I mean, what's the alternative?

That Americans are just naturally more homicidal than other nations?
I don't buy it.
That we have a larger population?
True, but it's more shooting deaths percentage-wise as well as via raw figures.
That it's violent video games and movies?
They allow those in European nations and other 1st-world regions as well.

So...?

On a separate note, if you ARE pro-gun...why do you think Americans are so reverent towards their weapons?

I mean, I had a friend--and we don't speak anymore, for...well, wait for it--who, besides being all for denying gays any legal rights and generally just being a rather unfriendly person to be around if you disagreed with him in the slightest, was a HUGE proponent of guns, so much so (and I'm not making this up) that he said there should be absolutely NO regulation on guns, that if you wanted a bazooka in NYC to "defend your family with," that you should be allowed to own one.

(You can see why he and I don't associate anymore.)

But leaving aside that insanity...why do we care so much about guns?

UK users, it doesn't seem as if your countrymen hold fast to their guns as we Americans do...you get by OK, yes?

@thatwasawkward:

It would seem I could draw a pretty straight line from "love of violence" to "love of guns"...

But the fact remains--other countries get by just fine with restrictions.

And I highly doubt the Framers had THIS in mind, this mentality of gun ownership, given that the 2nd Amendment states that it is for (and I quote) "A well-regulated militia..being necessary for the security of a free state...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It's not "infringing" on your freedom to bear arms to place some limitations in there, like other nations do.

Why don't you buy that we're more homocidal than other cultures?

It seems to me like there is a sizable segment of pro-gunners who sincerely believe that their right to bear arms is critical to preserving the ability to form a citizen militia to fight off the army. Not an invading foreign army, but the US military controlled by an abusive government. I guess in this scenario they would hide in the hills and fight for liberty like First Blood or Red Dawn.

@Bob Genghiskhan:

Because that seems an absurd point of view to me sans the guns.

If we ARE more homicidal, or prone to violence...well, what else sets us apart from European/Asian nations with arms control that would make us more homicidal?

We get the same violent movies and video games as they do.
We share many cultural ties with European nations, and they don't do this regularly.
We are a 1st world country, even in a recession, we still have it better than most people...

What else besides a proliferation of weapons WOULD make us more homicidal?

That's why I take that stance--

If we ARE more homicidal, well, it seems no small coincidence that we're also more lax with our allowance for what sort of guns we allow to be owned.

I'm not opposed to regulating guns. They should be regulated, absolutely. However, you have to acknowledge, if only as a matter of pragmatism... we can't uninvent them.

Personally I think America being so fascinated with violence on the whole goes back to the country's violent birth and the concept of manifest destiny. We're very individualistic and our culture encourages us to dehumanize each other.

I acknowledge that, thatwasawkward.

I'm not trying to put the genie back in the bottle--it can't be done, of course.

And I'd agree with your diagnosis as to why we're violent, as well.

But France had a violent revolution to start their republic as well (more violent, in fact)...
England has had past violence...
Japan is a nation with a past warrior Bushido code, so there are cultural aspects there...

And yet this isn't happening to THEM.

It happens to US.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that we also have the laxest attitude towards guns, and even a sort of reverence for them.

Viewing from over the Atlantic (where we have very restrictive gun ownership laws), the comparison I find hardest to understand is USA v Canada. Both have similarly high levels of gun ownership. The US has a much higher rate of gun crime. I don't really understand why.

CNN reporting in the gunman, James Holmes--

Apparently he was a PhD candidate at the University of Colorado for Neuroscience.

You just never know...wow...

Us Americans are born and raised to say "we're the best" and that's why other countries around the world that are just as good if not better than us laugh their asses off. Every one of our constitutional rights has limitations of some kind. The amendments have their limitations too. I don't see why someone needs a gun. People just stereotype about where guns are necessary (in "bad" neighborhoods which are only bad because the rich white society like me holds them down).

It's a sad environment in America. France, like you say, has seen four revolutions. I don't attach my personality with the American Revolution; that was over 200 years ago. France, on the other hand, has only been the Republic of France for 60-some years. They border Germany, who, if you don't know, have never gone this long (70 years) without fighting a war in their ethnic history. If anyone has a right to carry a bazooka, it's gotta be the French.

On the "bad neighborhoods" note--

How much do guns actually HELP?

I mean, we've all heard that most people in situations of panic--ie, a burglar--have a difficult time actually shooting accurately...



How much do these guns actually help defend...and how often do they lead to murders?

I agree with TWA, it's a larger cultural issue.

My opinion (well, not only mine, to be honest) is that US lack culture history (well, it's a fast-grown nation less than 3 centuries old, it's nothing strange); while in Europe centuries of issues have "modeled" the delicate relationship between a citizen and his understanding of the value of life (and thus violence) and the "statal" value of life/violence, it seems that the US still have to work to achieve the same understanding, so to say.

Please don't get me wrong (easy, given my English), it's not a matter of population or superiority/inferiority or such BS: it's a factor regarding sedimented culture in the Nation's conception too (and mostly). And to sediment, you need time.
Just think about death penalty, and his meaning considering legal intervention & human lives' value. It's the same story - a different (let's say young?) average conception of human lives'value.

(try to link this to the discussion dated about a month ago, regarding school&humanities)

They don't help, obi. There is no benefit to it. It just promotes violence in their communities which makes us think they are lower in society than we are. Not at all the case.

CNN reporting that the suspect reported that he left a (potentially explosive) booby-trap at his apartment, and the police have evacuated that apartment building and are proceeding with extreme caution.

Wow.

This guy really seems to have gone into all this with a sick, Columbine mentality... :/

I think this is sad and my thoughts and prayers go out to the families of those who lost their lives or were injured.

alright, as someone who is a Gun owner, grew up in a Gun culture (appalachia) and where I live, we own over 8 guns per home (in my county) we have never had a gun death in over 50 years.

And again, this guy was a sick sick man, and gun laws were not stopping him from getting the gun he wanted. There is no way to stop BAD people from getting guns, Impossible.

So, must we punish theother 99.99999% who behave correctly with their LEGAL guns?

Again, there is no good way to attack this problem.

Is there evidence that this has an effect on the statistics that matter? (i.e. total suicides, total homicides, /total/ injuries and /total/ burglaries , muggings etc.)

I recall an extensive study looking at differences in gun policy between the different states that concluded that gun laws neither reduced robberies and muggings, or increased homicides and armed assaults. I've yet to read anything particularly convincing for either side of this issue.

Ghostmaker, I am not sure how the national numbers work, btu when castle Doctrine was extended to the car here in Tennessee, car jackings dropped over 70% within a month.

I also know when gun laws were putin place in DC, that crime went up a lot, and I can research the % for you, but, home invasions ESPECIALLY were bad.

We have 0 home invasinos in my county. Know why? The risk far outweighs the rewward...lol

Some perspective is in order. There are shootings and horrible massacres all over the world, every day. We attribute them to religious and political conflict, and don't see them in the same way as we view this sort of event. That's because we have a stable and peaceful society, so when this happens in Colorado, it's shocking and horrible. But it's not that unusual. Plenty of other societies have guns and use them to kill each other. It's not a US problem.

So this guy was an evil or sick individual, but it's not a societal problem. There is no "fix." We can't legislate a perfect world.

dip, that was well put. Thank you

@StressedLines:

Is a lack of regulation worth this?

Other first world nations regulate and restrict guns far more...and they don't have NEARLY as many shooting deaths, percentage-wise or on raw figures.

Any way you slice it, StressedLines, even if YOU are a responsible gun owner:

Sometimes the few ruin it for the many, and warrant greater protection.

Sort of assumes that "the few" will surrender their guns alnog with "the many" doesn't it?

ok, found a fwe articles.

Gun crimes are dropping Nationally in US< but rising in cities with lots of anti-gun laws. Trying to get some exact numbers, but nationally, our gun crimes dropped 4% last year, but in Chicago were up 31%, and they just put some heavy laws on teh books.

I calm down enough to unmute obiwanobiwan and this nonsense is the leading thread? Ugh. The only thing to blame for the tragedy in Colorado is the wicked loser who shot the people. Not the guns he used or the car he drove, not the supposedly uniquely violent society. Him.

"Some perspective is in order. There are shootings and horrible massacres all over the world, every day. We attribute them to religious and political conflict, and don't see them in the same way as we view this sort of event. That's because we have a stable and peaceful society, so when this happens in Colorado, it's shocking and horrible. But it's not that unusual. Plenty of other societies have guns and use them to kill each other. It's not a US problem.

So this guy was an evil or sick individual, but it's not a societal problem. There is no "fix." We can't legislate a perfect world."

We cannot.

But we can take steps to improve it and make it better.

AGAIN--OTHER countries in the first world regulate and don't have nearly the sort of problem we do, a correlation here cannot really be denied.

Amongst 1st world countries, we have more shooting deaths because, in large part, we allow more freedom in ownership of guns, different gun types, etc.

Se can't fix it perfectly, but we CAN do something.

I think that "somebody else behaves badly therefore Stressedlines has to give up one of his rights" is a pretty bad reason for taking his freedoms.

You tell me obi, what is the answer?

You try to take them you WILL have a civil war. The Good people holding them will NOT give them up, because they think itis unfair they be punished for exercising their rights, that come from the Constition, not the Government.

catch 22, I guess.

And much stricter gun legislation would be unconstitutional. If you want to ban things like private ownership or all handguns or whatever then you will HAVE to amend the constitution. Focus energy on that if you don't like guns, since that's the only way things will change. As it stands now, getting rid of people's guns would be just as impossible as giving them knighthood.

Especially since having that right may protect Stressedlines from the people behaving badly in the first place.