Guns Don’t Kill People, GOP Laws Kill People



Guns don’t kill people, people kill people, has been the big selling point for the defense of the antiquated Second Amendment. Would there be cybercrime without the Internet? Do you ever hear drugs don’t kill people, people doing drugs kills people? Would there be homophobic bullying if it weren’t for religion preaching its alleged immorality through indoctrinated hate? Why is it the preponderance of guns is NEVER the reason for gun violence? With less than 5% of the world’s population, the United States is home to roughly 35–50 per cent of the world’s civilian-owned guns, heavily skewing the global geography of firearms and any relative comparison. Our culture of guns has armed our citizens with roughly 88 guns per 100 people.

The main reason is because the NRA, with the help of ALEC and the Heritage Foundation rule America through the Republican Party (and a few Democrats…

View original post 772 more words

26 comments on “Guns Don’t Kill People, GOP Laws Kill People

  1. What gets me with the whole gun thing in the US is that Canada doesn’t seem to have a similar problem despite a reasonably similar standard of living and laws.

    While Canadians are pretty laid back, why is there no history of frequent massacres there?

  2. Very good article, and very good point raised by 2353. I might point out though, that Canadians still use their firearms too much – on wildlife. That’s not cool either.

  3. From my experience with Canadians they don’t like Americans so much that they ‘pro-actively’ try not to emulate them to the point of not killing each other as much… besides which they are a much more humane and civilised country, eh…. where as in the USA, civility and humanities are but ‘lip-serviced’ in so far as you can make a buck out of it…..a.k.a. the USA’s worst enemy (IMO) is The U.S.A…….done did (doin’ ) it to themselves …… in the Asian Century the U.S.A. will be the ‘new’ Iran…. just say’n….. eh 😀

  4. Great article. BTW, I don’t think it’s useful to compare the Yanks with the Canadians.

    I suspect that Obama will have little effect on changing what many in Australia see as the US’s ‘gun culture’. I think the ‘problem’ iss much deeper than that.

    Many Americans believe that they ought to be ‘rugged individuals’ (Hoover captured that sentiment rather well) – reliant on themselves (and not government in all its forms) for their ‘destiny’, broadly defined. For many Americans, it raises the question of why be dependent on the ‘other’ (whether it be police or anyone else) when one can rely on oneself. Put simply, I need a gun so that I can be a ‘rugged individual’, independent of the ‘other’.

    The problem isn’t the ‘guns’ and the desire to own and use same but the underlying assumptions re humans and the way they ‘might’ or ‘should’ relate to the ‘other’.

  5. Guns sales have sky rocketed after both Obama presidential wins on the back of fear campaigns run by the gun lobbies and the rabid right including the Republicans.

    Gun incidents, including mass killings have risen on the back of increased gun sales after each Obama reelection.

    This leads into the question by 2353 @ 9:49 pm.

    Canada has a greater per capita gun ownership than the US but that was a statistic I read a fair while ago, yet has a fraction of the gun crimes and shootings.

    Why the difference?

    One thing is better gun control laws but the other big thing is fear.

    Almost from the time they are born Americans are conditioned to fear just about everything and it’s done to sell products. The powerful NRA instils fear to sell more guns on behalf of gun manufactures they represent.

    Fear of crime.
    Fear of personal attack.
    Fear of home invasion.
    Fear of invasion.
    Fear of government.
    Fear of terrorism and it goes on.

    There is a statistic the gun lobby always buries and that is of the number of shootings committed by the shooter getting hold of someone else’s gun at the time, be it family member as in the latest school shootings, someone known to the owner or a criminal getting hold of the victim’s gun. They are shootings that could not have occurred if the gun hadn’t been present in the first place.

    And Australia is not immune to this as the right in this country ramps up the fear everything for political gain.

    Not all that long ago, during Howard’s stewardship, the NRA made a push to slacken laws in Australia so gun manufacturers could sell purse guns to women under the umbrella of fear of rape and attack in the streets. By owning a purse gun these women apparently could take back the streets and be safe.

    That’s how it begins and ends going from small one or two shot purse guns to semi-automatic assault weapons.

  6. I had just typed a fairly comprehensive response and it’s disappeared.

    Not going to attempt to redo it so in short the answer to 2353’s question is fear.

    Americans are conditioned to fear just about everything from a very early age and more than anything fear of personal attack that can only be defended by having a gun. The instilling of fear is for the purpose of selling products and political gain.

    The NRA aided by the Republicans and Right on behalf of the gun manufacturers instil a fear of personal attack at any moment, home invasion, invasion of America, the government, terrorism (domestic and foreign) and it goes on, all things that they say can only be prevented by owning guns.

    It is no coincident that fear of of Obama being elected saw a massive surge of gun sales after each time he was elected and a corresponding increase in gun related incidents and shootings.

    There is a statistic the gun lobby suppresses and that is the number of gun incidents that are committed by the shooter using someone else’s gun, as happened in the latest school shooting. These are shootings that could not have occurred if the gun hadn’t been there in the first place.

    So for America it comes down to fear whereas in Canada they have better gun control laws and are not conditioned to fear everything.

  7. OK, that’s weird. Sorry for the double post but I can tell you that the first post did not go through. I refreshed and even shut down the browser and opened it again and it was not there until I posted the second one.

    Message is the same in both.

  8. Hopefully things are turning but I don’t think they will. As happened after the Picture Theatre shooting the gun lobby will run a propaganda campaign painting the massacres as “isolated incidents” that can be reduced by arming the population. After that propaganda campaign 67% of US citizens thought the shooting was an isolated incident.

    In today’s poll 52 percent think the shooting reflects “broader problems” while 43 percent think it represented an isolated act. Compare that to a poll taken after the movie theater shooting in Aurora this past summer when a whopping majority, 67 percent, believed the incident reflected isolated acts. This mirrors a Pew poll out today which finds that 47 percent of Americans think shootings like the one in Newtown are the result of “broader problems in society” compared to 44 percent who think they are “isolated acts.”

  9. “So for America it comes down to fear whereas in Canada they have better gun control laws and are not conditioned to fear everything.”

    Oh FFS, now I have heard it all….LMAO….

  10. There is a deafening silence from the NEA at the moment. I think the trump these chumps hang onto is the rediculously irrelevant 2nd amendment of the American constitution. Any meaningful gun law reform requires the political will to change the constitution. In a country fueled by the politics of fear that is bordering on impossible despite a country crippled by epidemic propitious gun crime. Guns don’t kill people? I think the laws are as crazy as the shooter. The media should never broadcast his name and he should be burried in an unmarked grave. Media poorer petrol on the burning man. No oxegen no fire. Copycats will enevatably follow, they have before and will again.

  11. Fat thumbs…NRA…ps It’s so hard for an Aussie to get their head around this tradegy. I had to wait a few days to comment. The difference between Australia amd the US OS bipartisan support to John Howard’s politically brave response to Port Arthur, his greatest legacy.

  12. ” Absolutely, fear defying logic. The second amendment is about as relevant as an ashtray on a bicycle.”

    Agreed. They are still debating what was actually meant by the second amendment. They are not even sure it was meant to include individuals, the document is that old it is totally out of date with a modern U.S.

    I listened to a young women from the gun lobby being interviewed on the BBC it spoke volumes to me. She was as about, as most Americans are that haven’t been to an ivy league university, as bright as a five watt globe. She had this sneering grin on her face the whole time she was speaking, it was like ” I know what’s best ” it was sickening to listen to..

    What is it with Yanks and guns? Penis envy maybe. Have you got a small dick Sparta? Just askin.

  13. Guns don’t kill people apparently. They’re just costume jewellery. Forensic experts are still mystified as to how bullets from these harmless clothing accessories keep ending up in dead and wounded people, particularly military personnel..

    They say they’re close to a breakthrough, so we can only wait with bated breath. :mrgreen:

  14. Jessie rightly shot me down (no pun intended) when I suggested that a gun buy-back plan similar to what Howard did here (the only good thing he ever did) would be something the presently debt-ridden country couldn’t afford. She responded:

    I think nothing is costlier than the lives of innocent children. Why can’t we buy back weapons? We afforded 2 wars totaling $3 trillion, why not clean up our crazy gun culture? No matter what its financial price tag.

    I must say I agree with her.

  15. Perhaps it’s just too ingrained in American society to change, like a lot of their ideas ( opposition to Obamacare). Not an original line this, but the American Myth is so bright & pure that mere reality doesn’t get a look in. During Obama’s first election campaign I remember watching a resident of Allentown Pa. railing against Obama’s plan to disenfranchise the people by taking their weapons. A citizen of a country that, if it wishes, can put a cruise missile through your bedroom window tonight nonetheless seeming to think that General Santa Ana’s out there somewhere, regrouping his forces…

  16. “What is it with Yanks and guns? Penis envy maybe. Have you got a small dick Sparta? Just askin.”

    Sigh…As always PJ, you elevate the level of conversation with your inglorious and utter moronic contributions…Australia’s intellectual elite in all its glory…

  17. NRA removes twitter and facebook. Obviously this yime the horrific murder of children has inspired the sensible slient majority into action to give some back to the NRA. The claim of the right to bear arms has become a lame excuse. That right was when guns were single barrel and single shot, not semi automaic and could kills hundreds in minutes. Seems even the US centre of politics citizens ( not the nutjobs of both sides) have decided enough is enough. Sad thing is, I predict whoever tries to actually amend the gun laws will end up being shot by some right wing lunatic with a gun, and that says it all.

  18. “Sad thing is, I predict whoever tries to actually amend the gun laws will end up being shot by some right wing lunatic with a gun, and that says it all.”

    The difficulty lies in trying to remove or amend law that has been in place and worked rather well up until the last 40 years. What has changed in that time is our culture dear Shane; we are bound by nothing anymore, no sense of community…From the bottom up it is failing…..

  19. There has to be a better way. That was what we we would call an infant primary school, in a quiet small American town.Yes,

    Those little bodies has 3 to 11 bullets in them from a military weapon. DO not like to say this may be the Americans need the shock of seeing those little bodies, close up and where they were left lying.

    Is that the life they want in that country. If not, time they did something about it.

    Laws and perceptions can be changed. Guns may not kill. Guns, especially military in the hand of idiots or the mentally ill, can kill great numbers in minutes, as occurred in that infant school.

    There is no argument on this earth that can justify them being so easily available.

    Most civilized country’s have moved on from allowing their citizens to be armed.

    They have other processes in place to protect their communities.

    Americans, there are better ways.

    In this country there has been a move to weaken out gun laws. It is time we demanded they be reviewed and tightened further,

  20. “Most civilized country’s have moved on from allowing their citizens to be armed.”

    Again, I think the problem lies in defining what is civilized here. For instance, were civilized European countries civilians armed or unarmed when Germany decided to slaughter vast numbers of them? How about the Chinese or Cambodians? I think it profoundly arrogant to assume mankind has somehow transgressed its biological instincts just because we have better technology when in fact they are on display every day in their cruelest manifestations. It is much like the old saying “nobody loves a soldier until the enemy is at the gate”.

    I think it odd that this discussion comes up every time we see such a sickening display. Spending countless time discussing the means of how we can control human beings (which is an oxymoron) vs. what could have been done aside from controlling the means in which it was done. Again, culture is what needs study here.

    How many mass shootings were there prior to the last 40 years for instance? Are Norway’s gun laws lax by chance or are they less “civilized”?

    So what has changed? Sure, we can reduce “risk” of one kind in place of another, that is not in question but you will never see such behavior eradicated I am afraid. It is ultimately the price we pay to live in such a free society. On this side of the Atlantic/Pacific or otherwise…It boils down to us as a people, were we have gone astray. When you marginalize, morally equivocate everything you lend yourself to such digressions. When what is right vs. wrong is no longer clear fundamentally, it is to be expected that people (especially the mentally ill) find “rationale” in the irrational. Where is the glue that holds us together…Murray has analyzed these very same questions with his new piece “Coming Apart”…To bad nobody is really listening…

  21. Not enough penises.

    There was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred. In this school of 450 students, a sizeable number of whom were undoubtedly 11- and 12-year-old boys (it was a K–6 school), all the personnel — the teachers, the principal, the assistant principal, the school psychologist, the “reading specialist” — were female. There didn’t even seem to be a male janitor to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees. Women and small children are sitting ducks for mass-murderers. The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm. Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.

  22. “feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm”

    I think the topic is a bit out of sync in regards to timing but would you say otherwise? Nobody is dodging bullets, male or female, but without a doubt we have been feminized to a point where this premise is not only apt but reasonable to mention. The pendulum has swung a bit much in one direction…Balance is key…

  23. @ Sparta

    …From the bottom up it is failing…..

    A curious observation – given the failures of the “elites” to act morally wrt to prosecuting the engineered wars in Vietnam and Iraq (as glaring examples). In both cases so -called “leadership” was reliant upon lies and manufactured “evidence” in order to “justify” extra-territorial slaughter (a.k.a. war).

    This would appear to indicate failures in “leadership” which become reflected in the populace, and indicate rather than the “rot” starting at the bottom. that it may well come from the top.

  24. Sorry, the bottom are not taking responsility any more for the sins of the powerful We at the bottom do not have the means.

Leave a Comment

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

You are commenting using your 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