Recent Violence

[Opsa]

While the news of the latest violence in the Connecticut school just washed over me on Friday when it happened, it is slowly eating into my heart.

I know it does no good to ask why this carp happens time and again. It's just another unstable person acting out his aggression. It could happen anywhere. I'm not feeling paranoid that it could happen here, of course it could, but think of all the places it didn't happen. What bugs me is all the suffering. I just feel so bad for all those parents of children that got in the way of the nutboy's bullets.

I try not to dwell on it too much. I try not to imagine too well how I would feel if Th'Opsalette happened to have been one of those kids. She is safe. I try not to torture my mind. But I know that somewhere tonight, there's a whole bunch of people with their hearts just massacred. They have no answers and likely never will have closure. I worry about them.

I wonder if my mind could take such a blow.

[Griffin NoName]

I wonder if my mind could take such a blow.

Odds are it would Ops. But also odds are your marriage might disinttegrate (based on stats not your actual marriage!).

I listened to Obama's speech live during the night here, and he was very careful in what he said, but implying tighter gun control possibly - I don't really understand how politicians learn to phrase things so they can't be caught saying one thing and meaning another, because this is what they all do, so what he was actually saying, I know not.

[Swatopluk]

Although US gun massacres do not affect me personally, the reactions from the usual suspects kindles an urgent desire in me to inflict hell and maximum pain for as long as possible on certain people. The Phelpses are obnoxious and despicable but their effect on actual policy is minimal. Certain politicians, religious extremists (with media outlets) and shills for certain industries are something different. These guys make even an agnostic wish that there was a hell to send them too.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

With regards to all that mess?

I saw countless picture-memes on FB over the past few days.

Of all that I saw, the best said (more or less):

"If the first thing that comes to your mind, when hearing about the shooting in Connecticut, is 'oh no--they are gonna take our guns', then your priorities are severely messed up."

As a nation, I think some of our priorities are severely messed up.   

And I did see Obama's Friday announcement speech--it was pretty good, and demonstrated that he is not only a caring human, but quite willing to demonstrate empathy in front of cameras.   A trait I rather prefer to the other sort.  But I have avoided listening to the news (apart from late Friday) since, as I'm not in the mood for the EMO-DRAMA carp, from either side.

I think we ought to focus on the surviving families, and give them as much sympathy as we are able, in whichever way we are able-- politicians can be counted on to say very ugly things [and they have, some leaked through my deliberate avoidance], so why should we stoop so low?  meh.

I've said before:  in a perfect world, no parent would ever bury his or her child.  Ever. 

But it's hardly perfect now is it?  No--the world is what we make of her, for better or worse.   

I feel much as you do Opsa, only I don't have immediate children to fret over, alas. 
 

[Griffin NoName]

The Obama speech I was refering to was the one he gave in Newtown today/yesterday - it was emotional and only very briefly and tangentially political.

We are not immune from young children massacres by gunfire..... we had ours in Dunblane (Scotland) several years ago. Lest we forget.

[Swatopluk]

We too had a few not even that long ago.
Not to forget the mass stabber last winter (iirc) suspected of having his blade tainted with HIV positive blood.

[Aggie]

None of us are immune to school bus accidents either, but having someone intentionally do it seems worse somehow.

[Bluenose]

In this country we had the infamous Port Arthur Massacre in 1996 when a young man went berserk and killed 35 people and injured 23 more.

After that, our then Prime Minister instituted a ban on semi and fully automatic firearms and instituted a firearm buy-back.  Although our rate of firearm crime is nowhere near that of the US, since that time, according to research by the Australian National University gun homicide rates have fallen by 59% and gun suicide by 65%.  Over the same time period there has been no "compensating" rate of increase in other forms of homicide and suicide, so the arguments of gun enthusiasts (such as one I heard on our local radio station yesterday) that people will simply use another method to hurt of kill are revealed to be nonsense.  It is apparent the reduction in availablity of firearms has had a direct positive effect on the death rates.  IMHO, the US would be very well advised to take note and start to reverse the insane gun culture that infects it.

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution states:
    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

There are a couple of things I would say about this.  First, the phrase "a well regulated militia" does not imply the uncontrolled distribution of firearms, clearly this amendment implies that appropriate regulation would be instituted.  Secondly, nothing in this implies that it was intended to include any and all possible arms.  So there are some limits on people's ability to hold arms.  Thus it is just an argument over where you should draw the line.  It is clear that like limits on free speech (it is not OK to yell "fire", for example, in a packed cinema unless there is a fire) there are limits on just what weapons ordinary citizens may hold.  To argue that there are not is akin to arguing that the people may keep any arms at all - does this include nuclear weapons?  Of course not.  It is a question of balancing individual rights with the common good.  I would argue that allowing the private possession of assault weapons and concealed weapons is clearly against the common good.  The only country that allows private ownership of these weapons is the one with the greatest problem of their misuse.  More and easier availability of such weapons clearly reduces public safety, despite the claims of gun proponents to the contrary.  Unfortunately for them, the statistics plainly show that they are wrong.  It is time for the US to man up to the self imposed problem and change direction, for as the saying goes, if you do not change direction you will end up where you're heading.  Does the US really want to go there?

[Swatopluk]

Btw, have you already heard of Bushmaster's* Man Card?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/scott/bushmasters-shockingly-awful-man-card-campaign

*the company that produced the weapon used in Newtown

[Opsa]

Tremendously well-put, Blue, May I quote you?

There are loads of people here in the US who are for tighter gun control laws. I marched in the Million Mom March for gun control in Washington D.C. We tried very hard to promote the cause simply as "sensible gun laws, safe kids" and the march was really very wonderful. There were fringers who razzed us, but for the most part it was a very large, peaceful rally. But it was shrugged off by some as just the mommies having their little public hissy fit.

Now we've had this disaster (and many more before it) and people are trying very hard to use this as a point in the argument against lax gun laws. The pro-gun folks are roaring that those people are opportunists.

So what can we do? We protest in a calm, organized way and are not heard, and we protest in an angry way when uncontrolled gun incidents occur and the pro-gunners try to shout us down. There are tons of sane people just asking for safer guns laws. I think it's fair game to use this as an example of what horrific things people can do with guns and why they need stricter regulations in the U.S.

I'd like to see my government act on reason and not be pushed around by entitled loudmouths the opposition. (Edited for taddiness)

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I loved what Rachel Maddow had to say about it.

She cited an independent poll of NRA membership, who would be in favor of tightening the already-on-the-books laws concerning gun registration at time of purchase.

Currently, only brick-and-mortar gun stores must comply with these-- there's a huge loophole in the form of traveling gun shows.  Close that loophole, and you've closed one of the largest venues for unregistered gun sales.

NRA members are in favor of that, when polled-- but the leadership of that organization are all still fringe-zealots... meh.  (one of many reasons why I'm not a member)

Another loophole to close, would be private transfers of guns-- the transfers should be, by law, also registered.  To put teeth in it?  Make the last registered owner responsible in some way, if the firearm is used in a crime (of any sort).  Make the owner-transfer registration reasonably painless, and you'd get these sales registered.

Obviously, the black market in firearms is a whole 'nother issue, and that would grow under the tighter controls.   

But, it'd be a pretty good start-- baby steps.   

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I have some very untaddy thoughts about NRA types, some including poetic justice, but that would accomplish nothing.
---
Is it really that hard to ask for a full ban on assault weapons? Also, one that has been proposed but scares the sh!t out the NRA is to put serial numbers/chips on the bullets themselves to track who sold and who bought the bullets used on a crime. Plus the famous Chris Rock proposal of "bullet control"/drastically raising the price of ammunition.

I'm not particularly optimistic about it, but shaming some of the #$%^&*( individuals in congress who get in the way would be a good way to start.

[Opsa]

I agree with you, Zone.

As for selling, good ideas, Bob.

When Mr. Ops' Dad died last spring he left a safe full of guns, which we had  no interest in keeping. (In this case, we inherited them but are not registered as gun owners! Scary.) We were worried that we'd inadvertently sell them to dangerous people.  

Luckily, we contacted the president of the local gun club to which he had belonged. The president bought all of them  and the safe and other ammo supplies from us and we were more than happy to be rid of them. I'm sure he got a great deal, but it was worth it to us to have them gone to someone who is hopefully a reputable person with a gun-owners license.

That doesn't mean he didn't turn around and sell them to Charles Manson Jr. at the very next gun show, but we did what we could.

[Aggie]

Plus the famous Chris Rock proposal of "bullet control"/drastically raising the price of ammunition.

This is a bad idea IMHO, in that it unfairly burdens sport shooters. Criminal types aren't going to worry as much about the cost of the relatively few bullets they shoot. Also, you'd quickly see home-loaded black market bullets become cheap and ubiquitous. Reloads aren't particularly hard to do; it's be much easier and less risky than a meth lab or grow show. There's nothing to give away a little bullet assembly line in the basement.

[Bluenose]

Opsa, quote away! 

I have a friend who lives in the bush and is a keen hunter (for food - roos & deer mostly) as well as a member of one of his local gun clubs.  They dress up like movie cowboys and fire their revolvers at targets at the local shooting range and give themselves silly nicknames.  Anyway, my friend is on a limited income, being retired and he reloads his own ammunition to keep costs down.  Raising the cost of ammunition and banning re-loads which would be the only way to include some sort of tagging system on bullets would unfairly penalise people like my friend.  In the end it would IMHO only be fiddling around the edges of the problem.

The real issue is the ready availability of such deadly weapons that use the ammunition.  I really do think that there are lessons to be learnt from the Australian experience.  The stats clearly show that the strategy has worked.  In the end the US gun lobby has to be taken on, whether the politicians over there have the guts to do so remains to be seen.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I have a number of thoughts regarding regulation in general. I'll check the debate forum and if nothing is already there I'll create a new thread.