinous, and not all (or even most) may be amended, their consideration is sophistry; something must be done in the breach.
Gun owners fear that constrictions upon ownership are but a slippery slope to confiscation of their weapons. To the concern that no one needs a black rifle they say, "Yes, and no one needs to drink soda, but they do." They say cars are deadly weapons, too, and can cause mass deaths; they do, but the deaths are usually unintentional. Ditto if one decides to gorge himself on either food or possessions -- one is responsible for oneself only, and the price of such indulgence will be paid by him alone.
Murder is the ultimate deprivation of human rights; once dead, there is no amending of the action. No atonement will undo the offense. If we claim each life is sacred, then it is grotesque hypocrisy to say that spree killing is the price of freedom. Crimes of passion, gang killings, revenge and the whole sorry lot of it can be understood; however, random spree killings cannot be rationalized.
The gunnies will tell you the 1927 Bath school killing --which killed 38 elementary school students and six adults -- was done with explosives, and they are correct; there are many ways to kill. But for this moment, there is a problem which may be reduced via proper control of the machine used to kill. The United States should manage the training, licensing and authorization of those who wish to be armed.
Just as freedom of speech is reined in to protect the innocent (with libel and slander laws), so must the right to bear arms be controlled inasmuch as possible in order to protect the innocent. Of course laws only work as protection when society agrees to comply, but perhaps the deterrent value of guaranteed jail time would ensure that many of these weapons would not make it into the hands of the deranged or malignant.
Canada does not often get a nod from the United States, but some of their policies regarding gun ownership are correct. Since guns are sold with locks in the U.S., it should be mandatory that they are locked once in the home, and the gun and ammunition should be secured. If there is a member of the household with a known mental health issue, there should be a special mandatory sentencing of that gun owner should that weapon be used by that household member in a criminal manner.
The Second Amendment has customarily been equated with the right to individual gun ownership. While I do not see the reason for anyone to own a semi-automatic weapon, I also support the Constitution and all rights which issue therefrom. While the right itself should not be infringed, the manner in which weapons are licensed, sold and stored should be amended to ensure the utmost protection for our citizens, and that is not currently being done.
Mandatory firearms safety training courses for anyone buying a gun, better background checks, securing the weapon and ammunition in the home ... these are starting places, but changes must be enacted lest we are willing to live in a real-life violent video game. The gunnies say spree shootings are a price we must be willing to pay in order to live free.
That is not the sort of freedom I recognize.
Labels: gun control, gun violence, school shootings, spree killing
posted by Lisa at 10:20 PM
18 Comments:
I dunno, Lisa.
How are laws around gun storage, sale, etc going to deter a homicidal maniac? I mean the maniac is planning on killing people, so I'm prety sure he's not too woried about the lesser crimes of illegal firearm transfer, improper storage, etc.
As for semi-automatics, that's a big bucket. Probably half of all handguns fall into it. A lot of shotguns and, yes, even some traditional hunting rifles (like the Brownings). BTW, Is the diminutive M1 carbine an "assualt rifle". What about the M1 garand? Or the civilian version of the M14 used extensively in match competitons? Who decides? committees of enlightened liberals and their politician buddies, who, based on my conversations with them, barely know which end a weapon the bullet comes out of, let alone classification differences and uses?
I have noted that more and more it seems that our national policies and laws are concocted by liberal interest groups based in the coastal NE or coastal west of the country. Such urbanites appear, to this observer, to believe it is their burden to bring us barbarians in "fly over America" to a realization of their version of civil society. I dissent. I think it is the urbanites that are warped and out of touch and I think it is their urban madness that gives rise to their freakish mad killer children.
Sure, no one in LA or NYC needs a "black rifle". However, what of the rancher down along the Mexican border? Should he be left inadequately armed and subject to the deprivations and predations of well armed drug running coyotes just because some Harvard and Berkley grads cannot conceive of his lifestyle?
Here's my suggestion. The North East and California can become gun free zones. They can kill all the unborn babies they want to, indulge in whatever gender confused weirdness floats their boats and sip their lattes and feel superior and safer.
And they can leave the rest of us alone to make our own laws, live our lives and raise our children how we see fit based on our situations.
When I was a kid we all had guns and hunted and no one went on shooting sprees. Actually, out here in the boonies it's still the same way.
LOL. There's my rant in response. Glad to get that off my chest.
avedis
P.S. BTW, I read that prior to the recent Newtown tragedy CT hadn't had a "mass" killing since the late '70s, when some maniac killed 12 with............a tire iron.
Guns are in vogue. That is why they are used by nut jobs. Take them away and the killers WILL find another way.
I went to buy some sudafed to send to the troops in A-stan (seems the winter weather is causing a round of sinus issues). Just try to buy a few bags worth. It's almost easier to buy a gun (I jest, I jest). More enlightened liberal protectionism at work.
Bleh.
avedis
All the blather misses the point, which is guns are designed to kill.
Yes, they are a tool and yes sometimes a murderer may try a different tool but nothing works like a gun.
Miyamoto Musashi noted this in the Book of 5 Rings.
The problem with rising Gun Violence and it is rising (30,000 Americans dead every year) is the amount of Firearms flooding society.
An armed populace is not a polite populace.
But, no one has the courage to make the Firearm Manufacturers liable for the effects of their product.
Grung_e_gene,
Deaths due to drug overdoses in the US are now in excess of deaths caused by motor vehicles or guns. Fueling the step increase in drug deaths is thse resulting from abuse of prescription pain killers and anti-anxiety medication.
What could be more regulated than prescription drugs? The regulations are obviously failing.
No one is seeking to sue the pharmaceutical companies.
The drugs are not intended by the manufacturers to be abused. Nor are guns sold to civilians intended to be used for criminal purposes.
Personal responsibility is a bitch, but without it we are no longer Americans. Maybe the country wants to go on some magical euro-socialist utopia seeking mystery tour. Count me out.
avedis
[Killing "unborn babies"? Come now, avedis, methinks your biological understanding is better than that.]
ISTM "Civil society" is the same, no matter who defines it. As per what causes freak behavior, that would be a long litany, but it's not only kids going on the rampage.
Per,
"[T]hey can leave the rest of us alone to make our own laws ..." --
You DON'T get to make your own laws. We are a nation of laws, which means they are imposed upon us, and as citizens, we agree to abide by them.
"Deter" is the key word, as I mentioned. If you buy into the laws, you may be deterred; if you don't, nothing will stop your homicidal behavior shy of the barrier method (since it unfortunately for many wasn't emplaced pre-conception, we must now try and cobble it on after the fact.)
avedis,
I am hardcore for personal responsibility.
Drugs can do you in nicely, and we are a society of anti-depressant, anxiolytic munching freaks. I don't care if someone commits suicide; that's his choice.
However, if you shoot me with a gun, that's not necessarily mine.
Avedis,As you note this is not my essay.
Your cmts are not a rant imo.
We do not have to justify our weaponry as long as we comply with the Natnl Firearms act of 1934 , and of 1968. If we want a belt fed then buy one and pay the tax. The dumb fucks at milpub are whining about military weapons etc... and that discussion was resolved by act of congress 78 years ago.
A black rifle semi AIN'T A MILITARY weapon and nothing but words make it so.
I share your concerns, but with Lisa's thinking i have a disconnect, since like all gun control laws there isn't much logic. How do you enforce the lock laws or safe security of ammo requirements? Do we do searches of private homes? Do we use warrants?
I for 1 secure my ammo and guns in safes and security lockers, but few do this. I doubt that a law will change behavior unless we use stasi like informants to rat out non compliant citizens.
If u lock your weapon i can drill the loch or EVEN CUT OFF THE FRIGGIN' trigger guard. I'd use a bench grinder.
As i said at milpub-the 1000 ft exclusion zone for firearms as specified in fed law was so successful that we should extend it to 2000 ft to make it 2x's as effective.
What about waiting periods? Why wait to buy a handgun IF you have criminal intent when all you need to do is buy a shotgun and follow the action that was displayed in NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN.
If anyone wants an illegal weapon all they have to do is link up with a drug dealer as hand guns are always available thru that source. And white guys do their share of cocaine.
My 1897 pump shot gun in close quarters is more deadly than any black rifle.
Thanks for your input.
We're in Asheville NC.
HNY
jim
Gene,
How many of the quoted handgun/gun deaths are self inflicted?
I believe that we have a right to self terminate.
jim
Avedis,
Have you read about the 175 wrongfully imprisoned men on gun charges here in NC?
Forget the liberals- i don't trust the gov't to make any laws that are coherent anymore.
jim
Good to know you're on my six, Jim ;-)
"Killing "unborn babies"? Come now, avedis, methinks your biological understanding is better than that."
First trimester I agree. Into the second, we part ways.
"You DON'T get to make your own laws. We are a nation of laws, which means they are imposed upon us, and as citizens, we agree to abide by them."
Well this is a question of federalism. Again I ask, why should some new yawkahs and hollywood skippy-do types get to make the laws that people in totally different states/environments have to live by?
AND this is a country based on a high valuation of individual liberty. We have a foundational law, the Constitution that is designed to endure to protect those individual liberties.
That is why I suggest that if some people want to live in a euro-style socialist system where the enligtened government decides what to do for the good of the collective they a) should move to europe or b) create such a system in places that already have such a prediliction, like the west coast and the east coast (DC up to Maine). I am ok with option b, despite Constitutional issues, because i think that these places are already full of lost deranged souls and I don't care to have anything to do with them anyhow.
I get that the problem, as you see it Lisa, is one of negative externalities (i.e. my freedom to own a gun might result in you getting shot). However, the magnitude of the problem you perceive is a double edge sword. There are 200 to 300 million guns out there in circulation. You're not going to confiscate them all. If the danger of being shot is so great that desperate action must be taken by the gov't then that same danger also mandates that I, as a citizen whose right to self defense is "primary" according to the Supreme Court, should be able to have guns for self defense against people using the other 300 million. Right?
If the bad guys have supposedly exceptionally lethal black rifles then I should have access to the same to counter the threat. Right?
I am snowed in on the farm and enjoying some imported beer and scotch I got for xmas.
A Happy New Year to both of you as well.
avedis
Jim, I just read about the NC men falsely imprisoned.
Yep, suuuuuure, trust the gov't...we'll keep you safe...big brother knows best.
In my own case the big chages eventualy got dropped because i had made the statement that the gun had come into the state less than 24 hours prior to its discovery and immediately after my fathers death. In NY law you have 10 days to turn in a handgun that is inherited or to notify the authority that you have a new pistol to add to your list of pistols you are permitted to own (if you have a permit).
If I hadn't had a cracker jack lawyer (that cost me an arm and a leg) I would be in prison right now.
avedis says:
"The drugs are not intended by the manufacturers to be abused. Nor are guns sold to civilians intended to be used for criminal purposes" --
People will abuse any and everything ... drugs, food, sex -- you name it, we've got a self-help group for it. Thing is, people are not like geese getting fat shoveled down their throats to get fois gras; I doubt many people kill another by tilting her head back and shoving pills down her gullet. Pills aren't generally a tool of murder, no matter how jagged.
Per, "You're not going to confiscate them all" --
I never spoke of confiscation. I specifically stated I believe in all of our civil rights. I also believe they can be regulated, as needed. After all, what is the Bill of Rights but the first Constitutional emendation?
Avedis,
Today at breakfast i watched every one doing their palm pilots , or whatever they are.
We get motorcyclists killed at stop lights by texting fools.
Where's the regulations or background checks.?
jim
17,000 suicides, 13,000 homicides, 1000 accidents.
avedis,
Statistics are hard to corroborate on gun vs. vehicle deaths/vehicular homicide. CDC and FDA differ, but it seems death by drugs (both legal and illegal) is approximately = to that by guns and vehicles, give or take a few 10,000.
More interesting is that death by lack of health insurance exceeds that of death by drugs, and that should be of a larger concern to a civil society, IMHO.
The drug behemoth (Big Pharma) is a disaster in itself, and as I have said before, if I were to buy into a conspiracy theory, it would be the nexus of Big Agra with Big Pharma to make us ill and keep us there. Issuing out of that malignancy would be the "nutters" we see going on shooting rampages.
... not that bad food and bad medicine will make you kill; it will just make you 'illin.
Lisa, those conspiracies you mention, probably all real enough, don't get liberals off the hook.
When I was growing up my I respected my father (even feared him) as a man even though he only used corporal punishment once or twice (I really needed it both times). He started teaching me gun safety when I was a little boy of 6 +/-, by 8 I was schooled in the art and science of marksmanship. On Sundays - or days when I had questions about morality and such - we would sit down together and read the bible and have deep discussions about what was being proposed, proper conduct to be right in the eyes of god and to be right with our fellow men/women.
You get the picture.
And you know what. It was all good for me because i was a spirited and wild young man. I needed that kind of structure and discipline.
And it wasn't just my family. Most of the families I knew were similar. Some better at it than others, but all following that model.
Now that way is the fodder for liberal jokes and derision. The feminists that run the education system hate men like my father. They hate me. Jodi over in there in hollywood portays such men as duffus props for the smart ass kids and frustrated wives on the cast to make fun of.
In liberal land, real women don't need men. Children are better off without them. Men like my father are evil carriers of the disease of "male dominance". They infect the next generation with "male stereotypes".
Liberals practically go orgasmic over the very thought of multiculturalism. The actual experience of it takes them right over the edge. They see nothing wrong with minority gangs gyrating around to primal beats, tattooed and with bones (piercings) through noses and ears and other apendages. Clans within tribes killing each other, random matings are glorified and carried out with great frequency, like savages in some primal jungle. All good. The govt is urged to further these "cultures" by giving these animals handouts; paid for by people like me. Feeding stations are set up for them and it seems there is no end to the excuses that are made by liberals on their behalf when their savagery spills becomes too painfully obvious to outside observers. It's my fault they're that way. the violence they perptrate is blamed on guns.
Lacking strong fathers, the children of the liberals themselves are educated by Jodi and video games and the unrealistic models set forth by the soften/qualify/non-competitive feminist scholl staff. Mom is out busy being liberated. When the kid starts showing signs of malfunction, a doctor prescribes mind altering drugs. Thats what health insurance is for right?
The problem is liberals and the "revolution" they have created in our society over the past 40 years or so, not guns. Sometimes the violence spills out of the city jungles (where the bulk of your gun killings occur) and into the communities inhabited by liberal elites themselves. Liberals, by nature not being able to accept responsibility for their own lives, cannot process that they are merely reaping what they sowed. So it's back, like cry babies, to mommy govt to clean up the mess.
Damn this is good scotch ;-)
avedis
avedis,
I absolutely agree with you re. the degradation of our society. Oh, I know the Good Libs say life never was good as they celebrate the virtues of multi-culti, but that's not me.
Stay tuned, avedis ... when I have a mo', I'll give you my societal roundup, and it will be totally un-p.c. and non-knee-jerk liberal. I'm Old School some times (yep, me and the Prez). I like men, and can't stand the sardonic and dismissive tone of Po-Mo "art".
Everything was feminist and homosexualized when I went through my college program. I am SO over that -- I was at the time.
We're more alike than different, I 'spect.
Avedis,
The VN people had a mass migration south after the Geneva accords ending the french inochine war.
Maybe that's what we need to do in America.
Set up regional gov'ts in which the red's /blues can prevail similar to what happened in Yugoslavia and in Iraq.
Let folks vote with their feet.
Segregate by philosophy and taste in music.
Hell i'd live in any place in which Fox news was not broadcast.
jim
Post a Comment
<< Home