who wants to go to school with classmates packing heat [link]
My son did. A second-grader brought gun to school because she wanted to be more popular. Oh, and her mother was a cop. Eight years ago, my coworker’s baby boy was shot dead by another kid at his baby-sitter’s house. I see one or two pro-gun comments here. I want to know their take on this and what solutions they have. Respectful dialogue appreciated. I have no intention of derailing this thread. [link]
Fret not about derailing that thread, kind Shodan-san. I have felt sick ever since I read your comment and I think this discussion about guns is relevant and necessary. I can’t even imagine what you felt like as a parent, when you discovered that your precious baby was at school with another child who had naively brought such danger with her. As for what happened to your co-worker, that must be every gun-owning parents’ nightmare.
I once ended a relationship with someone which had some “promise” (i.e. an Orthodox Malayalee etc etc) because he insisted on keeping guns in his home. Even if he had children. I just think the potential for tragedy is too high when you mix the two; not everyone is always as careful as we all should be and children are inherently curious and often, quite clever. He wouldn’t compromise and neither would I. That’s how strongly I feel about the issue– and I know many of you have passionate views on it, too.
One of you had this to say, on the same thread:
I wouldn’t call myself pro-gun but I can’t go as far as saying “ban guns”.
I’m uncomfortable with laws that make it easy to obtain guns, getting them at the local superstore, Kmart Walmart etc is what makes me uncomfortable. I’d prefer to see stricter laws and federal laws to govern the right to bear arms and a person who wants to take up arms and it could be in a lot of different capacities, not always law enforcement, would have to go thru stringent regulations and requirements and training in order to qualify for it. [link]
What do the rest of you think? Several of you are so respectful, you are worried about derailing the original VT thread with this nascent discussion, so I thought I’d open a space for your dialogue here.
::
And one final brown angle to a post on guns in America; PSUBrown wrote in to ask if Andrew Arulanandam, the Public Affairs Director of the NRA was desi. When Abhi played provocateur and wrote about the “potential” need for gun ownership post-Katrina, this question came up in our comments section and the consensus was that he might be of Sri Lankan origin, but there was no confirmation. Other mutineers have asked me about this in the last 24 hours, so if one of you knows more about Mr. Arulanandam, speak up and enlighten us. And if you will permit me to end this post on a slightly lighter note, I put that question to you, our wise crowd because I’m sure one of you is related to or dated him; all Mutineers are two degrees apart, except for this notable mystery woman. 🙂
Anna thank you for creating this post for this very relevant discussion that I wouldn’t want to have in the other space for fear of being disrespectful.
I’ve had a decent exposure to guns in my life and would have never been part of this discussion or entertained the notion of allowing people to carry guns if I hadn’t had that exposure. My ex was a NYPD detective with the SV squad and carried the standard 9mm semi which was I believe a Browning (I could be wrong) and also had a license to carry a 38 caliber so I’ve shot both guns.
Let me be the first to state that shooting a gun with that kind of recoil is intense not to mention how it makes you feel on the inside. It’s creepy to say the least. Someone has to be seriously twisted and sick and mentally disconnected to do this over and over again and shoot so many people. I think this particular shooter used two guns and a 9mm and a 38 caliber. I’m going to assume he used his 9mm more because a 38 caliber isn’t easy to load in a short time and a 9mm has a cartridge that’s easy to pull out and restock.
Anyway my ex and I were ‘almost’ mugged in the East Village one night. He handed his wallet to the guy and I handed over my purse. The guy seemed like he was high because he was shaking and the gun was cocked and I was convinced we were going to get shot. We didn’t. The guy was apprehended. No shots were fired. I’ve debated this issue practically my entire adult life and am simply not yet convinced that people should be completely prevented from carrying a gun. I do believe in extensive checks, balances and rigorous training mental and physical to handle a gun.
Now this is going to be hard for me to say but I do not see a probelm with owning a gun for home protection and you may ask why I say this,I say this because if your home is ever violated and the police don’t get there in time you are screwed. Now before you folks jump on me and ask what if you have kids in the house I say there are gunlocks out there for your weapon. On a sidenote I have been trained in the handling of weapons and I think that if you plan on owning one you should be trained and also you should have them gunlocks like I mentioned before.
Doug, hopefully there will be no jumping– on others, to conclusions, off cliffs etc. 🙂 Thanks for adding your take.
I know this may be innocent, but what’s the need for guns? That’s what we have the police force for…to protect us. The local news was giving out stats a few months ago, and many of the school shootings that occur are done with legally purchased guns. Back in the old days (say 1800s) , you needed a gun to protect yourself but I don’t see the need today.
South Africa has some of the least stringent gun laws in the world. You can carry a registered weapon, concealed, just about anywhere you want, except a casino. Many hotels offer weapons lockers, just like coffee pots, with a note reminding you to check your weapon before you hit the craps tables.
South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world, with guns involved in nearly half of them (link).
Is there a causal connection? I don’t know. I will say it is disconcerting and not reassuring, though, to be able to secure a camera inside a hotel room safe designed for a handgun.
I’m in agreement with Janeofalltrades. I don’t have the links at hand but there was another shooting in VA where two students had CCW permits and stopped the gunman from doing further harm. Also read another story where an off duty officer was able to stop a gunman in Utah. Appalachian School of Law shootings. Penn and Teller’s bullshit did a great episode on the 2nd amendment and why its important.
Just out of curiosity, if either of you had a gun at the time, would you have used it? Personally, I find gun ownership more frightening than not owning a gun, way too much irreversibility and power. I’m more for
Link didn’t show up, this kind of stuff:
http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/nlw/introduction/nlwtable.php
I’m not against guns entirely, but I am for incredibly stringent laws concerning guns. I don’t see why a private citizen needs to carry a gun around. Protecting your house? If your gun is locked up, how are you going to get to it in time to protect yourself? And if it’s not locked up, an intruder could use it against you. If you’re into shooting handguns for sport, why can’t you just lock up your handgun at the firing range where you practice? And if you’re into hunting for sport, maybe there should be a communal gun safe, and you have to check your gun out when you go hunting. I realize this will probably never happen, but seriously–just because someone likes riding doesn’t mean they are allowed to keep a horse in their backyard or in their house. You have to stable it somewhere. So you should have to keep your guns somewhere safe too.
The U.K has some of the strictest gun laws in Europe, with an outright ban on handguns. Here’s what their experience has been (from the BBC):
More laws are not going to change anything unless the stream of illegal weapons is checked. The handguns used by the VT shooter had their serial numbers filed off… chances are pretty high they were illegally obtained guns.
I wish the police were here to protect us. I live in Los Angeles and I’ve called the PD a few times (911) — I kid you not — the phone kept ringing, I didn’t even get a freaking operator.
I don’t know how I feel about guns. I don’t own one and I don’t want one in my house. But then again, I have never had someone break into my house or assault me, maybe those incidents would change my mind. I dunno.
I am shocked how knowledgeably people talk about guns in our country. Some civilians on TV were able to tell the kind of gun from the the sound of shots. That student, Erin (shaved head) , was repeatedly asked by the reporter if she knew what kind of gun the shooter was holding. Are we expedted to be so familiar with weaponry?
As Doug said, are we allowed to protect ourselves with guns only because we assume our agressors will be armed? Where will it stop?
Preston writes:
Israel and Switzerland have some of the most liberal gun laws in the world. They both also have the lowest murder rates in the world (after discounting Israeli deaths due to terrorism). Is there a causal connection?
Guns don’t kill people. Loners kill people.
M. Nam
i’m just glad to hear that media – when referring to the v tech incident – is for the most part discussing the gun control issue. rather than immigration or terrorism. this is exactly why you need to get all the facts before coming to some idiot conclusion.
It’s been said numerous times: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Case in point is the UK. Wonder what the numbers are on the rise in stabbings and/or vehicular homicide/strangulation etc in the UK. Crazy people will always be crazy and they will always find a way of killing or using illegal methods to obtain guns, the point is to make sure you are protected.
“Guns don’t kill people. Loners kill people.” Indeed.
We need to look at the people holding the guns. Here in the UK gun crime has gone up but so has Knife Crime.
I think there should be a complete ban, but that would not completely solve the problem.
Lots of people are, especially in the South. Guns are a feature of the culture and most people, even if they themselves are not gun enthusiasts, have friends and family who are. Hunting/fishing/camping involve being armed (for real or imagined reasons). Guns are just around.
While we’re discussing gun culture, and the importance of respect and love for life, life in all its forms, I’d like to VERY strongly recommend Mike White’s recent release “Year of the Dog.”
The guns for protection argument bothers me personally, because the place where I am in the most danger is in the ER where I work, which does not have a metal detector. With Virginia’s concealed weapon laws, many of my patients likely have guns on their person. All it takes is one angry, frustrated, unstable patient or family member person to start shooting, but I can’t use a gun to protect myself at work.
I believe gun ownership should be legal for private citizens. Just as abortion should be legal, and marijuana, and suicide, and poisons, and knives, and nooses, and boxing, and morphine, and cocaine, and that high bridge up at Cornell, and burgers, and alchohol, and cigarettes and that odious substance known as Koffee with Karan.
There should be laws governing the legality of these things, but their legality itself should not be assailed. Some require tighter strictures, some require much less. None should be taken lightly.
I think the South should be made illegal.
Gun Control is Bullshit. I suggest everyone watch this episode if you haven’t already.
HMF can you please explain why the South should be made illegal. I would real like to know.
I live in New Orleans, which has the highest murder rate in the country and my husband is thinking about purchasing a gun. I feel that it’s time to leave before purchasing such a weapon. As for policy, I’m all for Chris Rock’s Knives For Guns Exchange. “Remember, kids, it ain’t punk to fire from across the room. It takes a man to get close enough to STAB!”
Guns don’t kill people. Loners kill people.
there are complex social dynamics at work, it isn’t “just guns” or “just loners.” as noted above, south africa & switzerland have “liberal” gun laws (the swiss, cuz all men called to national service via conscription) and very different crime rates. but that’s because south africa and switzerland are very different countries! (e.g., compare their GINI coefficients) i spent my adolescence in a small town where every other truck had a gun rack, and a murder occurred once every generation (in my generation, it happened to be a rape/murder which involved a stabbing). but the small town i grew up isn’t every american city. the irony, in my experience, is that my liberal friends who live in cities where crime is a serious problem seem much more open to the need for guns then those who remain in small college towns. why? it seems an emotional response to the reality that many have been mugged (or they invariably know someone who has been mugged). in contrast, in a town with little crime gun ownership is academic, whether you think it is a positive or not generally those with guns are using them to shoot, either game or target.
there are two axes of values at work here:
1) a utilitarian one.
2) a “rights”/morality one.
the former is highly conditional upon your priors. re: #1, consider what anna said: “I just think the potential for tragedy is too high when you mix the two”…. if the expectation is that a gun you own is more likely to kill you or your family members than an intruder, the “rational” choice is obvious. but, that expectation might be conditional upon your situation. consider two situations:
a) living in a small town b) living in an urban neighborhood
the probability that there is a break in on any given day is much higher in b) than a), so the chances that a gun could be used against an intruder start to increase in b), to the point where the chance of self-inflicted death might be much lower then otherwise. this is a hypothetical, but it illustrates the problems in implying one-size-fits-all causal models.
but secondly, re: 2), there are many whose attitudes toward guns are not conditioned by utilitarian concerns, but rather moral ones. that is, some people believe that gun ownership is a “sacred” right, and utility calculations are totally irrelevant to their right, which they believe has moral sanction. in contrast, there are others who simply abhor guns as a matter of principle, or as a matter of socialized distaste. many people who make utilitarian arguments are basically masking these sort of sensibilities.
I’m as liberal as they come, but I think that Koffee with Karan should be outlawed forthwith. As far as the gun-control issue goes, I don’t know. I feel like there are valid arguments on either side; when I was eight, we had a break-in at my house in Karachi and the only reason we didn’t lose anything is because one of us in the family managed to get the gun that our security guard (absent that day) used to leave locked up with us (he was only given it while on duty and otherwise, it stayed at home), and shot the burglar in the leg. It was a terrifying experience, not least of all because with something like that, the threat of a “casual” accident is overwhelming, but without the presence of a firearm, I don’t know what would have happened. I feel that owning and/or keeping a weapon like a gun is very much a personal choice, but I agree that the governance around the issue of possession and ownership needs to be made more stringent in some way, shape or form.
I feel that it’s time to leave before purchasing such a weapon.
those us with the mobility/means to make a choice are lucky. the USA is a big country, we can go somewhere which is low crime, whether it is high gun ownership or low gun ownership. the bigger issue involves areas with endemic crime.
Also from Mr. Rock, “I think every bullet should cost 5000 dollars. Because if a bullet cost five thousand dollars, we wouldn’t have any innocent bystanders.”
Hey, HMF, have you been to Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan or Upstate New York? Honey, they use guns for the same reasons the South does. Ban the South – yeah, that’s some brainwork there.
Let’s go farther north. Canadians own the same number of guns as Americans but don’t come close to hosting the same number of gun-related deaths. What does that say about America?
I’m actually really offended by that, even if it was meant as a joke. I’m sick of northerners thinking they can lambast the South all they like and get away with it. It’s not like the North is such a bastion of racism-free liberal thought. I think that comment was downright trollish. People aren’t any worse down here than they are up there.
13 and #16: I understand, in principle, what you’re trying to say about human hands, not guns, killing people — but can we not throw vacuous generalisations around? Every time something crazy like this happens, the media bends backwards trying to show that the perpetrator was a “loner,” because society somehow perceives introverts as threatening. But I’m a “loner” — as in, I like to spend most of my time alone — and, like most loners out there, I have no plans to ever shoot anyone. Saying “Guns don’t kill people. Loners kill people” is just as ridiculous as saying “Bombs don’t kill people. Muslims kill people.” Both involve revolting, unsubstantiated generalisations.
When I read of the recent VATech tragedy, I am glad that the National Missile Launcher Association never took off. Imagine if people had bumper stickers like “Missiles don’t kill people. People kill people.” It would look rather ridiculous.
But to give the gun-rights supporters their due – they would point out that in Swizerland almost every male is drafted into their militia and keeps his rifle at home and murder and crime there is very low. It probably has a lot to do with the Swiss and not about human nature in general.
My question: “You own a car, you need proof of liability insurance. Why not the same for firearms?” I consider my right to drive much more valuable and important than my right to own firearms (which I do not own) but no one argues that requiring automobile liability insurance violates our rights. Firearms liability insurance would be very high in the first month of ownership because the risk is great that someone bought the gun just to kill someone. That high cost might have detered a college student.
If that nutjob had gone into Norriss hall with a steak knife, it would have been different.
This was what I posted on the other thread in response to someone else’s post.
Ban them too. Actually I think North America should be divided this way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map
They actually own more, per capita. But they also don’t have a media representing violent crimes 100 or so more times than they actually occur. They also don’t have a gov which uses violence so willy nilly to solve all its problems. It says a lot about America.
this is an interesting thread, i would say that my view is very close to desishiksa’s however do agree that banning hand guns will not solve anything, and most likely increase handgun violence. despite regulations on handguns, i still can go uptown and with 200 bucks by an unmarked handgun. What worries me more besides the fact that it was 2 handguns and took out so many people, was that if he had used a semi automatic, which i’m pretty sure are legal in this country, that number could have been 10 times larger.
Definitely not wander passed the mason-dixon line for a long as time.
re: the v tech shooting, it seems to me that focusing on mental health services would be more likely to forestall this sort of thing in the future. the stories i’ve read indicate that his profs knew something was wrong and recommended he get help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map
the jesusland map doesn’t address the fact that upstate NY, vermont, most of oregon & wash., etc., are awash with guns.
Ban them too. Actually I think North America should be divided this way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesusland_map
Just FYI, you’ll note that Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan didn’t make into the “Jesusland” bit. 😉
Back in the old days (say 1800s) , you needed a gun to protect yourself but I don’t see the need today.
I don’t know if that’s really true. First, I’d like to think the police are constantly available for our protection, but first responders do take a finite amount of time to respond, and sometimes, they just can’t be there soon enough. Also, consider the difference between police protection in a heavily populated urban area vs. a very thinly populated rural area. In fact, in rural areas, it’s not uncommon for people to keep a shotgun in the house, because you never know when some random, dangerous critter is going to run through your yard.
Second, there is a philosophical issue as well. The 2nd Amendment exists to allow people to arm themselves, as a form of resisting the tyranny of government. The entire Bill of Rights is designed to give people power against (or protection from) the government. The right to bear arms is completely consistent with the rest of the Bill of Rights, and I wouldn’t want it to go away, simply because there are instances where it might be anachronistic.
A co worker of mine attended V tech, he also personally knew the person who fired shots on the campus last August, causing a shut down then. He wasn’t friends with him, just knew him, and said he was clearly mentally unstable. He would live in the woods for days on end, he wouldn’t wear shoes (in the dead of winter), he didn’t own guns, however. He stole the gun of the policeman guarding him, and shot him in the hospital.
So at least in that case, all the gun control in the world wouldn’t have stopped the incident.
desishiksa – just wondering if you have ever seen the website http://www.f*ckthesouth.com; i think you can fill in the blanks, i have NOT verified any of the sources and does not reflect my opinion of the south, someone sent it to me as a joke, but the last comment about the South having the highest Murder Rate in the US…may be slighyly relevant to this thread?
is this all bs or perhaps some shreads of truth very poorly worded?
Brownelf, i agree. it is wrong to Generalise but we need to find out why people are using guns. what is the reason. metal health is one of them. many of the violent crimes that occur in my area are due to mental health.
They smoke lots of weed there, and Vermont has ben & jerrys ice cream.
30 Brownelf
I agree. Moornam isn’t the most clear-headed of commenters, and he probably suffers from the bourgeois nationalist’s love for structure and conformity and suspicion of rebels and misfits. Else he would have known that a lot of the world’s greatest art, science and math, and a lot of the questioning of oppressive customs, have come from “loners”. Grigori Perelman and Pablo Picasso, anyone? Better be the tiger, majestic alone, than the sheep, I say.
Somebody get Hitler a blanket; I’m in absolute complete agreement with Kobayashi.
Also from Mr. Rock, “Much like Rock’n’Roll, high-school shootings were invented by the blacks, and stolen by the white man”
A truly idiotic comment.
Alright people. It wasn’t a completely serious comment.
They smoke lots of weed there, and Vermont has ben & jerrys ice cream.
Heh. Thanks, HMF. I really needed a chuckle.
I’m not licensed nor have a registered weapon. He had it. Honestly he was perhaps the most calm person I had ever known. Had it been me (without his training) I’d have pulled it out and gone nuts. He was really relaxed and talked to the guy, eventually he flashed his weapon which was holstered to him and the guy took a step back and my ex grabbed him. It could have ended badly but didn’t and the guy’s gun was loaded.
I know you were joking but take a look at this picture. It’s not from the south and make a note of the ages.
brownelf #30:
Not all loners are senseless killers. However, most senseless killers are loners. There’s too much of a correlation that cannot be hidden away due to political correctness.
Indeed, I would go out on a limb and say that most loners are extremely creative people. As torpedo mentioned, some of the world’s most creative geniuses have been lonely in some phase of their life. However, those who snap out of their loneliness and learn to work with people that are different from them, become the Mozarts and Einstiens. Those who don’t, usually end up violent. Serial killers are so difficult catch because they are so freaking smart and creative with their killing and evasive methods.
Indeed, there have been studies that point to correlation between creativity and violence. Can’t find the link now, but if I do, I will post it.
M. Nam
Handguns, specifically, impose their own vicious circle:
Some people buy handguns, and can use them easily. (Easy to conceal, hence easy to bring anywhere.)
Handgun crimes go up, so people feel unsafe.
They buy their own handguns “for protection”, and so the number of handguns in society go up.
This in turn leads to a further rise in handgun crimes, and still more people buy handguns “for protection” etc.
🙁