Yes, Mass Shootings are a Uniquely American Phenomenon

Posted by

But so is the cultural and right-wing media obsession with guns

In 2008, during his rough and tumble presidential primary campaign against Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama got into some trouble at a fundraising event when he made these comments about working-class voters:

“They get bitter; they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Clinton, of course, nailed him for the comment, hoping to resurrect her campaign. And Republicans were all over him as well, but that’s no surprise. To them and Clinton at the time, it was a way to further the narrative that Obama was an out-of-touch elitist.

But rather than break down the quote word for word, which by the way is 100% accurate, for purposes of this post and the recent tragedies in the news, let’s focus on these four words: they cling to their guns.

Indeed they do. Some estimates put the entire quantity of guns Americans own at upwards of 350 million, which means there are several million more guns than if each American owned a gun per person. And yes, the mass shootings we keep experiencing, including the most recent in Atlanta and Boulder, are, without a doubt, a uniquely American phenomenon in the modern world.

We love our damn guns in this country. And it seems as though there’s a segment of society who think any possible attempt to regulate (isn’t that word in the Constitution?) their firearms is nothing but a plot by Democrats to seize them all. When a Democrat is elected, gun and ammunition sales skyrocket. Hell, soon we may get to 400 million in circulation. When will we get to 500 million? 600? Surely we’ll get there soon enough.

But while the mass shootings are certainly uniquely American, so is the obsession with guns in general and the cultural and political divide that drives it all. And nothing epitomizes the fixation more than how the right-wing echo chamber reports on gun violence. Once again, Fox News is leading the way in dividing, misleading, and gas-lighting the country.

As is usually the case, when it came to reporting on the Boulder shooting, you may not have gotten an accurate picture of what was happening depending on what news you were watching. When the news broke, MSNBC and CNN were reporting on the shooting non-stop. When law enforcement finally had a news conference in the early evening to update what happened, both of those networks carried it live.

Fox, on the other hand, had more important things to cover. Even after learning that ten people lost their lives, Laura Ingraham interviewed someone about the “farce” of social distancing. Later, Tucker Carlson talked about the beginning of the end for girls’ sports and Miami’s recent spring break melee. Talk about “Breaking News,” huh?

At the top of the hour after the news conference, Fox did do a quick update on the shooting, saying their thoughts and prayers were with the victims and would keep “monitoring” the situation as more facts became known.

Let’s face it. Fox didn’t want to cover the event because it goes against their far-right narrative; owning a gun is a God-given right. And it doesn’t play to their base of viewers either. It’s far better they change the subject to Democrats wanting to confiscate your guns rather than dig deep into what’s causing the mass shootings in the first place: There are too many freaking guns in America, and it’s too damn easy to buy one.

Time and again, we end up in the same place. Democrats in Congress demand we do something, anything, to try and reduce gun violence. Republicans say Democrats are playing politics and want to take your guns. Fox News and other outlets like them are more than happy to perpetuate that narrative.

In a sense, it’s the culture that drives Fox, and Fox helps drive the culture. It’s a symbiotic relationship we’ve seen throughout the pandemic as well. As I wrote in a previous piece, it’s become a toxic mix that has made America an even more dangerous place to live.

While the hosts on Fox regularly downplay the pandemic and wearing masks, they do not practice what they preach. Most, if not all, broadcast remotely and have been told it would be that way until September.

They tell their viewers Dr. Fauci is nothing but an incompetent scientist. They bring on quacks like Dr. “herd immunity” Scott Atlas to spread disinformation and conspiracy theories. But in the meantime, the hosts isolate themselves from the public and watch as those very same viewers refuse to wear masks and spread Covid throughout the communities in which they live.It’s shameful. Over half a million dead from COVID, thousands of others dead from guns every year, and Fox doesn’t give a crap about any of them. It’s as if the network itself is a death cult. Harsh? Yes, but what else are we left to determine?

It would be a dereliction in duty not to mention the other entity that’s become an even more lethal and existential threat than Fox News or the radical gun culture in America: The Republican Party. They’re worse because they control what policies are passed in Congress — or even worse — policies that are not.

Complete obstruction is all they have left these days. The only way any common-sense legislation on gun safety gets passed is if the Democrats develop a steel spine and do away with the filibuster. How many of us are skeptical that will happen?

Something may get done, but none of us should hold our breath. The Republican Party, Fox News, and the gun nuts of America will stand in the way of anything substantial. Not even a limited background check initiative stands much of a chance.

The real question all of us need to ask, though, is why? Why are they preventing lives from being saved by passing common-sense gun safety laws? Why the dangerous stance on vaccines, masks, and social distancing, all of which will help us get through this nightmare that’s plagued our society over the past year?

The complete disregard for human life is the hallmark of a death cult. Obama was right nearly 13 years ago when he said working-class voters cling to their guns. What’s even worse is that they’re more than willing to sacrifice lives to amass an armada of weapons even dictators like Hitler and Stalin would envy.

You’re damn right mass shootings are uniquely American. But so is the death cult, whose membership grew exponentially during the former guy’s term. What are we going to do about them?

150 comments

  1. For goodness how long, The British still in our imperial haze envisaged ‘The Arabs’ as all dressed like extras out of ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ (except for the women who all wore black burkas) while waving and shooting very long barrelled rifles in the air, we also ‘admired’ the various tribes from Afghanistan as noble warriors who did something similar (only their clothes were darker and more rugged). We were aware that American ‘cops’ carried guns, so did gangsters and Private Eyes. Other Americans had guns because they were farmers or when they went hunting, and that was the way of the world. And ‘everyone’ ‘knew’ the Kennedys had been shot by the Military/Intelligence services, while Wallace had it coming, but Reagan and Ford had been shot by ‘kooks’. And there had been Prohibition and The Wild West.
    That was in the long ago now as the number of mass killings mount and make headline news it has dawned upon the British public that there is this ‘gun culture’ in the USA and these folk are not like our regulated ‘Hunting, Shooting and Fishing’ folk but are folk who would make you want to buy a gun just in case one of them got too close to you.
    I have tried to engage with a couple over the media, but it is a one-way street; they have an encyclopaedic knowledge of fire arms (apparently Burford’s Cavalry at Gettysburg did not have carbines but something else- I couldn’t tell the difference) and do not exchange views They tell you theirs and that is that. And one admired the Native American for resisting the Government and dying noble deaths (who knew smallpox, TB and alcoholism were noble?).
    Who knows where it will lead. If they persist in their aggressive, tunnel vision way, the next path will be those who swore they would never carry guns start to, ‘just in case’. I understand there members of the LGBT community fed up of being harassed and threatened are starting to ‘pack’. Firearms unlike NRA folk are not one-way traffic. Of course lots of anti-gun folk could join the NRA and work from within (but that’s more a European infiltration style-might not work in America) .
    Take care you guys.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Thanks Roger for your usual wisdom on how things are over here. The NRA at one time, was basically a gun safety organization. They’d advertise it in their letters and publications. But that all changed in the 70s and 80s when they joined the gun manufacturers in a severely unholy alliance, which has infested our society ever since. Do you realize, Roger, that the NRA and Republican Party have successfully blocked any ability to study the long-term affects to public health that guns inflict on the streets of America? Our National Institutes of Health have wanted to study the issue for years, but Congress/Republicans have blocked the effort. That tells you all you need to know about the power of these people. It’s got to change Roger. Fast.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Firstly thanks Jeff.
        Y’know. Back in the 1950/60s transfer of decades I picked up on aspects American culture through TV programmes, comic books and American SF (British was too turgid and self-absorbed), then I was hooked on the music. From there I marvelled at the way such a large nation could hold itself together as a workable democracy and was fascinated at the balance between The Administration, The Legislative and the Judiciary. Yes there was lots which was not palatable, but what nation is pure, spotless and does not have an unpleasant side- none I have come across.
        For years and years I had constant run-ins with fellow brits of all political stripes who had, actually racist views on ‘Americans’ as one single group. I thought of the USA as my kind of adopted nation.
        Sadly no longer, I see a nation riven by many issues and a substantive portion of the populations who adhere to warped opinions like some Caucasian western and diluted version of ISIS.
        It is interesting that you mention that turn around in the 1970s & 1980s, as that would be the time the Religious Right rose lead by their hypocritical and very wealthy preacher caste, and all fed by characters given radio shows to spout even more division.
        Of course as far as minority groups are concerned this is business as usual, but the ranks of Hate, Intolerance and Fear have grown more confidence.
        I’ve been over this before, time and time again, but it bears repeating. No nation, ever has experienced total stability and many have fractured from greatness into bits. The path to the separation of the states in diverse nations is becoming more likely and this would not be pleasant and populations move from hostile places to more of their own (an old story in Europe and Asia).
        As you say, it has to change, and fast. But The How and The Why, now there’s the rub (Hamlet).
        Take care you guys. History is a bumpy and stormy ocean.

        Like

  2. This: any possible attempt to regulate … their firearms is nothing but a plot by Democrats to seize them all. is spot-on!

    Just yesterday, my other-half and I had a heated (on his side, anyway) discussion on gun control. Yes, he’s an avid –but VERY safe– gun owner. It’s like a hobby for him in that he has a sizeable collection of various styles and calibers — ALL of them stored in a gun safe!

    Nevertheless, the NRA has him all worked up related to this latest move by the Democrats and he is totally convinced it’s leading to a complete and total confiscation of ALL guns! (Talk about religious brainwashing!) It’s just so frustrating that reputable gun-owners seem unable to take themselves out of the picture and recognize that there are NUT-CASES running around killing people!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I feel for you Nan, having to have that discussion with your other half. It’s usually a no-win argument when it comes to guns for some people-most people on the right that is. They’re more than willing to be ok with sacrificing innocent people’s lives at the hands of deranged killers, rather than giving up any of their ‘God-given right’ to own a gun. It’s such a ridiculous argument. Hell, expanded background checks are supported by almost everyone in the country. But even that can’t get done. I hope this time will be different. I fear it’s same old same old though.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Reblogged this on Filosofa's Word and commented:
    Our friend Jeff, like myself, is still reeling from the recent mass shootings. And, as our friend Keith so often reminds us, while the mass shootings get a ton of notice, many more die in other, less publicized shootings and suicides. I want guns gone, but realistically will have to settle for some sweeping gun legislation that reduces the number of incidents, injuries and deaths. Good post, Jeff … thanks!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You’re the best Jill! Thank you! I’m with you. I wish we could do away with all of them. I know that’s not realistic though. But Jesus, can we at least get a freaking background check bill done? That’s something so minor, but the radical right Congress can’t even agree to it. So damn shameful!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Awwww … thanks, Jeff! I had a very hateful comment on another post about guns tonight … the commenter, not a regular reader, said that I was insane, and that any and all gun laws were an infringement on his rights. I replied that his guns were an infringement on my right to life, and that my right to life came long before the 2nd Amendment. But, I also told him that I wished I had a magic button that would disable every form of weapon in the world. You’re right … the background checks are a no-brainer just as is a ban on assault weapons. Those were designed solely for military use! But now we can turn a crowd in a church, mall, or grocery store into shreds in under a minute … and this, to me, is indefensible!

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yes, that person represents a minority-a sizable one at that-in this country who own their weapons of war like a badge of honor. I’m like you..wish we could disable every damn firearm in the world. So sick of the destruction.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. One acquaintance told me that ultimately I would be forced to own a gun to protect myself. As I told him, if that’s what it takes to “protect” myself, then I’ll just accept my fate and let someone rot in jail for killing me. I will never, as long as I live, own or touch a firearm. Period.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Btw, I shall respond to you tomorrow, instead. To your earlier email, that is. Thought I’d be able to today. But tomorrow for sure Jill….

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Trying to be objective, and aware of the dangers of commenting on another country’s culture, but you hit the question ‘why’ and I’m still puzzled. Mass shootings are not unique to the US, but you certainly seem to have more than anywhere else. I can’t imagine you have more nutters than anywhere else, so the obvious thing is to control the guns. The US has vast areas of wilderness that the UK doesn’t have; I can understand why, in some circumstances, it may be sensible to carry a weapon. But there has to be a reason for it. Guns are fascinating; I get that. But why would you want one that actually worked? I accept you can’t ban them; but why would any reasonable person object to making sure that guns are only legally sold to someone that a) Has a reason to have one and b) Is deemed mentally stable? Interesting that you link this issue with those who are against trying to defeat Covid and save lives; we have those too. We all value our freeedoms, but there’s a kind of playground mentality about these people; if it wasn’t so dangerous, life-threatening and selfish, it would be laughable.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. So glad you are weighing in my friend. I value anyone’s opinion from across the pond. You speak eloquently about our problem and you’re spot on. Someone posted on Twitter the other day how Japan deals with guns. Talk about restrictive! But frankly, I wish we were even half as restrictive as they are. I believe we could save thousands of lives with just some common-sense legislation. But as you inferred with our massive ‘rural’ areas here, it’s a hard sell for some of these people. They really do love their guns. But the real issue more than anything else: why do we need these semi-automatic weapons in the hands of our citizens? Simple answer is, we do not. But banning them will take a minor miracle. Just one of many many problems were dealing with over here friend. Thanks for the insight though, and hope to hear from you again.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I think you hit the nail on the proverbial head when you spoke of culture. On various forums I’ve pointed out to anti-control types that various gun control laws work, and are proven to work, all around the world. From Japan’s zero-tolerance stance, to Germany’s allowance for firearms but only of certain types (along with regular evaluations), gun control laws work. Unfortunately, anti-control types are adamant that their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment means zero restrictions on guns in any way shape or form.

    They also refuse to see that the Constitution is not infallible – it has after all been amended before. Just because it’s ‘Constitutional’, it doesn’t mean it’s right/good, and vice-versa. May I have permission to reblog this (with the note that you may get a visit from a gun-nut who pesters one of my sites)?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. This comment of yours: Just because it’s ‘Constitutional’, it doesn’t mean it’s right/good, and vice-versa. seems to what many in today’s government believe as they are doing all they can to override the parts they don’t like.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I speak as an outsider. I’m from the UK, where we don’t have a Constitution per see. I can’t say I’m intimately familiar with the Constitution, but given when it was written, it is always entirely relevant to the here and now?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Undoubtedly there are parts of it that would benefit from some “tweaking,” but it is the standard that the U.S. long ago determined as the document to govern by. The problem that concerns many of us state-siders is there are individuals who don’t like some parts of it and have taken it upon themselves to “alter” it — NOT by overall public/national agreement, but by their personal actions as elected representatives.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Thanks so much for the feedback and compliment. I don’t think I’ve seen you here before but regardless, welcome! And you most certainly can re-blog the post. I welcome any gun-nut who wants to spout off to me. I’m ready for him! If he gets to crazy I can always mute him. But I’d love to hear from him. These people are militant to the core about their ‘little toys.’ I’ve had enough of them to be honest. Regulations DO work. You and I know that it does because we actually look at the facts. 400 million plus guns in America is beyond insane. I’d love to throw all of them in a big ditch and let them rot forever. I realize it’s not going to happen. But, you get the idea of where I’m coming from.
      Once again, thanks my friend. Hope to hear from you again!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You are a damn fool who fantasizes bout killing all gun owners yet I am the insane one for owning guns and knowing how they are the best way to protect ones self

        Like

      2. Buy as many guns as you want friend. I guess that’s your 2nd Amendment right. I don’t fantasize about killing anyone, fyi. Maybe that’s just your paranoia taking over. Good luck. Thanks for responding

        Liked by 1 person

      3. “400 million plus guns in America is beyond insane. I’d love to throw all of them in a big ditch and let them rot forever” You saying this to me seems like you want to throw all gun owners dead in a ditch to rot . Or at least you wish some jack boot thugs would come along and kill theses people to steal their property to satisfy your sick fantasy . Guns used property are for defense be that of ones self ones family one home / property/ and on grand scale ones town / state or nation . Nothing is so evil as denying free people the right to defend themselves. I am willing to die to protect my rights are people like you willing to kill or die to take them?

        Like

      4. Criminals, rioters, misguided Antifa / BLM activists . would be tyrants / authoritarians, Pretty much anyone seeking to do harm . Hell even toss in wild animals as well. Guns are used properly are simply for defense of ones self one family ones property and or on a grand scale ones state / nation. Bad people exist restricting private law abiding citizens from have any means of self defense in my opinion is evil . I am pro 2a to the point of private citizens being allowed any arms the military has . That means full auto squad weapons SURPLUS Tanks APC’s hell even weaponized drones. If military has it pretty much citizens should be also allowed to buy it if they can afford it even fighter jets if they are licensed to fly and can afford to store them safely at a air port .

        Like

      5. I’m beginning to think there’s a bit of tongue-in-cheek going on here …

        However, if not then I truly feel sorry for you that you live in such a frightened state of mind, worrying that “bad people” are lurking around every corner ready to strike you and your loved ones dead. (BTW, what makes YOU so special (dangerous?) that “they” would zero in on you and yours?)

        Liked by 2 people

      6. I do not live in fear simply owning a carrying a gun is not done out of fear it is out of knowing bad people do exist and that me being a white male who is more liberty / right wing minded means your side has a target on my back because I will not comply or shut up about your sides bullshit.

        Like

      7. I do not think I’ve heard a more paranoid bunch of BS in my life. My friend, I know you’re serious, and that’s what makes me cringe. There are many folks out there in America who feel exactly the way you do. And it’s why we’re heading quickly down the rabbit hole of hell in this country. I don’t know what it took for you to feel the way you do, but I’m sorry for whatever happened to you in this life. I wish you no ill-will at all. I just want a life where I do not have to fear some whack job with a military style weapon might blow be away while I’m drinking my coffee, buying groceries, or anything else I might do in public. I have just as much right to my freedom to move around my community without that fear, as you do to possess a firearm. 400-500 million guns circulating in this country isn’t enough for you huh? I’m frankly disgusted with your views and suggest some anger management classes. Thanks

        Liked by 2 people

      8. Yeah you do wish all American gun owners ill will you wish for their property to be stole by democrat government people. AND If they refuse you would say they should die. So no pal you do wish me ill will. I have grown up in some of the most restrictive gun control places in America and the over all gun issue is not legal gun owners . It is violent criminals who either stole their guns or bought them illegally . Sometimes background checks do not catch all the bad people due to enept record keeping or outdated records. You do not have to right to not be afraid me simply walking around with a pistol should not make you fear me unless you are doing shit you should be shot for . No 400 or 500 million is not enough no limit to how many would be enough long as we as free people have a right to bear arms.

        Like

      9. That’s quite a leap to say I want all gun owners imprisoned or killed, isn’t it? What the hell is up with you friend? I want common sense gun safety laws. That’s it. How you equate that with me wanting you imprisoned or killed is ridiculous and paranoid beyond belief.

        Liked by 1 person

      10. No you want weapons banned and confiscated and you know what will happen when gun owner refuse to comply ith their property being stolen by the government.

        Like

      11. I’ve been listening forever about how Dems are going to take your guns. Obama! Obama! Obama did basically nothing on guns. He tried for extended background checks. Your crazy Republican politicians told him to go pound sand. Again, your paranoia is troubling. You seem hellbent on some kind of war being started in America. Is that your hope?

        Liked by 1 person

      12. Says who? That’s your hysteria again. Robust background checks, both at point of purchase and after, exist in other countries. Therefore there are clearly methods that work. Instead of dismissing the idea or pretending checks will be by biased workers, why not look at how it’s been successfully implemented elsewhere.

        Like

      13. Well other countries are not as large population wise also most other countries have a much further disregard for gun rights . Just because your anti gun rights dream system works in other nations doe no mean we must adopt it. I refuse to have my right to bear arms be held hostage by some far left bias ass social worker. Sorry but most if not all in the mental healthcare field are left wing bias . What do you mean robust demanding a mental check spying and demanding access to a persons phone and Social media. Your bias against guns makes you think any further restriction no matter how bias against the owner is good. Let me also assume you want the gov to also dictate how you may store your property. Further training for carry permits I can compromise on ie 20hrs of training instead of the 1 to 3 hours most states require .

        Like

      14. It’s not a case of ‘disregarding gun rights’ Asher. It’s a case of practical and sensible means to protect life. You are making wild, sweeping generalisations about mental healthcare workers, yet you have bemoaned the apparent stereotyping of gun owners (no one has stereotyped gun owners, except in your imagination). This is a further example of your staggering hypocrisy. Again, look to what has worked in other countries – really LOOK – don’t make assumptions (if that’s actually possible for you).

        Like

      15. What is common sense about banning all guns except single shot or bolt action . What is common sense in demanding nation gun owner lists that both the gov and the public can access? what is common sense about demanding all gun owners or buyers to be put under mental health Scrutiny by bias likely anti gun female social workers . What is common sense about allowing red flag laws to be called in by exes or family member who also despise you for owning guns. Red flag laws punish gun owners with no due process the Jack boot thugs bust in your home steal your property and you will likely be shot or never get your property back. That all is common sense to your kind no due process for gun owners because our rights / right to bear arms matters less than you fear.

        Like

      16. No your side ant all your anti gun demands 0 compromise and if e gun owners refuse to put up with tyrannical anti gun laws yall feel we should be arrested and or worse

        Like

      17. Utter rubbish Asher. You are inventing arguments people haven’t made because you lack both the integrity and the capability to address the arguments *actually* raised.

        Liked by 1 person

      18. You people simply want it make it as hard as possible for a legal gun owner to keep their guns or a new one to purchase one. You refuse to address illegal gun owner and just wish to punish those who make the effort to follow the current gun laws . I do not think you are coming from any kind of sane or rational stance on gun ownership you have said you do not think the right to bear arms should be respected . Because you misrepresent well regulated and the militia parts of the Second Amendment. You do not understand or respect gun culture nor the self defense aspect . Answer this do you think people have the right to defend themselves with possible lethal force if they are being attacked or stolen from? You have refused to answer this numerous times.

        Like

      19. The only person misrepresenting the 2nd Amendment is you. A well-regulated militia is not an ‘unregulated militia’, yet you appear to read the 2nd A as meaning ‘anyone and everyone can have any weaponry they want, with little or no vetting or evaluating of their suitability to wield them’. That’s obviously *not* well-regulated.

        You think I’m not being rational about guns? Is that because I do this thing that you hate called ‘presenting facts’? Boo hoo. I know you love to lie, but there’s nowhere to hide Asher. The USA is an inherently more violent and dangerous country than most other developed nations. That’s a fact. The USA has a problem with mass shootings that’s unique among developed nations. That’s also a fact. Countries like France, Germany and Switzerland (and the UK for that matter) allow for gun ownership but employ consistent, nationwide systems and policies regarding firearms – and the USA doesn’t. That’s also a fact.

        Another fact. The US murder rate with guns only is higher than the Germany, French, and Japanese murder rate. Three US cities are in the top 50 most dangerous cities in the world for murder. You’re twice as likely to be murdered in New York than in London – and New York is one of the *safer* US cities!

        You say I don’t respect gun culture? Why *would* I respect it?! It’s obviously not a healthy thing. The USA was 9th in the world for total gun deaths, according to data gathered over the last decade or so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

        Gun culture has allowed US society to believe these deadly weapons matter more than the right to life. You yourself have admitted that. You are being deliberately blind to the facts Asher. Stop being dishonest.

        Liked by 1 person

      20. your ilk will not be happy until no citizen can protect themselves like is the case in the UK You wish for the strictest forms of gun control making it nearly impossible to . own any weapon Gun owners have been compromising our right to bear arms for over 100 years . Fact is you are a bootlicking asshole who wants tyranny and revoking of rights of anyone who refuses to think like you do done do not ping back to me my page or even think about me any further you have not once been willing to allow for comprmise you want sweeping gun registries so gov can come steal peoples legally purchased property you want forced invasive mental health checks on owners and no due process for them to have their property stolen 1 wrong answer boom you have no right to protect yourself. You know the mental health field has a bias you ignore it thinking any of them give a god damn about protecting some ones rights they get off on drugging and berating people with issues or in my case simply locking me up to be abused by staff . Fuck every last mental health worker in the world. Fuck every last gun control NAZI like your self too

        Like

      21. As usual, a pack of hysterical lies from the coward. I have repeatedly referenced the gun laws of countries beyond the UK… so of course you whine about the UK. You’ll quietly ignore how the UK is inherently safer, in favour of hyperbole. Why am I not shocked? You favour death over life – the lives of *children* matter less to you than the right to run around with guns – so guess what? I’ll ping your deceitful, shambolic far-right site as much as I want, to highlight the idiocy and arguments of the true nazi in all of this. Clearly, you won’t be happy with anything less than the regular spilling of blood for the sake of your right to have guns.

        Liked by 1 person

      22. again answer the question do people have the right to protect themselves with possible lethal force? Or no just let people or gov officers bust in and attack steal anything they want ? Gonna bet you side with every other dictator in history that confiscated peoples property .

        Like

      23. Why would I jump through hoops for you? You, who makes sweeping broad generalisations about healthcare workers yet decries sweeping broad generalisations about gun owners (even when no one is making sweeping generalisations)? You cannot apply your own approach evenly, you don’t even understand your own Constitution, and you think the lives of kids matter less than the right to have guns. When it’s pointed out to you in painstaking detail that there are *various* forms of gun control that *work*, resulting in clearly safer societies, you whine about your rights to have guns (and I for one have never said ‘ban all guns’, I’ve even said that would be impractical, only for you to ignore that like the lying coward you are).

        When you can address the arguments and facts, not your imagination arguments, I’ll answer your question.

        Liked by 1 person

      24. darthtimon, I’ve blocked Asher from our blog. I see where he threatened you with a bloody nose. The man is seriously deranged. I just can’t allow him to say such things on our site. I hope you understand. You forewarned me about him. I totally understand now. You, of course, are always welcome here!

        Liked by 2 people

      25. Thanks Brooking! I’m now trying to determine whether or not to report his comment to the authorities. Does it class as a threat to inflict harm? Is he even worth reporting? Or might his instability make him dangerous to someone else?

        Liked by 1 person

      26. Boy, that’s a tough one. I certainly might consider reporting him to WordPress though. They might be able to do something. Maybe a warning to him, or something like that. Hell, maybe they might suspend his account for a time. There’s just no place for such crap. Good riddance to him!

        Liked by 1 person

      27. asher, you ask — do people have the right to protect themselves with possible lethal force

        Maybe you haven’t noticed, but this is the 21st Century not the wild, wild west. Who/what are you so afraid of? Must be difficult to live in such fear that you need a trusty lethal weapon at your side.

        Like

      28. Asher, alongside his paranoia, is a liar who goes out of his way to distort arguments. Take for example Brooking’s wish to throw guns in a ditch, something I believe their post made quite clear – Asher reimagines that to mean ‘gun owners’. It’s a wilful, deliberate misinterpretation of a clear statement, which he then attacks vigorously – because he’s too cowardly to address the *actual* argument.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Brookingslib, Asher Slade, Nan and Jill Dennison, the text of the Second Amendment says in plain and simple English, “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.” Proponents of gun control omit the latter part of the Second Amendment in order to justify the push for gun confiscation and control.

    Like

    1. No, they don’t “omit” anything. They simply interpret the Amendment in the way it was intended AND considering the TIME in which it was written.

      It’s interesting that the “interpretation” of written documents tends to lean towards the preference/prejudices of the individual. (Especially religious material.)

      Like

    2. The text also speaks of a well-regulated militia, not an unregulated one. Nor is the 2nd Amendment capable of addressing how individuals can acquire fourteen AR-15 semi-automatic rifles without so much as even a token alarm bell going off somewhere as to why. Nor does it address the imbalance between weapons approximating modern military weapons and the training and evaluation of the people wielding them.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Darth Timon, if there are no restrictions on what armaments can be owned, that should render all pushes for gun control as Unconstitutional. Your right to self-defense, my right to self-defense, as well as that of millions of other people, should never be taken up for public vote.

        Like

      2. But there already *are* restrictions. ‘Well-regulated’ sees to that. Moreover, why the assumption that Constitutional = unwaveringly good and unconstitutional = always bad? There are many other countries that have various forms of gun control and much lower problems with gun crime, especially murder.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Darth Timon, if you want to live in a gun-free zone, move to a country that allows no citizen the opportunity to defend himself or herself. Problem solved.

        Like

      4. I live in the UK, but your argument is not an argument and addresses nothing I mentioned. The UK is a safer country than the USA. France is safer, Germany is safer, Canada is safer, Australia is safer, Japan is safer. Every one of those countries practices gun control laws, but they are all different forms of gun control. There is a high percentage of gun ownership in Germany. You can buy guns in the UK and France. The difference is one person can’t buy 14 assault rifles without someone noticing and asking questions. Other countries have much better forms of evaluating someone’s fitness to own these deadly weapons. All the countries I mentioned are much safer places to live than the USA. You might want to think about why, instead of making empty snarky replies.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Wait, one example overrides the on-going difference in safety in the US vs any one of the countries I listed before? Gun control clearly works. Why is the US murder rate with guns *only* higher than the total murder rates of France, Germany and Japan *combined*?

        Liked by 1 person

      6. Darth Timon, politicians who push for restrictions on guns have Secret Service who are armed to the teeth. If they are as uncomfortable with guns as they claim, they should forfeit that protection, otherwise they would be hypocrites.

        Like

      7. Is it? Or is it the self-fulfilling prophecy of ‘people have guns so I need guns so THEY need guns even more, oh look we all have guns and lots of people are dying?’

        Like

      8. To offer up something I posted elsewhere… Let’s start from the top. Urban areas, are they safer with or without guns? Among US cities, St. Louis has more murders per 100,000 people (64.54) than any other US city. Baltimore is next on 58.64 murders per 100,000 people. In third place is San Juan, with 54.01 murders per 100,000 people. Missouri, the State in which St. Louis resides, has some of the weakest gun control laws of any US State. Maryland (where Baltimore resides) is better, and Puerto Rico (host to San Juan) is quite slack. Detroit, fourth among US cities for murders, has a rate of 40.74 murders per 100,000 people, and Michigan, the State upon which Detroit sits in, has inconsistent gun laws. All figures are based on 2019.

        Whilst the following is from 2018 and therefore the numbers are slightly askew, it’s interesting to see how even some of the safest US cities compare with cities in other parts of the world. In 2018 London had a murder rate of 1.8 per 100,000 people. New York City had a murder rate of 3.4 per 100,000 people. To put it another way, you were twice as likely to be murdered in New York than in London.

        https://coalitionofthebrave.wordpress.com/2021/04/17/more-guns-less-violence/

        Like

      9. Darth Timon, the commonality in the cases with the mass murders is that law-abiding citizens are restricted from being able to adequately defend themselves.

        Like

      10. The Vegas shooter sprayed people with ranged weapons from his hotel room. In theory anyone else might have returned fire and created chaos. In the UK we have had two mass shootings, and the first, at a school in Dunblane, resulted in changes to the law that have meant only one subsequent mass shooting. It’s the presence of these weapons that is the common denominator in why US mass shootings are both extremely deadly and extremely common.

        Like

      11. Darth Timon, I would feel much safer if I was surrounded by people who were armed than people who were not in the event of a violent gang-related activity.

        Like

      12. And statistically I *know* I am safer here. Do you have children Ragnar? I have a daughter who is of school age. Do you know how often I worry about a shooter attacking her school? It never occurs to me. Contrast with the regular shooting drills US schoolkids have to go through.

        Like

      13. Really Ragnar? Are you even reading my posts, because I am not convinced. Teachers should be free to teach and nuture and guide their students, instead in the US you want them to be armed. This isn’t even considered in the UK and you’re not stopping to ask why that is. Kindly *read* my posts. Are you a parent?

        Liked by 1 person

      14. Darth Timon, I do read and reread each post I comment on, regardless of the blog. No, I am not a parent, however, I would want my kids to be safe wherever they are, even if guns are involved.

        Like

      15. And I know my child is safe, as we haven’t turned the right to own deadly weapons into a quasi-religious movement that overrides the right to life.

        Like

      16. Darth Timon, I understand. Not everyone likes spicy food and not everyone can tolerate it very well. If you like what you see, please drop a few comments. By the way, I have only one basic rule in my comments policy: No profanity and no personal attacks against me or anybody else. Aside from that, feel free to comment all you want. My blog is solely moderated, however, I am willing to make time to read all comments I get.

        Like

      17. Darth Timon, do you contribute to this blog as a regular member or just drop an occasional comment? I may have referred to this as your blog,however, I think it might belong to Brookingslib.

        Like

      18. It’s more a case of what I’d seek to remove from circulation. Semi-automatic weapons, any form of machine gun, especially those that are easily concealable, should be under tight restrictions. However It’s more about the education around guns, and better means of evaluating both would-be gun owners and existing gun owners. Regular checks on the mental fitness of gun owners and restrictions on the number of firearms per person would make a difference.

        Like

      19. Darth Timon, I agree with you in a sense. However, I would also say that it is unreasonable to call for a blanket gun ban in response to the actions of a few bad people.

        Like

      20. In fairness, I don’t see many people calling for a complete ban, though I do understand why people might do so. A consistent pattern, year on year, is that guns have been responsible for more than two-thirds of all US murders.

        Liked by 1 person

      21. We’ve kind of covered this already. Technically every school in the UK is a gun-free zone. How many school shootings have happened in the UK since Dunblane in 1996? None.

        Like

      22. Are we going down that rabbit hole? Bottom line, I have zero reason to believe mass shootings are rife in the UK. All the available facts tell me UK schools are much safer than US schools. Ask yourself why that is.

        Like

      23. What, in terms of guns? We have no guns in our society. We have a lower murder rate and no school shootings since 1996. As we have no guns we can’t have regulation on them – aside from the laws that ban most forms of firearm.

        Like

      24. Darth Timon, you probably know the history of the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting. Gun-free zone. Columbine shooting. Again, a gun-free zone. Mall shootings, gun-free zones. Gun control only affects law-abiding citizens, not criminals.

        Like

      25. Darth Timon, what would you prefer: Being defenseless from attacks by an armed robber and sitting on your hands or being able to defend yourself with deadly force if you absolutely have to?

        Like

      26. Isn’t that something of a false choice? I prefer a society where guns aren’t worshipped but instead recognised for the deadly, dangerous devices that they are. I prefer not having to worry about a shooter at my daughter’s school, or a shooter in town when my wife is out. I prefer being able to go to work without fearing a shooter storming the store.

        Liked by 1 person

      27. Darth Timon, I have no problem with reasonable regulations. The issue is with the hypocrites who preach about gun control but have armed security attending them at their beck and call.

        Like

      28. *Shrug* people in positions of power and authority will always be targets for fringe groups and lunatics. In a heavily-armed populace, they’ll need their security even more.

        Like

      29. So let me ask you, rag … if you were “carrying” and in a public area (festival, restaurant, mall, etc.) and several individuals entered the location and started randomly shooting near your location, what would you do to “defend” yourself and those around you?

        Are you a sharp-shooter that could –with total accuracy– “put down” one or all of the shooters? Or would you, more likely, miss your target and shoot one of the people running to get away?

        You see, the problem with private individuals with guns is that MOST of them have NO TRAINING … yet they think they are going to protect themselves and those around them.

        And one more thing … what about the individuals who “carry” and drink? What happens when a argument occurs after the gun-toting person has had too much … and whips out that gun to “settle an argument” ??

        Further, the “incidents of gun violence” have NOT gone down and more people are carrying guns today than ever before.

        Like

      30. Wow! Think about what you just wrote.

        WHY would people be “in fear for their lives” if no one was carrying a gun???

        I have no problem with the average individual owning guns … IF it’s used for legitimate purposes like hunting and/or target shooting. But for individuals to “carry” just because they think they need “protection” is the most asinine reason ever invented … for the exact reasons (and others) that I previously pointed out.

        Liked by 1 person

      31. True. But they’re not as readily available as they are now with a gun shop on practically every corner. Plus, as it it now, any Tom, Dick, or Harry that thinks they need “protection” can purchase a gun … to “protect” him from the OTHER Tom, Dick, or Harry that ALSO carries a gun.

        It’s a vicious circle, rag. And won’t stop until people like you stop thinking the world in general is out to harm you.

        Like

      32. Nan, I don’t subscribe to the paranoia of “the world is out to get me” like some people do. However, law-abiding citizens should not have to forfeit the basic human right to self-defense.

        Like

    3. My friend, in the latter part of the 18th Century, when our Constitution was being formulated, a musket was the type of gun used at that time. Can you honestly tell me that Thomas Jefferson, James Madison etc..could have honestly imagined the type of weaponry available to the American public today? I think you know the answer to that but it doesn’t matter to you, does it? You want to own whatever our military and police can use, and have as many as you want. Do I have that right?
      We are a laughingstock to the rest of the world. You may not care but I do. We lecture others on human rights. Yet, here we are, the murder capitol in the modernized Western world. This is a travesty. A sham. Despicable. Gun control? You’re damn right. Well-regulated, to me, means exactly what it says. If you want a weapon to defend yourself, fine. Have at it. But we should limit the type of weapon you can have, as well as the number. This is NOT unreasonable. This is NOT far-left BS. This is the right thing to do. Your view is the radical view. Most people in America, by wide margins, approve of stricter gun safety laws. I want a less violent society. You, on the other hand, have taken the approach that more arms is the answer. I wholeheartedly and resoundingly disagree-as is usually the case with you and I.

      Like

      1. I didn’t think I was insulting you personally. I do feel your view is in the minority in this country. That’s not an insult, just an observation.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s