Published: Tuesday, Dec. 18 2012 12:00 a.m. MST
The author makes some good points about family breakdown, media violence, and
isolation via electronic devices, but the comment that guns don't kill
people is altogether trite and unpersuasive in light of the Newtown tragedy,
which follows on so many similar incidents. Without a gun, the shooter would
not have been able to slaughter so many innocents. I mourn for the victims and
their families, and for the gun advocates who are deluded into thinking that
free access to automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles is any kind of
solution. Somehow I doubt that the framers of the Second Amendment would have
condoned such access if they could witness its consequences in today's
I don't feel sorry for gun enthusiasts at all. You all failed to set a
responsible tone in this country regarding guns and instead fanned the flames of
discontent, rebellion and glory of killing with assault rifles.You
deserve all the regulation you get in the near future.
The author makes a legitimate point that our culture contributes to the gun
violence that we have witnessed in mass killings over these past several years.
But the statement that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people"
is getting old and certainly doesn't belong in this discussion. I think those who will fall on their sword (or their rifle) before they allow
any gun laws to change should at least answer this simple question: Why is that
last year, the United States, with 330M residents had 9120 gun related deaths
and Germany, with 55M residents had 148 gun related deaths. One reason, it
seems, is that there are approximately 10 times as many guns owned by private
citizens in the US as in Germany. Of course the US is 6 times larger than
Germany. So what is the rest of the answer? I'd like to know. Can
Jan, the simplicity of your argument is one of reasons the discussion of how to
prevent mass murders is so hard to have, and that is the discussion now... the
prevention of mass murders. Someone as deranged as this person has problems far
more serious and complicated than self alienation. I would say also that
violence in games, tv, and movies has a tendency to de-sensitise an individual
to violence (an issue directly related to guns) rather than lead them to self
alienation. Shooting someone over and over in a game and having them just pop
again the next time you turn the computer on is a very different outcome than
developing a dislike for the character. If the discussion is about
preventing mass murders..you as a gun enthusiast have to explain and defend a
weapon whos sole purpose is mass murder. Semi automatic high capacity guns have
only one purpose and that is to kill many many people very quickly without the
need for re-loading and giving your victims access to you.Lastly you
have to defend policies that allow the deranged unencumbered access to such a
How can an ordinary citizen defend himself against an assault-carrying criminal
if assault weapons are banned? The police? They arrived quickly at the Sandy
Hook school but not in time. Criminals will always carry assault weapons
whether they are banned or not.What has the banning of illicit drugs
done to prevent their use? Zip.Why aren't we banning alcohol?
It kills, too.
@ Screwdriver. As long as we have a society dominated by the secular
progressives, the moral relativism cultures, we will continue to have these
tragedies. Excellent examples of this are the evolution of the cultures we see
everyday on the news in Chicago, Detroit and New York. As long as we have these
cultures, a gun in my hand is much better than a cop on the phone for me and my
@MountanmanAren't some of the most dangerous places in the
world dominated by religious fanatics rather than secular progressives? You
cite Chicago, Detroit, and New York. Perhaps they are dominated by "secular
progressives," but I'll counter with Baghdad, Kabul, and Rio De
Janeiro, which are cities hardly dominated by "secular progressives."
A gun in your hand may well be your best protection, but to blame a
lack of religion for crime is just foolhardy.
Mental illness has been with us for 6,000 years.Guns have been around for
1,000 years.Mass shootings (schools, malls, going postal, ect.)
erupted 20 years ago.SSRI medications were indroduced 20 years ago.Coincedence?Read the FDA warning labels on the box.We've been warned.
How about some resources for our abysmally underfunded public mental-health
I say allow the sale of assault type weapons to Military, Police, or veterans of
both.We've had the proper training.Keep them out of the
hands of the general public.I grow tired of people sighting
Switzerland as an example.Switzeerland has a 100% Military enlistemnet
requirement.so, if you want an assault weapon - join the
Military.And get the proper training.Oh ya, and one other
thing -- it's FREE.
@ CHS. The difference between Baghdad, Benghazi, K. Korea and Tehran is not
religion, its just the size and kind of the weapons, i.e. WMDs. Your example of
Rio De Janeiro is a perfect example of leftist, secular progressive culture, not
religion. Religion has NOTHING to do with gun violence. Switzerland, Sweden,
Finland and Israel are among the highest citizen gun ownership countries, yet
very low if any gun violence. The difference, again, is secular progressive, and
moral relevance cultures that have infested much of America. I lived for two
years in a small country in SE Asia where private gun ownership is banned! Only
the crooks had guns and trust me, they used them frequently against an unarmed
victim citizenship. History is full of nations were citizens were disarmed only
to allow dictator (the only ones who had guns) to murder millions of defenseless
citizens without moral conscience. Pol Pot, Hitler, Kim Jung Il. Mao tse Tung
and Joseph Stalin to name a few of the more recent ones. Guns in American
citizen's hands is our best defense against dictatorship.
Curmudgeon, ECR,the statement "Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you" is trite and getting old and certainly doesn't belong in
this discussion. just because you do not like a statement does not
make irrelevant or untrue. LDS Lib,the DN publised an article
by John Fund yesterday refuting your comment about mass killings erupting in the
last 20 years. "In fact, the high point for mass killings in the U.S. was
1929, according to criminologist Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of
To Mountanman: Sweden, Finland, and Switzerland are all far more secular and
progressive than the U.S. The U.S. is a theocracy compared to those three.
Lost in DC - I would say that none of us should give equal status to statements
from the Bible and those promoted by the NRA. The Bible has just a little more
credibility, to me anyway.And by the way, would you like to stake a
stab at answering my question from my earlier message? Would anyone?
Guns don't kill people but they make it simple. As killing devices, they
are effective and easy to operate. So easy, in fact, that a child can work it.
So easy that you hardly have to think about it. Just hold it in your hand, aim,
and with a single movement of your finger you send a piece of lead flying
through the air at 1200 feet per second or faster to tear through flesh,
arteries, and organs before you can blink your eye.After the bullet
exits the muzzle, there is no calling it back.
One of the stupidest statements I have ever heard (and I hear it every time
someone massacres lots of innocent people) is "Guns don't kill people.
People kill people."Actually, it should be "Guns don't
kill people. People with guns kill people."And for the record,
guns sometimes do kill people. How often does a gun being cleaned go off and
kill the owner? How often do kids find a loaded gun, and it accidentally kills
one of them? Too often. So don't give me that nonsense about guns not
killing people.Gun deaths in the U.S. are so much higher than in
those countries where strict gun laws prevail that we don't need to ask
stupid questions about how we can prevent many of these tragedies. We will never
prevent all of them, and our violent culture certainly needs to be reformed, but
it is obvious that stricter gun laws are necessary. At a minimum, ban assault
rifles. That's a no-brainer. And if you don't think so, well, as I
said, it's a no-brainer.
You'll be happy to know that folks who want gun control readily agree that
guns do not kill people--people kill people. By the same token, please know
that "gun control" has nothing to do with controlling guns--it's
about controlling people. We are in favor of guns being left by themselves to
be what they are. We simply want to restrict the ability of people--whom we
agree are the cause of the problem--to aquire the instruments of death that are
needed to committ mass murder.
I am weirdly pretty neutral on the gun debate. I own a dozen guns but I also
have some sympathy for the assault weapon ban argument. With that said, I
can't listen to anyone too seriously that isn't at least consistent in
their argument. Ban assault weapons because they kill people? Okay, great. Are
you also just as - or even more serious about banning alcohol too? Drunk driving
killed nearly 10,000 people last year along in the U.S - many, many of those
completely innocent children. That's A LOT of Sandy Hooks EVERY SINGLE
YEAR. Where's the outrage over that? Please... someone who is anti-gun but
pro alcohol use enlighten us.
This is a problem that goes far beyond any simplistic discussion of either gun
control or mental health.It needs to be tackled very seriously while
examining all aspects of it. It's society, mental health, culture,
weaponry, and a perhaps a hundred other interrelated factors all rolled together
into one incredibly complex casserole. But this America. And if
any nation can solve it, we can.We just need to find the will to
work together to do it. And that will require ALL of us to put aside
preconceived notions -- no matter how sacred they may seem to us.
"Please know, guns do not kill people; people kill people."Says someone who then blames violent movies/video games. "the incessant
violence that our children are watching at younger and younger ages "A lunatic in China went into a school that same day and stabbed 22
children with a knife. The good news from that sad story is that unlike in
Newtown, nobody died. Guns are manufactured for one purpose, to injure or kill.
I'll buy the idea that people kill people... but guns make it a heck of a
lot easier. Since the right to life is something that is supposed to be
inalienable, I would think we would take reasonable steps to help preserve that.
After all the Second Amendment itself specifically has the words
"well-regulated" in it.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments