It is a massive tragedy, but one that seems beyond comment nowadays. Mass killings in schools and other crowded places is arguably part of the pop US culture; an acceptable cost for “the right to bear arms.”
It is an unfortunate and horrible thing to point out, but how often does one hear of the same happening in Japan, the UK or elsewhere? No, these horrible acts are largely a phenomena of the US. Indeed, it doesn’t matter how much one shows that gun ownership and gun culture matches high gun related deaths, the US love their guns, including the automatic varieties and questioning such logic puts one in line with a meeting with such a manic device.
Today’s story is tragic, but mostly because such a tragedy is no longer unique, but almost mundane. An unstable mind may also see it as a way to achieve fifteen minutes of fame in their otherwise, apparently lamentable existence. That mass murder can be reduced to such is frightening.
I hope, finally, the US can acknowledge their gun fetish for what it is.
“Don’t like guns? Don’t own one” doesn’t cut it because the owner is the last person the gun is intended for.
Mass gun ownership is doomed to such behaviour. Please find the virtue to save lives without guns.
5 thoughts on “Mass Murder In Connecticut: Gun Ownership”
Yes. I saw footage of Obama saying that now’s the time to make ‘real change’ about guns.
I’ll be waiting to see what amounts of it. It’s basically creating a cultural change, which will prove difficult to gain support.
I’ve not heard a sensible counter argument from the gun toters, but they’ll keep up the same lines all the way. I just can’t help but be thankful that I ‘m not raising my childrend in a country with high gun ownership – especially automatics
Good one Tim, I also posted a comment along similar lines.
He said “meaningful change”, without actually mentioning guns. So maybe he means a massive national mental health program intertwined with beefed-up social services so as to identify and help people at risk of this sort of behavior.
I say that somewhat sarcastically, but as long as the 2nd Amendment is interpreted as protecting an individual right, massive investment in mental health is pretty much all there is. In this specific CT case, a requirement to keep guns in a safe would have been unlikely to help because the mother would likely have shared access with the son (considering that shooting at ranges was something she had regularly done with her children and the son was now 20). Gun safes could have helped in some other cases (I think in Columbine, the guns were borrowed from parents without permission.)
Always the most costly option, translating into taxes – yet another thing people hate