Untied States

As everyone other than the US Government has at the moment, I’ve been discussing solutions to the continuing spree murders in the United States. During one thread, someone who espoused the view that gun ownership isn’t even a contributing factor asked what they were supposed to do to stay safe if they didn’t have guns. The answer to me seemed rather clear.

Call the police.

They however, didn’t agree that was a good answer. Not because they didn’t believe the police had the resources to respond to immediate threats, but because they didn’t trust the police.

Which, given their arguments about needing a gun to protect against ‘BLM and other terrorists’, struck me as ironic.

And un-American. All those people bunkering down alone instead of relying on a public service formed of other Americans. Forgetting that the Constitution starts with “We, the people…” not “I, the isolationist…”

The problem isn’t guns. It’s institutional paranoia. A misinterpretation of the Constitution that says the answer to disagreements, disappointments, and diaper rash is to shoot until the problem goes away; that says the postman might be your enemy so shoot them if they approach your letter box just to be on the safe side.

2 thoughts on “Untied States

  1. Are you under the impression that the police were not called during any of the school shootings over the past few years? Because I’m pretty sure that somebody–many people, in fact–did call the police. In the latest shooting the police were called repeatedly on the suspect prior to the shooting starting.

    Police generally get to crime scenes after the crime is committed.

    Like

    1. I’d assumed – although couldn’t state with utter certainty the specifics in each instance – that the police have been called to spree murders.

      I’m speaking of the deficit earlier in the process: the idea of keeping guns at hand all the time because someone might break in or act in a worrying fashion. While there are good reasons for someone to have a gun (protecting livestock for example) the idea that citizens need to be ready to kill people at any moment is extreme in a nation that has a police service.

      If the fortification mentality had resulted in the US being the nation with the lowest per capita burglaries, muggings, and other such crimes, then I could see a complex balance between the increased chance of gun crimes and the decrease in other crimes; however, all that having a gun just in case has just moved the needle from the crime with a potential beating to the same crime with a high risk of a gun being involved.

      So, I’m suggesting people drop the concept of gun ownership as a safety against criminals thing and leave that to the police.

      I don’t want to stop farmers, collectors, or people who like target shooting from having a gun if they choose, but I do want to find a way to reduce people misusing guns to solve disputes; and getting rid of the idea of the gun as a way of resolving disputes between private citizens seems like a reasonable start.

      Like

Share Your Thoughts

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.