?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Lakeshore
An author of no particular popularity

Jay Lake
Date: 2012-12-15 08:01
Subject: [culture] The Connecticut shootings
Security: Public
Tags:cancer, culture, guns, health, personal
I've already said most of what I would say about the Connecticut shootings. Now, on chemo when I am cognitively impaired and my filters are compromised, is not the time for me to try to say more. I'll leave you with one thought of my own, and one from someone else.

Via Twitter, from @ethannichtern: A KNIFE Attack in a Chinese School today WOUNDS 22 Kids, kills NONE. #endofargument http://t.co/w4HnrjS0

As for my part, consider this. Zero guns would equal zero gun violence. By definition. There must be some midpoint between zero and 300,000,000 guns where 30,000 people don't have to die every year of suicide, homicide and accidental shootings.

Post A Comment | 10 Comments | | Flag | Link






(no subject) - (Anonymous)
jordan179
User: jordan179
Date: 2012-12-15 19:08 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Also, there should be a legal ban on killing people.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



adelheid_p
User: adelheid_p
Date: 2012-12-15 17:54 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
The problem is a gun ban wouldn't result in no guns --just no legal guns. There would still be illegal guns and to anyone who is already intent on committing a crime what is one more crime of having an illegal gun? And it still leaves the root cause unaddressed. In many cases (I don't know about the Connecticut case), the issue is untreated or poorly treated mental illness. What we need is less stigmatization and lack of insurance for mental illness treatment. And we probably need to change some culturally in other ways in regards to violence and human life values, etc.
Reply | Thread | Link



jordan179
User: jordan179
Date: 2012-12-15 19:08 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Zero guns would equal zero gun violence. By definition.

Absolutely. And the moment that you invent Clarke's "Trigger," let us all know.

Of course, the downside to that is that it can also be modified to suppress biochemical reactions, so it's a death ray.

As the characters discovered at the story's end.

Oh, wait, did you mean "pass a law banning guns?"

How will that cause guns to cease to exist? For that matter, how will it stop criminals from getting them?
Reply | Thread | Link



mevennen
User: mevennen
Date: 2012-12-15 21:03 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Strict gun control here (UK) seems to be working. Gun crime is going down - by 19% in 2011. Yes, criminals still have guns. Oddly enough, they mainly use them to shoot other criminals. Armed robbery isn't actually that common. Of the murders we've had this year, a large number seem to be embittered men gunning down their own families.
Reply | Thread | Link



slweippert: annoy
User: slweippert
Date: 2012-12-15 21:18 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:annoy
IMO the first thing we need to do is to ban semi and full automatics, which is what the nut-job used. There is no reason those need to be in the hands of anyone but trained military people. Target shooters and hunters don't need automatics, and it's silly to think they do.
Reply | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-12-17 04:09 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
If they argue that they need automatics, then obviously they're not very good hunters to begin with.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Thom Marrion
User: xnbach
Date: 2012-12-16 15:07 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
This- http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2012/12/14/i-think-we-can-have-that-gun-conversation-now/

My favorite quote out of it is this- You might then say, “But criminals don’t need to be regulated or care about regulation,” which is another version of the “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” saying. And that’s true. But it’s true of everything, isn’t it? Bombs are illegal, so only bombers will have bombs. Last I checked, criminals are always willing to do things we’re not — that’s why we create laws that ideally prevent and ultimately punish them for the transgression. “If we make rape illegal, only rapists will have rape! And murder, too! And they can shoplift! OUR FREEDOMS ARE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK DAMN YOU OBAMACARE.”

(I also never much understood the defense of, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Yeah, duh. But guns make it a whole lot easier, don’t you think, to facilitate all that people-killing-people?)
Reply | Thread | Link



Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2012-12-16 15:21 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Yep, this.

It took me years to figure out that "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" was *not* a pro-gun control slogan.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-12-17 01:33 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
A great site, since a lot of folks like to use Switzerland as an example of responsible gun ownership:

Switzerland — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law


Reply | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-12-17 01:35 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
And as another page on the same primary site points out, Israel's gun regulations include mental health background checks.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/israel
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
my journal
links
January 2014
2012 appearances