minihefThe major studies which showed the opposite have largely been discredited but we could argue about that all day.
Anyway I totally agree that there are loads of huge factors that play in to the ridiculous number of gun deaths in the US. Poverty, ghettoization of inner cities, education, gang culture, race, lack of appropriate mental health care, and gun laws etc.
What I don't understand is your argument that because there are lots of factors then you should only focus on a few. Following on from Jon Stewart's point are you saying the US is capable of fighting several multi-billion dollar wars halfway across the globe but cannot approach this gun issue from multiple angles?
Why not try to do more to tackle poverty, ghettoization, gang culture, improve mental health care services, whilst simutaneously introducing the sort of gun regulations which the majority of Americans are in favour of? Tightening background checks, closing ownership loopholes, limiting access to certain types of weapons and a host of other simple measures would save lives without compromising the right of responsible Americans to own guns through the proper channels.
Instead every massacre is followed up with bullshit platitudes by politicians and lobbyists who don't have the desire or courage to make any substantive changes on any of those issues.
Your last paragraph completely misses the point that the second amendment was never intended to not confer unrestricted access to modern weaponry and if common sense gun laws prevent even a few deaths then it surely has to be worth it. Even if it meant there were a few fewer mentally ill people who had an arsenal readily available then some of this senseless death could be avoided.
If you really think that rednecks being able to own assault weapons without being subject to basic screening and regulations is really more important than trying to preventing the deaths of thousands of innocent people then I don't know what to say to you other than I'm really fucking pleased I don't live in a society that is remotely like the one you're in favour of.
I'm not saying that we should only focus on a few angles, I'm saying we need to prioritize focusing on the big problems first, which is all culture, gang, and poverty related. Most people have it backwards and would rather focus on the smallest fractions of the problem first and foremost, which honestly, are hardly problems when you realize humans are not perfect beings.
More effective background checks, closing loopholes, etc. thats all fine. limiting access to certain types of weapons, like i said earlier, is pointless, the types of weapons people want to limit account for the smallest percentage of gun crime. it doesnt matter if the majority of americans are for it, majority rule is not how this country is meant to or should run. if the majority of americans want to ban/limit "assault" rifles, its purely because of misinformation and emotionally driven, illogical thinking. assault rifle sounds scary, they look scary, and the media told me only killers use them, so lets ban them and ignore the facts.
for everyone who says the 2nd amendment wasnt intended for modern guns, there are just as many people saying the opposite, im not going to argue because thats a whole other topic and a waste of time.
And i never said rednecks shouldnt be subject to basic screening. im all for background checks and reasonable regulations. but I am saying that our rights and freedoms are most definitely more important than peoples lives. we could regulate the shit out of everything and everybody and it might create a sense of safety. but living without rights and freedoms is not worth the perceived safety. you look at the other end of the spectrum and the most over regulated countries arent any better when it comes to preventable death. maybe they get to feel safer?
like i said in an earlier post, alcohol accounts for far more death, violence and abuse than guns do. is it really worth the tens of thousands of deaths every year in the US just so we can consume a beverage? more people are killed by blunt objects than all rifles(assault rifles being just a subset of all kinds of rifles) why not tighten down restrictions on baseball bats.
These gun control nuts want to ban an object that accounts for maybe a few hundred deaths per year in the US. they treat it like its a huge fucking deal and we need to fix this supposed problem right away. a few hundred deaths is NOTHING, you have a better chance of choking on a twinkie. but its scary, so lets ignore the facts and ban them.
The fact is, when you take gang/career criminal related crime out of the equation. the stats look as good as anywhere else in the world. for having such relaxed gun laws, we look damn good.
And guess what? you do get to live in a society that is like the one im in favor of, at least for the most part. we prioritize alcohol use over peoples lives, we prioritize the right to eat shitty food and smoke cigarettes over peoples lives, texting and driving, our right to travel in general. we could tighten down restrictions like crazy on all of those, but we dont. I dont even drink but id rather 80,000 people die per year so i have the right to consume alcohol if i feel like it. just everybody else does. so yes, those couple hundred deaths per year that involve an assault rifle, even if they're more violent and scary than a drunk driving douche killing a family, im completely ok with.
People seem to forget that we are human, we are violent, imperfect and we fuck up. we are going to find ways to kill each other and kill ourselves regardless of how much you attempt to prevent it. over-regulating may add a false sense of safety but it really doesnt do jack shit.
