The "right to keep and bear arms"

subjects that are really off-topic

Postby Daniel73 » Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:09 pm

From DCML:

- - - - - - - - - -

Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chuck Munson
Subject: Very OT: From a Virginia Tech alumnus
To: dcml

Hi DCMLers,

I hope that you all will forgive this large off-topic
post, but I'm guessing that I might be the only
Virginia Tech graduate on the list and, since we all
are connected to this world by more than a love of
Disney comics, I'm guessing that a large number of our
"outside-the-US" membership may be wondering about
this tragedy that seems to reoccur here with
frightening frequency in one form or another.
Obviously, this all hit a bit too close to home and
has occupied many of my thoughts over the past two
days.

I don't pretend to have any answers as to why this
troubled young man chose to end his own and so many
other lives so senselessly. I also don't pretend that
I can reconcile the debates around a) our 2nd
Amendment to the US constitution which absolutely may
or may not grant anyone in this country the "right to
keep and bear arms", b) the statistics that I have
read that up to 30,000 in the US die in incidents
involving firearms, and c) that what laws limiting gun
purchases here really don't seem to keep any criminals
from getting guns or anyone on the edge of sanity who
has never previously broken the law.

I can tell you that among Tech students, faculty, and
alumni there is general shock that this could happen
at our university. A hopelessly naive thought
perhaps, but for a university with a fairly good
reputation for research, academics, and sports, set in
a pretty southwestern Virginia mountain town where the
students outnumber the townsfolk 2-to-1, this type of
event is just not something we could easily imagine.
However, I am not naive enough to think that the
parents of the elementary school children in Beslan,
or the school in Scotland, or Columbine, or another
school in California, or any other school shooting
would expect it any more than the parents of the Tech
students who died. The disturbed young man who did
this lived only ten miles away from me and graduated
from the high school right next door to the recreation
center where my daughter Kathryn took swimming
lessons. Kathryn will start kindergarten in
September. Sending your child to school is not
supposed to be something that will have you worrying
about their safety.

I have very fond memories of my years at Tech; it
disturbs and saddens me to know that now my university
will be known by so many simply as the site of a
terrible tragedy. Yes, I have connections many years
removed to the sites. While studying Architecture, I
had engineering classes in Norris Hall where most of
the victims were. The architecture building is less
than 100 yards away, so I walked by Norris almost
every day over five years. I was always pleased that
I was in one of the smaller dorms on Upper Quad, close
to the architecture building, rather than the much
larger dorms like West AJ which I considered to be
rather dehumanizing and was told were places where it
was more difficult to bond with your neighbors.
However, I knew plenty of friends who lived there. But
Tech is so much more than this tragic event.

There is so much irony in the reading the portraits of
the victims in as much as many appear to have
represented what is best about the US. One professor
was a Holocaust survivor who stood in the doorway to
his class to give his students a chance to escape; a
few of the students were International Studies majors,
something that some would say the US so desperately
needs in these times; two of the victims graduated
from the same high school as the shooter.

The good news is that we Hokies (the nickname for
Virginia Tech students and alumni) are a pretty
positive group. Tech doesn't have a monopoly on great
faculty and students, but I expect to see a lot of
support and effort to recognize and actively pursue
the traits that trigger these decisions in mentally
disturbed individuals. Also, if you care to show
support for my alma mater, I read that the Student
Association and the Alumni Association are asking
people to wear the school colors, orange and maroon,
on Friday.

Thank you for your indulgence. I wanted our friends
overseas to know that neither Tech nor this incident
should be reduced to cliches.

Take care everyone,
Chuck Munson
Herndon, Virginia

- - - - - - - - - -
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Daniel73 » Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:21 pm

Below my reply to DCML, today, April 18, 2007 12:47 PM.
I've corrected a typo in my text. As I did in a correction sent to DCML, five minutes later.

> The good news is that we Hokies (the nickname for
> Virginia Tech students and alumni) are a pretty
> positive group. Tech doesn't have a monopoly on great
> faculty and students, but I expect to see a lot of
> support and effort to recognize and actively pursue
> the traits that trigger these decisions in mentally
> disturbed individuals.

Let's start with the government then. In a country were guns are allowed to be sold to citizens, people can predict and expect that someone will sooner or later start to shoot down someone.
And on television, games and in cinema, violent movies are okay. But movies about sex are forbidden. What do people expect to happen? People are programmed that it's cool to [shoot down] people.
And what about Iraq?

I wouldn't have written my comment if you wouldn't have refered to "mentally disturbed individuals". The world is full of so-called "healthy" people who kill and torture. The entire humanity appears mentally disturbed.
If there's one certainty, then it's that no one can predict who will be a killer and who not. A lot of killers look perfectly "normal" before they become killers. That's what's so scary. You never know who will be next.
I think this is a matter of humanity and not just of blaming some individuals. Blaming individuals would be too easy.

I wish you all the best, and take care.

Daniël
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Barko » Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:49 pm

It´s bound to happen at intervals. They should drop that ancient wild west law concerning guns. It may not stop criminals from getting guns but it may stop a nut or two from blasting innocent people out of existence. Without free access to guns you can still be a member of a gun club and shoot all you like if that´s your interest...
Barko
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:09 am

Postby Robb_K » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:59 am

Canada has a somewhat similar culture and history, but they have much, much more strict gun laws. Canada's murder rate is only 1% of that of USA. When a large portion of the population has guns, many, many people will be killed.

I live half year in USA, and 1/2 in Europe. I have NEVER had a gun pointed at me in Europe. I have NEVER had a shooting or killing near me there. i have been held at gunpoint by police in USA, and been totally innocent, Not only is the average citizen much more violent there, but the police behave that way, too. I have been near gang shootouts, in which innocent bystanders were killed. A little baby was killed by a stray bullet in a gang related shootout in a West Los Angeles shopping centre. It was in a very wealthy neighbourhood.

The media (films, TV, books, video games) glorify violence in USA. And, we can see that such culture is spreading all over the World. When I was a child, visiting family in Holland, we could keep our bicycles unlocked on the streets, and there was NO danger that anyone would take them. I used to sleep in parks, or on grass near the road when traveling. I would NEVER do that now, even in Europe. The same with hitching rides. The USA is getting more and more violent, and it is spreading to formerly tranquil places.

The anti-gun control lobby in USA is too powerful. Apparantly the big money that runs politics in USA want the people to have guns. But why would a "sportsman/hunter" need a machine gun or rapid repeating rifle to slaughter masses of animals? Is that SPORT???

There is NOTHING in The US Constitution guaranteeing individual citizens the right to carry guns. US communities have the right to raise organised militias in times of need.

It is clear that the people in (economic) power in USA don't value the lives of the average person there, very much. They won't ALLOW them to raise money to provide even basic health care for all citizens. They are willing to let thousands die outside public hospitals, waiting to be served, because they can't afford to pay for medical insurance that their employers refuse to pay for. They lobbied lawmakers for, and used the media to pursuade voters, to raise the traffic speed limits on the highways back up to 65 miles per hour from 55, even knowing that many thousands of people will die from traffic accidents, over and above the amount who would die with the lower limit. The gun lobbyists are from the right wing that also agrees with the wealthy classes on social measures.

The USA needs to change their gun laws to have high rigourous checks on people wishing to purchase guns, and military-type weopens should be outlawd, altogether. There are thousands of times more "average citizens" using guns there than professional criminals. The instances of ordinary citizens saving innocent lives by protecting themselves from real criminals is infinitesimal compared to the amount of lives taken from acts by previous "non-criminals".

When I'm in Los Angeles, I NEVER go outside at night. I can think of very few places in USA I would do so. I go outside at night in Canada or Europe, without much fear (in most places). I wouldn't go looking for trouble, and there are a few places to avoid in most European and Canadian cities. But, on the whole, it's like the difference of night and day between USA and other 1st-World countries. One of the main reasons is simply the availability of guns. It will take a lot more work to change the media's glorification of violence, and to change the cultural bias towards it. But, it would be a relatively easy undertaking, to make the gun control laws a lot more restrictive.

Of course, gun control probably wouldn't stop the really unbalanced people. Those who plan a mass killing event, even with a gun, already had the time to calm down from being riled up. If they had a long time to plan, and still commit the act, the "convenience" of having a gun handy and ammunition was not a factor. If the gun were not available to such a person, they could use poison gas, home-made explosives, flooding, or various other means to kill a lot of people. But, more things can go wrong to upset such plans, and, on the average, they would be less successful.

But, if the gun restrictions would be made much more strict, the greatest benefit would be more in the spontaneous killings, and youth killings, and accidental killings.

But, just as the USA's leaders have shown no interest in trying to forestall Global Warming, and little interest in lowering air and water pollution, I don't see the gun mongers allowing anything to happen soon in the control area.

They are also not willing to put much of their resources into education, and they are very protectionist on international trade. Perhaps they will continue to lose ground in the World Econony, and eventually won't be able to compete. Then, when The Chinese and Indians own everything in USA, they'll put their money and influence behind gun control (as they understand chaos is bad for business)!
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Barko » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:42 am

You are SO right, Rob! You don´t have to watch Michael Moores "Bowling for Columbine" to know that the US gun laws are inhuman and scandalous. The same goes for the lack of free doctors and hospitals and free education on all levels. Most of the politicians seems to be currupt and there´s only two parties to choose from. So, what to vote for? Warm shit or cold shit! To a large degree we´re at the mercy of multi-national companies and other power players who holds the politicians on a string like puppets. Sadly, Europe is copying the US. What to do? We can only keep voicing our opinion and hope that one day the great majority will wake up and demand a change...
Barko
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:09 am

Postby Robb_K » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:59 am

I assume that Moore hasn't been assassinated yet, because that might make him into a martyr, and even arouse the currently completely docile public somewhat. The way things are now, the powers that be can just discredit him as a "flake", and mock him (and the lazy, ignorant public).
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Barko » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:02 am

Yes, Rob. They do try to discredit Moore! They tried to do so in a 14 min. interview with him on "60 min." but he was too clever for the interview´er, thank God. So they did´nt succeed. But they´re trying all the time to pull the rug away from underneath him. Let´s hope he´ll keep standing his ground...
Barko
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:09 am

Postby Rockerduck » Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:56 pm

Well Barko, from reading only a few of your posts I can already say we're on the same position when it comes to politics (and I'm also an admirer of Michael Moore).

However, I don't agree with Rob that the world has become more violent. Just today I tead a story in a free Dutch newspaper, which told about a professor who, after doing research, concluded that the world nowadays is much less violent that hundreds of years ago. I think everybody, no matter their age, wants to believe the world was better and safer when they were younger --despite the facts.

Also, I don't think television or films or computer games are to blame. I believe it's too superficial to put the blame on them. That was also a point made by Moore in 'Bowling for Columbine'. After the Columbine-incident, there was a witchhunt after Marilyn Manson. Instead, one should look at the environment in which kids grow up. I think it's not a question of a violent culture as well as an individualist culture (again, like Moore also pointed out). Without a decent upbringing and education, the risk of kids doing these awful thing increases significantly, I think.

That's not to say that the laws concerning weapons in the US should be much stricter. I've heard opponents says: "then why don't you ban knives? People kill with knives too", but that argument doesn't ring true. Knives are generally not produced to kill, but a gun is. And then there are people who say: "if everybody had a gun, we would be safer" and that's also not true. Baghdad is unsafe, *because* everybody has guns in their house. But if you make it difficult or even almost impossible to get a hold of guns, the risk of tragic incidents will decline.
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Barko » Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:33 am

Well, Rockerduck, Whether society has become more violent or not is an interesting question. I have´nt read the story you refer to, so I cannot have an opinion about the professors research. Certainly the level of violence in popular culture (books, movies, tv, games etc.) has never been as high as now. Of course you can´t blame popular culture for the level of violence, but it´s a contributing factor none the less. One of the many factors in the equation. Certainly the environment you bring up children in, is another factor. I don´t know if the actual statistics on violence (murder, assault, robberies etc.) has increased or decreased. It would be interesting to find out! Perhaps there lies the final answer!
As for gun laws, I think the US should adopt the european gun laws. Here you can be a hunter all you like and you can be a member of a shooting club and shoot all you like. There´s only a couple of vital restrictions: You can´t carry your weapon for personal protection (if your life is at risk, you can get a special permit to carry from the police) and you can´t buy guns over the counter freely. That way hunters and members of shooting clubs have their needs fulfilled and the public safety have their needs fulfilled. Of course easy access to guns means more gun killings! Now, any nut or jealous husband can buy a gun at the spur of the moment and blast innocent people out of existence. What kind of "freedom" is that? Does anyone really think that if everybody carried guns there would be no gun killings? But the opposite is true: If you can´t buy guns freely , the level of gun killings will be much lower. You only need to look at the statistics of gun killings in the US and compare them to Canada and European statistics! I remember Michael Moore went through them in "Bowling For Columbine"...
Barko
Member
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:09 am

Postby Robb_K » Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:06 am

Rockerduck wrote:However, I don't agree with Rob that the world has become more violent. Just today I tead a story in a free Dutch newspaper, which told about a professor who, after doing research, concluded that the world nowadays is much less violent that hundreds of years ago. I think everybody, no matter their age, wants to believe the world was better and safer when they were younger --despite the facts.

Also, I don't think television or films or computer games are to blame. I believe it's too superficial to put the blame on them. That was also a point made by Moore in 'Bowling for Columbine'. After the Columbine-incident, there was a witchhunt after Marilyn Manson. Instead, one should look at the environment in which kids grow up. I think it's not a question of a violent culture as well as an individualist culture (again, like Moore also pointed out). Without a decent upbringing and education, the risk of kids doing these awful thing increases significantly, I think.

That's not to say that the laws concerning weapons in the US should be much stricter. I've heard opponents says: "then why don't you ban knives? People kill with knives too", but that argument doesn't ring true. Knives are generally not produced to kill, but a gun is. And then there are people who say: "if everybody had a gun, we would be safer" and that's also not true. Baghdad is unsafe, *because* everybody has guns in their house. But if you make it difficult or even almost impossible to get a hold of guns, the risk of tragic incidents will decline.

I agree with you, Rockerduck, on MOST of your points. But, I don't agree with you that the USA was just as violent when I was growing up than it is now. Your professor stated that The World was more violent "hundreds of years ago". Despite the fact that I am significantly older than you are, I wasn't alive hundreds of years ago. I grew up in the late 1940s and 1950s. I say that the societies in Canada, USA and The Netherlands (places I observed in those days), were significantly less violent than they are now. I'm not talking about the period just before, including World War II (when there was much more violence than now).

I agree that the environment in which children are raised has more to do with the way they behave than watching violent films or playing violent video games, or listening to violence-themed "Gangsta Rap". But I believe that all those things foster a growing desensitivity to violence in youth, and a growing feeling that such violence is "normal" and to be expected. I think it DOES help make the situation worse. In terms of the threat of violence to the average person in The Western Countries, current times are among the SAFEST in human history. But I can tell you that the late 1940s and 1950s were MUCH MUCH safer for people in USA than now. I have met many people who have lost a family member or friend to a gunshot murder in the past 30 years. But never back in the '50s or early '60s.

I agree with you that guns make it much easier for many, many more people to be hurt badly or killed than when just knives and clubs were available. Also, when I was young there were the same number of fights per capita. But MOST of them were fought with fists and wrestling, and no one died. now a lot of arguments end with lethal shootings. I think that the much stronger gun controls in Western European countries and Canada, make those places a lot safer than USA. I NEVER go out walking at night in USA. I do that frequently in Europe and Canada, with no thought that it may be unsafe.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Rockerduck » Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:29 pm

Barko wrote:But the opposite is true: If you can´t buy guns freely , the level of gun killings will be much lower. You only need to look at the statistics of gun killings in the US and compare them to Canada and European statistics! I remember Michael Moore went through them in "Bowling For Columbine"...

To be fair, Moore made a vital mistake in doing that: he forgot to adjust the statistics he found to the size of the population in the countries. He merely pointed out that there are much less gun-related incidents in European countries, but he didn't add that that might be due to the size of the population. I still support stricter gun laws, though.
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Rockerduck » Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:34 pm

Rob:

I think people in the 1940's and 1950's looked more after another. It was a different time. Families and communities were much stronger. Today, the world is more individualistic. I think that's one of the reasons why violence, especially among teenagers, has increased. Nobody's looking after them. Nobody is controlling what they do, how they feel. Also, I don't want to generalize, because I'm not familiar with any details, but it seems to me the education in the US has become very bad (at least, that's what I've read here and there).
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Robb_K » Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:04 pm

Rockerduck wrote:
Barko wrote:But the opposite is true: If you can´t buy guns freely , the level of gun killings will be much lower. You only need to look at the statistics of gun killings in the US and compare them to Canada and European statistics! I remember Michael Moore went through them in "Bowling For Columbine"...

To be fair, Moore made a vital mistake in doing that: he forgot to adjust the statistics he found to the size of the population in the countries. He merely pointed out that there are much less gun-related incidents in European countries, but he didn't add that that might be due to the size of the population. I still support stricter gun laws, though.

Rockerduck: Even adjusting on a per capita basis, there are many more gun-related casualties in USA than in The Western European countries. Russia may have as many as USA, due to the lawlessness there, since the breakup of The Soviet Union. The last figures I saw showed that Canada had only ONE HUNDREDTH the gun-related killings that the USA had, on a per capita basis.

If guns were much more difficult to get in USA, their figures would drop significantly (not as low as Canada's-due to cultural differences), but they'd be much, much lower. All violence wouldn't stop, but deaths would be lowered significantly.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Robb_K » Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:06 pm

Rockerduck wrote:Rob:

I think people in the 1940's and 1950's looked more after another. It was a different time. Families and communities were much stronger. Today, the world is more individualistic. I think that's one of the reasons why violence, especially among teenagers, has increased. Nobody's looking after them. Nobody is controlling what they do, how they feel. Also, I don't want to generalize, because I'm not familiar with any details, but it seems to me the education in the US has become very bad (at least, that's what I've read here and there).

I agree with you on both counts. The education in USA is getting worse and worse. The morals are very low as well, due to a big change in values in that country. There are many angry and frustrated people there.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Rockerduck » Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:35 pm

I wonder how that low moral and angry and frustrated people can be explained when it's one of the most religious countries in the world. (Or maybe it can, because religious people often tend to 'talk the talk, but they don't walk the walk'. But that's another debate.)

Robb_K wrote:Rockerduck: Even adjusting on a per capita basis, there are many more gun-related casualties in USA than in The Western European countries. Russia may have as many as USA, due to the lawlessness there, since the breakup of The Soviet Union. The last figures I saw showed that Canada had only ONE HUNDREDTH the gun-related killings that the USA had, on a per capita basis.

I don't know if that's true. I would believe what you're saying, but I don't know for sure. However, I assume that you're right, but that still doesn't justify Moore for doing a poor job at this particular point.
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Next

Return to Off-Topic International

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron