Weaponized America. Cooking. Terrified. Absolutists. Celebrate violence. Murder spree. Mike McClellan’s guest commentary leads with these words that serve only to color a deeper issue than what type of bullets and guns are out there. I’m not convinced “we” Americans celebrate violence since I am a “we” and I do not and I don’t know one American who does.
What happened in Connecticut is truly sickening. Across the globe sickening events occur. Scores of young Ugandan children are ritually sacrificed every day. They are not killed with guns. On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of innocent people died. They were not killed by guns. Evil is rampant across the globe and we try to stomp it out yet that evil has persisted through the ages. What’s happening is deeper than our laws and that is why it’s difficult to address; it’s a morality thing, but then that’s subjective as well, isn’t it?
Our constitutional right to be crazy shall not be infringed upon has been successfully argued and upheld in court, yet we don’t go after that issue, we go after the Second Amendment — which is not founded upon the idea that our right to hunt, practice, or protect our home, shall not be infringed upon. The crazies get Prozac, gun owners get legislation.
Weeding out the crazies is a difficult idea because just who is crazy? Me? You? That rabbit hole goes deep and some would argue that thought police are far worse than gun police.
We’ve legislated our American culture and morality for over 200 years yet our culture and morality only gets more brazen. The thicker our law books become the more convoluted our culture and world view becomes. The issue is not our weapon of choice, it’s the moral chasm in our culture that gets wider by the day and gun laws won’t fix that.
Randy Bigger
Gilbert
SculptorDad posted at 10:55 am on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Nice try, but the cause of this particular event will hopefully be found to be the psychotropic drugs in his brain promoted by Big Pharm. We deserve to know the truth, guns are just the tool.
Cincinnatus posted at 11:14 am on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Randy,
Thoughtful piece but I don't think it's that metaphysical.
The US has over 1/3rd of all the firearms on the globe. Simple matter of a society awash in guns provides a statistically significant opportunity that criminals and the mentally incompetent will be able to get their hands on one or more. It's arithmetic.
Rich posted at 2:37 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
There is no real correlation between guns and violence, therefore if your aim is to stop violence, as is pointed out, it isn't going to happen enacting gun laws. For example, the US had a ratio of about 88 guns per 100 people, a homicide rate of 4.2 people per 100K; Canada 30.8 per hundred and 1.6 per 100K, while Mexico has 15 guns per hundred and a homicide rate of 16.9 people per 100K. In general per capita gun ownership is relatively high in lower crime countries, for example in the top ten per capita ownership countries, only one has a rate of homicide over 5 per 100K, and they are among the world's least violent societies. (check for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate ).
Juggernaut8000 posted at 2:38 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
It's not guns or morals. It's young adults who have been fed prescription pills for a multitude of made up conditions and then provided violent video games and television as a substitute for a parent. The common factor with all these shootings is the meds for all the BS conditions such as ADHD, bi-polar disorder and depression to name few.
truth posted at 2:40 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Leon, after reading your comments I hope to GOD you don't own a gun.
Cerulean posted at 3:09 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
An interesting set of numbers for those who are concerned about morality.
The Public Religion Research Institute and the Religion News Service found that only 35% of white evangelicals support stricter gun laws. And that, of all the sub-classifications of men/women, Republican/Democrat etcetera, by far the largest group of households that have guns in the home are Tea Party affiliated. 65% of the Tea Partiers have guns in their home as compared to the lowest subgroup of only 23% in the non-white population.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/this-is-where-catholics-protestants-the-religious-stand-on-gun-control-you-might-be-surprised/
Here is another interesting article about “guns and mass shooting in the United States”.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/
truth posted at 3:19 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
The six largest groups of Romneys donors were employees of big banks like Goldman Sachs and J P Morgan; wealthy hedge fund managers and private equity bosses gave millions more to the GOP Super Pacs. But these Wall Streeters awoke on Nov.7 to a sober reality. The markets 300-point plunge the day after the election tells you everything about their mood. Wall Streeters were convinced they had the power to put a private equity guy in the White House, so that they would'nt have to "hang their heads, hide their jets and apologize for their sucess" for the next four years. The biggest fear of these 1%ers maybe soon come to pass: that Obama, having endured their gripeing in the first term, "will now be free to ignore the Masters of the Universe completely." The New York Post NYMag.com
onerebel posted at 4:08 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Interesting how some on the Left are trying to imply that just because someone does not back gun control, and has a gun in their house they must lack morals. Are these the same self righteous individuals that accuse the NRA and gun owners of having the blood of innocent children on their hands, while at the same time they support abortion on demand?
Mike McClellan posted at 4:56 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
What we might be seeing here is a conflation of defining deviancy down and the paranoid style in America.
Google both terms and read what Moynihan and Hofstader had to say about each years ago.
Better, here are the links to the two pieces:
Hoftstader's -- http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics
And Moynihan's -- http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/formans/DefiningDeviancy.htm
Cincinnatus posted at 8:06 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Rich,
Guns don't cause violence they just make it easier and a lot more lethal. And when you flood an entire country with them you get what we have now.
Your numbers don't really make the point you intend. Canada has a lower number of guns and a lower homicide rate. And Mexico has been in the middle of a murderous drug war for years so stats aren't really useful.
tededitedit posted at 8:29 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
I think the writer was attempting to get at the observation that a general moral breakdown contributes to these horrible results. Fewer families are intact. Fewer people believe in a higher power, the sanctity of life, and that suicide is selfish. More quick fix attempts with drugs. More people, but fewer leaders, fewer examples. Less discipline. Less personal responsibility. Compassion 'events' instead of a compassionate lifestyle. Bad behaviour advertised and glorified by athletes and entertainers. Violent games, violent shows. Electronic communication replacing face-to-face, voice, and handwritten communication.
samkat posted at 8:52 pm on Sun, Dec 23, 2012.
Unfortunately, the anti gun group refuses to dig into the root causes. Rather, in their eyes, a disarmed society is a civil society. According to them, guns are the sole cause of all violence when in fact there are many other factors that are undoubtedly major contributors.
This country is lacking in an aggressively mental health program. Look at the individuals involved in all of the recent incidents. All had mental problems. Now, what about the many individuals with uncontrollable rage problems. Whether they follow through with a gun, a knife, a ball bat or even their bare hands, they do physical damage to their fellow human beings to include murder and oftentimes have a history of such violence. We already have enough gun control laws on the books as it is.
Mike McClellan posted at 5:43 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
Limiting the size of gun clips or magazines is hardly "disarming society." Asking that private sellers at gun shows be required to do the same background checks is hardly "disarming society." Even banning certain assault-type rifles is hardly "disarming society."
You're right about the recent murderers -- all had mental problems. But only one, Loughner, even made a dent in the mental health system. The rest had no records.
And the fact is that these mass murderers don't use their hands, a knife or a ball bat -- they use guns, and apparently the weapon of choice is a semi-automatic with a large magazine.
Finally, the "gun control" we had before concerning assault rifles was a joke. And the NRA and its lobbyists made sure it was by lobbying for as many loopholes as they could get into the legislation.
So when LaPierre get on TV and says that the ban didn't work, what he doesn't say was that he made sure it wouldn't have a chance.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 7:22 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
Just like a Commenter pointed out....there have been no "massacres" at Gun Shows. If one of the teachers at the School had had a personal defense pistol....these horrific killings wouldn't have taken place. You can say the same for every single gun-related massacre that has occurred in the United States and other Countries.
A WELL-ARMED CITIZENRY IS A .......WELL-DEFENDED....CITIZENRY.
YOU CAN'T PUT ALL THE .......LOONIES & CRAZIES....OUT THERE IN THE COUNTRY IN HOSPITALS OR ASYLUMS. THERE ISN'T MONEY ENOUGH IN THE KITTY.........(OUR "GIVE-AWAY" DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT HAS SEEN TO THAT).
YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF EVERY SINGLE STATE IN THE NATION.......SO FORGET THAT OPTION.
WHAT'S LEFT = MILLIONS OF CITIZENS CARRYING THEIR PERSONAL DEFENSE PISTOL ON THEM AT WORK, AT HOME AND AT PLAY.
I GUESS FOR MANY PEOPLE, IT TAKES A CERTAIN MIND-SET, AND SOME OLD-FASHIONED "INTESTINAL FORTITUDE = WHAT THE MILITARY CALL = "GUTS")............TO DEFEND YOURSELF, YOUR LOVED ONES AND YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS.
WHO KNOWS...MAYBE IN 2013....ONE OF THE DRUG COMPANIES WILL DISCOVER AN............."INTESTINAL FORTITUDE" PILL...........DEMOCRATS AND LIBERALS WOULD BE AT THE HEAD OF THE LINE.
Cincinnatus posted at 7:34 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
It doesn't follow that a moral breakdown is causal. All the trends that Randy and tededit cite have been taking place in Europe for years and their levels of mass violence or even isolated acts are nowhere near ours. They watch the same movies and play the same video games we do. Same with Canada. While it's important that we take a serious look at the American love-affair with violent entertainment it is not explanatory. It's an excuse to divert attention from the fact that we simply have too many guns and an incredibly lax regulation of them.
Cincinnatus posted at 7:45 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
Leon,
The Constitution doesn't call for a "well-armed citizenry". It calls for a "well- REGULATED" militia.
Intestinal fortitude is not a substitute for common sense. Maybe they should make a pill for that.
xxx01 posted at 9:38 am on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
This writer has it correct. As John Adams, one of our founding fathers put it, ""We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Sometimes the truth hurts, but unfortunately this truth becomes more and more undeniable as times passes and incidents such as these increase in frequency. Symptoms of our moral decline can be seen everywhere. We have become, as John Adams postulated, a nation in decay and therefore, in decline.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 1:31 pm on Mon, Dec 24, 2012.
Dear Cincinnatus,
The "well-regulated militia"....that you speak of....was only comprised of ...'WHITE MALES".
GOOD LUCK ...GOING TO SOUTH PHOENIX OR SOUTH TUCSON AND TAKING THE GUNS AWAY FROM THE HISPANICS AND THE BLACKS.....BE SURE AND GIVE .."SOUTHWEST AMBULANCE"...A HEAD'S-UP....SO THEY CAN HAVE A BODY BAG ON BOARD....................[wink]
Cincinnatus posted at 8:09 am on Tue, Dec 25, 2012.
Alan Jacobs has it about right;
.the general More Guns approach to social ills — is the absolute abandonment of civil society it represents. It gives up on the rule of law in favor of a Hobbesian “war of every man against every man” in which we no longer have genuine neighbors, only potential enemies. You may trust your neighbor for now — but you have high-powered recourse if he ever acts wrongly.
Whatever lack of open violence may be procured by this method (it) is not peace or civil order, but rather a standoff, a Cold War maintained by the threat of mutually assured destruction. Moreover, the person who wishes to live this way, to maintain order at universal gunpoint, has an absolute trust in his own ability to use weapons wisely and well: he never for a moment asks whether he can be trusted with a gun. Of course he can! (But in literature we call this hubris).
The American Conservative, December 17, 2012
Guns, Risk and Safety
sockratties posted at 5:16 am on Thu, Dec 27, 2012.
california leon.. we don't have to go anyplace to find a Hispanic weirdo except to your house.
sockratties posted at 6:05 am on Thu, Dec 27, 2012.
The issue of gun violence may be seen as a morality concern but morality is subjective. Terrorism often grows out of a mind consumed with moral righteousness incompatible with the greater society. Deranged individuals who have perpetrated attacks on innocents fit within our permissive society until they pull the trigger. Their justifications or motives are neither moral nor immoral. They are better described as amoral as their mind has dehumanized their victims by objectifying them much as are the targets in video games.
sockratties posted at 6:07 am on Thu, Dec 27, 2012.
There are common dynamics … They are generally disconnected from society, tending to be loners. They actively seek affirmative support on-line. They have a history of being dismissed or perceive themselves as rejected. They need to make a statement or lash out although they wouldn’t describe their actions as such. They have contemplated suicide and expect to die. They plan their events far in advance. They often leave clues that go unrecognized. Their targets generally are vulnerable and unsuspecting.
sockratties posted at 6:08 am on Thu, Dec 27, 2012.
The NRA is trying to limit the argument to school shootings and armed protection in schools. If schools become difficult targets and theaters are protected by armed guards there will be a next “soft” target; perhaps food courts in shopping malls or waiting rooms in hospitals.
There is a limit to arming a society. We need to find a way to reverse the trend of increased violence which includes drive by shootings, road rage, acts of terror and random shootings. Until we can prevent individuals from shooting innocent people we may need to restrict use of the most lethal tool. Gun control may not be the answer but guns are a common factor so that may be a place to start.
sockratties posted at 6:09 am on Thu, Dec 27, 2012.
excuse multiple posts because of "spam" notice... thanx EVT