NationStates Jolt Archive

You may as well try and get rid of the moon. That'd be a lot easier, and you'll meet with less resistence.

My OP now!

We need to get rid of the gun culture that is prevalent in the US. No, Virginia Tech didn’t set me off; it was the very first statement from the White House in regards to the tragedy at VT that did it. Among the first statements made was this gem:
As far as policy, the President believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070416-1.html

Think about this for a second, a great tragedy has happened, 32 (+1) lives were lost and yet... yet the first thing out of the White House is a reassurance to the members of the NRA that the government won’t be coming after their guns. And I am not singling out just President Bush in this; today (My time at least), Senator Reid echoed the same: http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/04/18/ap/politics/d8oin2go1.txt

In the current gun control thread, the normal gun nuts are baying their standard of “If only everyone was armed, this wouldn’t have happened” as if adding more fire to a raging inferno is a good idea. Now we can debate that point till the cows come home (and probably will), but again, it speaks volumes about the gun culture in the US.

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

The gun nuts are also right in that other countries also have guns, sometimes more per capita than the US, but they do not have the same issues regarding gun crimes and deaths that the US has.

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

The gun nuts are also right in that other countries also have guns, sometimes more per capita than the US, but they do not have the same issues regarding gun crimes and deaths that the US has.

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?


Quoted For Absolute Truth

Thoughts? You're right, of course.

The problem is in how to go about it. And judging from how much most Americans seem to agree with their gun culture I somehow don't really see it being gotten rid of.

i agree.

the problem the US has, on top of the culture, is that guns are already very prevalent and relatively easy to access. as such banning guns or making an effort to control the guns themselves will leave citizens unarmed while criminals remain weilding their guns. bad situation to be in, and exactly the kind of situation i would hate the UK to be become, but that's a totally different matter.

point is i agree - culture. change. yes. :)

We need to get rid of the gun culture that is prevalent in the US. No, Virginia Tech didn’t set me off; it was the very first statement from the White House in regards to the tragedy at VT that did it. Among the first statements made was this gem:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070416-1.html

Think about this for a second, a great tragedy has happened, 32 (+1) lives were lost and yet... yet the first thing out of the White House is a reassurance to the members of the NRA that the government won’t be coming after their guns. And I am not singling out just President Bush in this; today (My time at least), Senator Reid echoed the same: http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/04/18/ap/politics/d8oin2go1.txt

In the current gun control thread, the normal gun nuts are baying their standard of “If only everyone was armed, this wouldn’t have happened” as if adding more fire to a raging inferno is a good idea. Now we can debate that point till the cows come home (and probably will), but again, it speaks volumes about the gun culture in the US.

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

The gun nuts are also right in that other countries also have guns, sometimes more per capita than the US, but they do not have the same issues regarding gun crimes and deaths that the US has.

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?


I disagree with you. You need to take guns away from the criminals, not law abiding citizens with legal fire arms.

I disagree with you. You need to take guns away from the criminals, not law abiding citizens with legal fire arms.

No no no no! This is not just another generic gun thread. Don't start with the same exhausted arguments! This is primarily discussing gun culture not gun ownership.

I disagree with you. You need to take gun culture away from the criminals, not law abiding citizens with legal fire arms culture.

Fixed.

You may as well try and get rid of the moon. That'd be a lot easier, and you'll meet with less resistence.
Maybe, but they said the same things about bigotry and while it hasn't gone away we have made strides.

My OP now!
Damn you! Give me back my OP! *Shakes fist*

You may as well try and get rid of the moon. That'd be a lot easier, and you'll meet with less resistence.

My OP now!

Indeed. A majority of US states (35) have passed "shall issue" concealed carry laws over the past few years. Trying to ban guns is one of the "third rail" issues in US politics.

You would never get elected.

It's why Harry Reid commented that we shouldn't rush to change the gun laws - and he's a Democratic leader. He knows that the reputation of the Democrats as a gun banning party is what helped them lose control of Congress in 1994.

He doesn't want a repeat.

I disagree with you. You need to take guns away from the criminals, not law abiding citizens with legal fire arms.
Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

I disagree with you. You need to take guns away from the criminals, not law abiding citizens with legal fire arms.

Exactly. I mean, they're criminals, you honestly think they're not going to get their hands on illegal weapons anyway?

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

This is one I'm going to have to disagree with you vehemently on NERVUN, and on grounds you probably won't like. ;)

As Mao Tse-Tung famously said, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

An armed populace is going to be a check on tyrannical power. Japan is an example of what happens when you disarm the populace. Hideyoshi's sword hunt was the start of the the current forcibly disarmed populace in Japan. The forcible disarmament, to this day, stifles Japanese democracy. If the beureacrats and politicians had to deal with a populace that was armed and willing to defend their rights, Japan would be a freer place today.

Of course, much of this does depend on the modern national culture of Japan. However, that was largely put in place during the Tokugawajidai, when arms were forcibly denied to the people.

As far as policy, the President believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed.

Quoted for asshattery, criminal stupidity, and anything else I can think of. I simply need to compile a list. (is imitating Dinaverg)

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

How would you do that?

80 million US adults own guns (that's probabaly about half of them). 300 million guns in active use.

40 billion dollar a year business.

How would you do that?

80 million US adults own guns (that's probabaly about half of them). 300 million guns in active use.

40 billion dollar a year business.

Release studies showing that guns make you gay. That'll scare off lots of the ignorant reneck gun owners.

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

I think we should work more on getting rid of the criminal culture and thier "love" of crime. For example: The "no snitchin'" shirts that are worn in courtrooms to intimidate witnesses, the glorification of gangs and violence in popular media, etc.

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

That's not going to happen, pure and simple. You've got more guns than you have people in this country.

You want to decrease violent crime? Don't target the methods used to commit the crime. Target the causes, and while you're at it invent a security device of some sort we could use to disable an armed assailent that is nonlethal, easy to use, and freely available.

Release studies showing that guns make you gay. That'll scare off lots of the ignorant reneck gun owners.

But they're not the ones committing most of the crimes. Release studies that guns are more associated w/ "white culture".

This is one I'm going to have to disagree with you vehemently on NERVUN, and on grounds you probably won't like. ;)

As Mao Tse-Tung famously said, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

An armed populace is going to be a check on tyrannical power. Japan is an example of what happens when you disarm the populace. Hideyoshi's sword hunt was the start of the the current forcibly disarmed populace in Japan. The forcible disarmament, to this day, stifles Japanese democracy. If the beureacrats and politicians had to deal with a populace that was armed and willing to defend their rights, Japan would be a freer place today.

Of course, much of this does depend on the modern national culture of Japan. However, that was largely put in place during the Tokugawajidai, when arms were forcibly denied to the people.
Well, 1. I disagree with the validity of the argument because, seriously now, if the folks in power WANT to be tyrannical, the difference between what you have and a tac nuke is more than overwhelming. 2. Again, I didn't say I wanted to take away guns, I want to remove the gun culture. I KNOW people can own firearms safely and securely, but what is going on right now isn't right. We're too much in love with that tool to the point where it is no longer a tool, it control US instead of the other way around.

Yeah, Japan doesn't have any (legal) guns but Japan also posted 54 gun deaths last year for a country with the half the population of the US. Canada has similar gun laws and posted far less gun deaths. Switzerland has more guns than they really know what to do with and posted far less gun deaths than the US. It's ain't the guns I'm after, it's the culture in the US that says "Get a gun and your problems will be over" and "You NEED a gun!". People very rarely NEED guns, they WANT them. We need to deal with that want.

That's not going to happen, pure and simple. You've got more guns than you have people in this country.

You want to decrease violent crime? Don't target the methods used to commit the crime. Target the causes, and while you're at it invent a security device of some sort we could use to disable an armed assailent that is nonlethal, easy to use, and freely available.
Doesn't address the idiots who buy large weapons then leave them loaded around their houses to show off to friends, now does it?

I think we should work more on getting rid of the criminal culture and thier "love" of crime. For example: The "no snitchin'" shirts that are worn in courtrooms to intimidate witnesses, the glorification of gangs and violence in popular media, etc.
I'm addressing the whole issue, not just the criminal one.

I'm addressing the whole issue, not just the criminal one.

But what's the "whole issue"? You say you want to get rid of the "love of guns" but not guns themselves. Effectively that's the same thing.

How would you do that?
I don't know yet. I'm just pointing out a problem.

80 million US adults own guns (that's probabaly about half of them). 300 million guns in active use.

40 billion dollar a year business.
And?

Well, 1. I disagree with the validity of the argument because, seriously now, if the folks in power WANT to be tyrannical, the difference between what you have and a tac nuke is more than overwhelming. 2. Again, I didn't say I wanted to take away guns, I want to remove the gun culture. I KNOW people can own firearms safely and securely, but what is going on right now isn't right. We're too much in love with that tool to the point where it is no longer a tool, it control US instead of the other way around.

Yeah, Japan doesn't have any (legal) guns but Japan also posted 54 gun deaths last year for a country with the half the population of the US. Canada has similar gun laws and posted far less gun deaths. Switzerland has more guns than they really know what to do with and posted far less gun deaths than the US. It's ain't the guns I'm after, it's the culture in the US that says "Get a gun and your problems will be over" and "You NEED a gun!". People very rarely NEED guns, they WANT them. We need to deal with that want.

On more careful reading, of your OP, I'll give you a cautious maybe, how's that. (I apologise for the rather knee jerk reaction. I hope you understand where it comes from, especially on these boards...)

The reason it's cautious is this: how do you plan to effectively change the "gun culture" without disarming the populace?

This is one I'm going to have to disagree with you vehemently on NERVUN, and on grounds you probably won't like. ;)

As Mao Tse-Tung famously said, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

An armed populace is going to be a check on tyrannical power. Japan is an example of what happens when you disarm the populace. Hideyoshi's sword hunt was the start of the the current forcibly disarmed populace in Japan. The forcible disarmament, to this day, stifles Japanese democracy. If the beureacrats and politicians had to deal with a populace that was armed and willing to defend their rights, Japan would be a freer place today.

Of course, much of this does depend on the modern national culture of Japan. However, that was largely put in place during the Tokugawajidai, when arms were forcibly denied to the people.

i'm not sure basing your arguement on one country is such a good idea.

the UK is a democracy. gun ownership is all but illegal... the point being we have a disarmed populace. but i haven't noticed much tyranny lately.

the tyranny of Nazi Germany was something that came about largely through democratic processes, and which the voting public supported (at least on a basic level). what good would an armed "militia" be good then?


i'm sorry, but the usual "what if..... ZOMG TYRANNY!1!1" arguement carries little weight with me.
allowing ordinary people access to weapons designed to be lethal doesn't make much sense to me either, and basing it on a big "what if" statement makes even less sense.
guns for personal protection from armed criminals, however, is an issue i can understand. but there you got a chicken-or-the-egg situation... anyhoo...

bringing it back to the gun culture, and not just the usual ownership arguements, i'd say that the history of the US is one in which the militia - the uprising and revolution of the ordinary joe against his oppressors (the british) - is glorified. just look at american movies. and there's the wild west... conquering in a near-imperialist way the west from the native americans at the barrel of a gun has long been the subject of - and glorified in - movies.
its a culture where you can show terrible bloody violence on primetime TV, but showing boobs is considered taboo.

its a culture i don't understand, but one that certainly seems to drive this love of guns.

It's a nice pipe dream. But that's all it is.

Doesn't address the idiots who buy large weapons then leave them loaded around their houses to show off to friends, now does it?

No, it doesn't.

...rereading your argument, I am finding that I must agree with you. Please accept my apologies: I thought I was reading the words of someone who wished to remove all traces of guns and the right to possess them.

I agree that gun culture is just far too severe in this country. Fact is, we don't practice safe gun handeling methods at all. We need to require gun training and gun safety courses for all who purchase guns legally. The amount of stupidity that occurs with our guns is due to ignorance, a lack of any training, and just plain old testosterone. Take the Swiss, as you quoted: they have more guns than they know what to do with, but they also train their entire populace in the use of such weapons and how to handle them safely. That is exactly what we should do, and is exactly what I plan to do for myself when I purchase a firearm. Note that I did not say if, but when: I fully intend to possess such a firearm for defense, be it from a thief in my house, a wild animal--far more likely where I live--or from a government that has gone mad.

I think you're going to have a hard time making a change to that aspect of our culture without getting into historical revisionism.

The USA has a violent history. Sometimes violence was justified, sometimes not. Either way, guns are sort of symbolic of the romanticism that surrounds US history from the Revolution through Western expansion to WWII. For better or worse, this country wouldn't have come into being without them.

A picture of a Minuteman just isn't complete without his musket and powder horn. What Cowboy doesn't carry a six-shooter? And of course some of our most revered citizens are veterans from Wars, Especially WWII.

Personally, I don't own any guns at this time but as a history buff, I'd love to own an authentic Civil War rifle or musket, especially one that works.

All of this has led to a culture where having a firearm is a symbol of empowerment. (Not masculinity per se.) Citizen militias rising up to take on th egreatest military power of the 18th Century... Lone homesteaders using a shotgun or rifle to protect their land and family from hostile (sic) Indians... American warriors storming the beach at Normandy armed with nothing more than a semiautomatic rifle.

As much as I support the rights of individual gun ownership I do agree with Nevrun in that our culture does somewhat worship guns. Not a big deal if we're talking about a hunter with an impressive collection of rifles and shotguns, but a very big deal when this is applied to inner city gangbangers or heavily armed bankrobbers.

i'm not sure basing your arguement on one country is such a good idea.

In this case, it was a convenient shorthand that both NERVUN and I understood.

the UK is a democracy. gun ownership is all but illegal... the point being we have a disarmed populace. but i haven't noticed much tyranny lately.

It may not be there now, but at some future time when it comes knocking on your door late at night and you have no means to attack it what will you do?

the tyranny of Nazi Germany was something that came about largely through democratic processes, and which the voting public supported (at least on a basic level). what good would an armed "militia" be good then?

Warsaw uprising anybody? If there had been earlier incidences of that, the course of the war might very well have been different.

i'm sorry, but the usual "what if..... ZOMG TYRANNY!1!1" arguement carries little weight with me.
allowing ordinary people access to weapons designed to be lethal doesn't make much sense to me either, and basing it on a big "what if" statement makes even less sense.

Denying someone a right on the grounds that something is unlikely to happen equally makes no sense to me.

Try this on for size: the UK doesn't need independent newspapers, because the government is unlikely to print biased information.

bringing it back to the gun culture, and not just the usual ownership arguements, i'd say that the history of the US is one in which the militia - the uprising and revolution of the ordinary joe against his oppressors (the british) - is glorified. just look at american movies. and there's the wild west... conquering in a near-imperialist way the west from the native americans at the barrel of a gun has long been the subject of - and glorified in - movies.
its a culture where you can show terrible bloody violence on primetime TV, but showing boobs is considered taboo.

its a culture i don't understand, but one that certainly seems to drive this love of guns.

Again, the crux is how will you change this culture?

A mighty high five for NERVUN, he's got it right. It's the gun culture that is causing the problem rather than the saturation; after all, it's not guns that kill people, but people. Taking away the guns will leave the gun culture, and that's what creates the problem with gun violence.

Sadly, this won't happen anytime soon. But as has been said, we can make progress. Part of it is this realization.

(As an aside, I found it sad as well that we had people on both sides jumping on the issue by the afternoon of the event. Show some respect, seriously.)

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?

Do other countries fetishize violence the same way that we do, especially as entertainment?

Release studies showing that guns make you gay. That'll scare off lots of the ignorant reneck gun owners.Releasing studies is a good idea, but I'm not sure if that one will work. How about studies that show gun owners have smaller than average penises?

unfortunately culture is enormously hard to control so I doubt there can be any real plan on how to change it I do remember however watching a whole series on this though so its not a crazy thought

the only solution I see is:

-to rebuild community spirit, people need to look after each other and there neighborhood if a gang is harassing some store the shopkeeper needs to know that he has someone in the neighborhood who's willing to call the cops and help the poor guy out

-less promoting of violence in commercials there was a Nike ad that used 50 cent boating about how many times he got shot now I know censorship is generally a bad thing but if thats everywhere teenagers look since there the ones being being targeted by this ad, what are they going to think?

-more responsibility's from the stars for some reason though rappers like to boast about how hard it is in the hood you rarely see an album where they aren't acting like a gangster thug

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?
In essence, NERVUN speaks of the enormous amount of unnecessary affection people show towards guns in this country, as well as the way they act as if it makes them deserving of power and respect. It also has to deal with the huge amount of unsafe activity with guns by those who are stupid enough to keep them lying around the house loaded. It has nothing to do with stating that guns are useless for defense and that they are somehow some kind of evil machine that must be destroyed.

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?

Wow, if only there was any difference between the love for free speech and the love for murder...

Wait, there IS!

Wow, if only there was any difference between the love for free speech and the love for murder...

Wait, there IS!

funny I own 3 guns and I never murdered anyone, I don't even want to, not even a little bit.

strawmen fun for you?

funny I own 3 guns and I never murdered anyone, I don't even want to, not even a little bit.

strawmen fun for you?

You compare loving guns with loving free speech and YOU claim I'm using strawmen? That's so funny it's not even funny!

Don't want to take away the guns, I want to take away the love of guns.

Why? Shouldn't the only thing that matters be behavior?

You want to what, control people's emotions?

Outlaw a "culture?" What's next? Well, that hippie culture. Hey that Hispanic culture. We need more control over what cultures people have!

You compare loving guns with loving free speech and YOU claim I'm using strawmen? That's so funny it's not even funny!

I compared one constitutional right to another, you said that all gun lovers are murderers.

Wow, if only there was any difference between the love for free speech and the love for murder...

Wait, there IS!

The RTBA is to murder, as free speech is to slander.

Next idiot please.

Oh no you said something about how US Americans love guns too much so you must want to ban guns from the face of the Earth!

Similarly it would also be nice to reduce the US American love of over consumption of food and other goods.

I see your concern as both are very harmful, but I think it is mainly a matter of public awareness and theres not much that can be done about these things without the help of some national media. Plus perhaps getting a group of leaders in Washington who aren't so gun-nutty that they would make it so that you can't sue the gun-makers for negligent distribution practices.

Then again, look how unsuccessful the anti-marijuana campaign is (why it isn't an anti-meth/herion/crack campaign I haven't figured out) and I see those commercials everyday.

It's not going to be easy is what I am trying to say I guess, but I'm sure you already knew that.

As someone said earlier the 'gun culture' seems to be tied in with the whole frontier/militia ethos.

But does'nt this frontier ethos also embrace other aspects of american culture. Example: religion in the US, capitalism, etc... If so can one aspect of this be changed or does the whole ethos have to shift?

I compared one constitutional right to another, you said that all gun lovers are murderers.
Constitutional rights are not necessarily ethical. The people who found a country aren't (a verifiably real, just and knowing) God; their writings shouldn't be taken as the infallible authority as to whether or not the permission of something is a fair and appropriate way for a nation to conduct itself.

For instance, supposing that the constitution suggested that citizens had a right to refuse to pay taxes to their local councils (who, after all, only exist to serve the people), there would at least be a reasonable case to be made for the revocation of such a right in the interest of forming public services.

The revocation of gun rights is a similar topic for discussion, and the option should be judged on the merits of the removal of the right to bear arms rather than on what the founding fathers of America had to say about it.

Another reason i want to have a gun for protection is in the event law and order breaks down. What if we had a New Orleans on a massive countrywide scale or California dumps into the sea, or there is a nuclear war, or a plague or a meteor or zombies or a severe nationwide long term power outage or one of a million other things that could happen that would leave you unable to defend yourself and no higher authority that could serve this function either. When its shit hits the fan time i want a gun. Thats not culture, thats basic survival.

Constitutional rights are not necessarily ethical. The people who found a country aren't (a verifiably real, just and knowing) God; their writings shouldn't be taken as the infallible authority as to whether or not the permission of something is a fair and appropriate way for a nation to conduct itself.

For instance, supposing that the constitution suggested that citizens had a right to refuse to pay taxes to their local councils (who, after all, only exist to serve the people), there would at least be a reasonable case to be made for the revocation of such a right in the interest of forming public services.

The revocation of gun rights is a similar topic for discussion, and the option should be judged on the merits of the removal of the right to bear arms rather than on what the founding fathers of America had to say about it.

all of my constitutional rights are important to me, but that's not what we are talking about in this thread, Nervun claims that he doesn't want to take away my gun rights, only my "gun culture" and I was confused as to what that meant, he still hasn't explained it to me.

all of my constitutional rights are important to me, but that's not what we are talking about in this thread, Nervun claims that he doesn't want to take away my gun rights, only my "gun culture" and I was confused as to what that meant, he still hasn't explained it to me.

I mentioned "criminal culture" and he stated he's encompasing the "whole thing". I still haven't figured that out. There are numerous countries w/ a "gun culture" that isn't tied to crime and they have exponentially less crime.

There are already numerous copycat threats across the nation. Those have nothing to do w/ "gun culture".

http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2007/04/18/ap/us/d8oiphe80.txt

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?

This is a guess, because I am no mind reader, so don't jump down my throat. Also, I ramble and feel that short unconnected points should be good enough for someone with an imagination to decide what I most likely mean. :p

I think Nevrun probably is speaking more of the love of guns in terms of something similar to an addiction to guns and not so much as stoppng people from enjoying target practice or simply feeling protected. It's clear that some people think a gun in every hand will stop crime completely. It seems to the casual observer that little boys are a bit too gung ho about guns and violence in many cases as they can take their sisters Barbi and turn it into a toy gun. It can be worrying in a shoot first and ask questions later culture.

We could probably compare it to overzealous doctors who prescribe dangerously addictive pills too often when thers a good chance they aren't needed. Tryign to stop the culture that produces that mentality, doesnt mean that we want to get rid of prescription medicine.

That is where I think you failed in your argument on trying to compare the love of guns to the love of free speech. Yes, they are both Constitutional rights but a culture where there is a love of free speech isn't dangerous is it?

I mentioned "criminal culture" and he stated he's encompasing the "whole thing". I still haven't figured that out. There are numerous countries w/ a "gun culture" that isn't tied to crime and they have exponentially less crime.

There are already numerous copycat threats across the nation. Those have nothing to do w/ "gun culture".

http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2007/04/18/ap/us/d8oiphe80.txt

okay, I understand what you mean by the "criminal culture", I just can't understand the "gun culture"......

This is a guess, because I am no mind reader, so don't jump down my throat. Also, I ramble and feel that short unconnected points should be good enough for someone with an imagination to decide what I most likely mean. :p

I think Nevrun probably is speaking more of the love of guns in terms of something similar to an addiction to guns and not so much as stoppng people from enjoying target practice or simply feeling protected. It's clear that some people think a gun in every hand will stop crime completely. It seems to the casual observer that little boys are a bit too gung ho about guns and violence in many cases as they can take their sisters Barbi and turn it into a toy gun. It can be worrying in a shoot first and ask questions later culture.

We could probably compare it to overzealous doctors who prescribe dangerously addictive pills too often when thers a good chance they aren't needed. Tryign to stop the culture that produces that mentality, doesnt mean that we want to get rid of prescription medicine.
oh, you mean like the violence in our culture, I can see a point to trying to tone that down......in general.

That is where I think you failed in your argument on trying to compare the love of guns to the love of free speech. Yes, they are both Constitutional rights but a culture where there is a love of free speech isn't dangerous is it?
I think some people could see free speech as a threat to security of the nation, I mean what if all the bigots get us bombed? (someone did actually use that argument with me this week)

I'm still trying to grasp the idea of 'gun culture' as well. I see several 'cultures' with an unnatural fixation for guns, such as 'gangsta' culture, but I don't see one overlapping gun culture.

I don't think highly of guns. I never have an I never will. I consider them to be tools for the weak. However, I AM contemplating the purchase of a firearm. I recently received my pistol permit and I'm trying to decide if I'd rather have a handgun, shotgun or rifle. I'm not in any particular rush as I don't consider myself to be weak. ;)

Despite that, I hold the Second Amendment of the Constitution in very high regard. My support of it and the attempted erosion of it by numerous sources both in and out of government is what's driving me to own a gun.

Now I ask you, Am I part of 'gun culture'? I'm many flavors of nut, but I don't think I'm a gun nut. :)
I wonder if I am part of the culture too........

I'm still trying to grasp the idea of 'gun culture' as well. I see several 'cultures' with an unnatural fixation for guns, such as 'gangsta' culture, but I don't see one overlapping gun culture.

I don't think highly of guns. I never have an I never will. I consider them to be tools for the weak. However, I AM contemplating the purchase of a firearm. I recently received my pistol permit and I'm trying to decide if I'd rather have a handgun, shotgun or rifle. I'm not in any particular rush as I don't consider myself to be weak. ;)

Despite that, I hold the Second Amendment of the Constitution in very high regard. My support of it and the attempted erosion of it by numerous sources both in and out of government is what's driving me to own a gun.

Now I ask you, Am I part of 'gun culture'? I'm many flavors of nut, but I don't think I'm a gun nut. :)

That's what I'm trying to get defined as well. I "love" my guns in the same way by Brother in Law "loves" cars. I enjoy going out target shooting, etc.

yeah, I mean I have guns, but I only shoot them at the range.....is that making me dangerous? does liking to do that make me a violent person? am I part of the "gun culture"?

We need to eliminate all culture, imho.

okay, I understand what you mean by the "criminal culture", I just can't understand the "gun culture"......

That's what I'm trying to get defined as well. I "love" my guns in the same way by Brother in Law "loves" cars. I enjoy going out target shooting, etc.

oh, you mean like the violence in our culture, I can see a point to trying to tone that down......in general.


I think some people could see free speech as a threat to security of the nation, I mean what if all the bigots get us bombed? (someone did actually use that argument with me this week)

You are so right, I meant a culture of violence.

Your second point about free speech getting us bombed has already kind of come to pass if you believe that the terrorists attack the US because of its debaucherous lifestyles. Though I don't believe that. In any case, there's no tellign what will offend someone and cause them to deal out pain and destruction so tackling the culture of violence still seems like a better way to go than restricting a right to free expression.

NOOOO!!!! :eek:

*hides the yogurt*


*hides the alcohol and the cheese*

We need to eliminate all culture, imho.

NOOOO!!!! :eek:

*hides the yogurt*

You are so right, I meant a culture of violence.

Your second point about free speech getting us bombed has already kind of come to pass if you believe that the terrorists attack the US because of its debaucherous lifestyles. Though I don't believe that. In any case, there's no tellign what will offend someone and cause them to deal out pain and destruction so tackling the culture of violence still seems like a better way to go than restricting a right to free expression.

oh, I would like to figure out a way to pull back the violence in this country, but it has little to do with guns, and more to do with the idea that some people have that "might makes right", I can't count how many parents I know who "discipline" their kids by hitting them, how many little boys I know who feel they have to fight to "save face", and how many men there are in this country who think it's okay to hit their wives for various reasons. I don't like violence, gun related or not, I just am not sure how to change that aspect of our culture, and I really don't think that the whole problem with violence is a US-only thing either.

oh, I would like to figure out a way to pull back the violence in this country, but it has little to do with guns, and more to do with the idea that some people have that "might makes right", I can't count how many parents I know who "discipline" their kids by hitting them, how many little boys I know who feel they have to fight to "save face", and how many men there are in this country who think it's okay to hit their wives for various reasons. I don't like violence, gun related or not, I just am not sure how to change that aspect of our culture, and I really don't think that the whole problem with violence is a US-only thing either.

Interesting. BTW what is your stance on smacking children in the name of discipline?

Interesting. BTW what is your stance on smacking children in the name of discipline?

I think that physically assaulting people in the name of anything (other than self defense) is wrong. I don't think that you are teaching your children anything worthwhile by smacking them. I think it adds to the culture of violence in the world.

oh, I would like to figure out a way to pull back the violence in this country, but it has little to do with guns, and more to do with the idea that some people have that "might makes right", I can't count how many parents I know who "discipline" their kids by hitting them, how many little boys I know who feel they have to fight to "save face", and how many men there are in this country who think it's okay to hit their wives for various reasons. I don't like violence, gun related or not, I just am not sure how to change that aspect of our culture, and I really don't think that the whole problem with violence is a US-only thing either.

Agreed and it certainly isn't a US only thing but we do seem to be one of the leaders in of it when compared to some of our 1st world counterparts.

Yeah, earlier in the thread I was suggesting that it could take a national media campaign (although like I said, it doesn look like those anti-marijuana campains are doing any good) and perhaps leaders who would not rather protect the gun industry from negligent distribution lawsuits rather than look at ways to curb negligent distribution (and perhaps leaders that aren't war first, negotiate later). As most people don't go for the do as I say, not as I do line. If our leaders are doing it then it must be okay right?

I think it would be in our best interest to target children and teenagers with non-violent messages.

I don't believe that violent movies and video games cause people to be violent. I think it coems from kids growing up who get hit when they do somethign wrong rather than have it texplained to them why what they did was wrong. <-- shoot first ask questions later.

I'm not a behavior psychologist so I could be completely off base but this is how I currently see things regarding ths issue.

Agreed and it certainly isn't a US only thing but we do seem to be one of the leaders in of it when compared to some of our 1st world counterparts.

Yeah, earlier in the thread I was suggesting that it could take a national media campaign (although like I said, it doesn look like those anti-marijuana campains are doing any good) and perhaps leaders who would not rather protect the gun industry from negligent distribution lawsuits rather than look at ways to curb negligent distribution (and perhaps leaders that aren't war first, negotiate later). As most people don't go for the do as I say, not as I do line. If our leaders are doing it then it must be okay right?

I think it would be in our best interest to target children and teenagers with non-violent messages.

I don't believe that violent movies and video games cause people to be violent. I think it coems from kids growing up who get hit when they do somethign wrong rather than have it texplained to them why what they did was wrong. <-- shoot first ask questions later.

I'm not a behavior psychologist so I could be completely off base but this is how I currently see things regarding ths issue.
I think I can agree with you. ;) (bold added by me... that's exactly what I see too)

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

The gun nuts are also right in that other countries also have guns, sometimes more per capita than the US, but they do not have the same issues regarding gun crimes and deaths that the US has.

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?
My feelings about guns are a lot like my feelings about power in general: the people I trust most when it comes to wielding power are the people who crave power the least. The more a person craves power, the lest I trust them to hold it. This goes double for guns.

I think that physically assaulting people in the name of anything (other than self defense) is wrong. I don't think that you are teaching your children anything worthwhile by smacking them. I think it adds to the culture of violence in the world.

:)

I wish more people took you as an example of proper parenthood.

I think that physically assaulting people in the name of anything (other than self defense) is wrong. I don't think that you are teaching your children anything worthwhile by smacking them. I think it adds to the culture of violence in the world.

Hmm. A moral dilemma for me then. My parents smacked me as a kid, and I believe that I grew up to be a more upstanding and disciplined man as a result. And I think that if by some accident I ever have children, I may smack them.

If you're wondering what it was exactly my parents did, I was smacked on the buttocks once for misdemanours. It was never painful, more of a shock than anything else. My parents are not violent people.

I also believe, as you do that any violence that is not in the name of self-defense or keeping the peace is wrong.

Hmm. A moral dilemma for me then. My parents smacked me as a kid, and I believe that I grew up to be a more upstanding and disciplined man as a result. And I think that if by some accident I ever have children, I may smack them.

If you're wondering what it was exactly my parents did, I was smacked on the buttocks once for misdemanours. It was never painful, more of a shock than anything else. My parents are not violent people.

I'll assume that your parents explained to you what you did wrong and why it was wrong?

Hmm. A moral dilemma for me then. My parents smacked me as a kid, and I believe that I grew up to be a more upstanding and disciplined man as a result. And I think that if by some accident I ever have children, I may smack them.

If you're wondering what it was exactly my parents did, I was smacked on the buttocks once for misdemanours. It was never painful, more of a shock than anything else. My parents are not violent people.

I am not interested in hijacking this thread with another smacking debate, but if you want to start a thread on it, I will probably show up.

I am glad that you grew up upstanding and disciplined. I can tell you that I had just about the worst situation growing up, and I am not a violent person, and most would consider me a productive member of society.

I'll assume that your parents explained to you what you did wrong and why it was wrong?

Yep. I grew up knowing that there were consequences for behaviour I had been taught to be wrong.

I agree it's a cultural problem, but I think calling it "gun culture" is misleading. It's about fear and independence, not guns.

Yep. I grew up knowing that there were consequences for behaviour I had been taught to be wrong.

Smunks right, I won't hijack either. We were talking about guns, violence in general and where a culture of violence might come from. So it's somewhat relevant but more off topic at this point.

Smunks right, I won't hijack either. We were talking about guns, violence in general and where a culture of violence might come from. So it's somewhat relevant but more off topic at this point.
First off, you have to acknowledge that there are variants within the "gun culture" you're talking about.

The gun culture of hunters is not necessarily the gun culture of target shooters is not the gun culture of street gangs is not the gun culture of survivalists is not the gun culture of benchrest shooters...

Some are as different as they can possibly be.

I agree it's a cultural problem, but I think calling it "gun culture" is misleading. It's about fear and independence, not guns.It's about the stereotypical American attitude that everything can be achieved through violence.

First off, you have to acknowledge that there are variants within the "gun culture" you're talking about.

The gun culture of hunters is not necessarily the gun culture of target shooters is not the gun culture of street gangs is not the gun culture of survivalists is not the gun culture of benchrest shooters...

Some are as different as they can possibly be.

Hmm yes we seem to have stumbled upon "Gun culture" being a tree upon which there are branches of said "culture".

And that "Gun culture" is but a single tree of an orchard that is called "Violence" culture.

You could argue that video games have about as much influence as legal gun ownership.

I agree it's a cultural problem, but I think calling it "gun culture" is misleading. It's about fear and independence, not guns.
I think it's also about "masculinity" in American society. "Masculinity," as near as I can tell, doesn't actually mean the same in America that it does in other places around the world. "Masculinity" in America seems to be entirely about proving that you ain't no girl and you ain't no faggot.

A whole lot of American guys seem to be totally freaked out about their "masculinity," and they are doing spectacularly stupid things in their attempts to protect their manhood.

First off, you have to acknowledge that there are variants within the "gun culture" you're talking about.

The gun culture of hunters is not necessarily the gun culture of target shooters is not the gun culture of street gangs is not the gun culture of survivalists is not the gun culture of benchrest shooters...

Some are as different as they can possibly be.


I believe you missed the majority of what I was saying DK.

I am speaking of a culture of violence.

I've not even come close to saying that everyone who owns a gun is part of the culture of violence if that's what you are getting at.

Hmm yes we seem to have stumbled upon "Gun culture" being a tree upon which there are branches of said "culture".

And that "Gun culture" is but a single tree of an orchard that is called "Violence" culture.

You could argue that video games have about as much influence as legal gun ownership.

Your typical benchrest shooter isn't about violence - in fact, you'll probably find they are more into the engineering of accuracy. Most of them would never even use a weapon to defend themselves.

You can't lump them all together, unless you're building a strawman.

Your typical benchrest shooter isn't about violence - in fact, you'll probably find they are more into the engineering of accuracy. Most of them would never even use a weapon to defend themselves.

You can't lump them all together, unless you're building a strawman.

Kinda like me. I'm a military geek. I read military magazines, and in them I read about guns, and tanks, and missiles and battleships. I build scale military models. I collect militaria. I hope to one day perhaps have an AK-47 hanging on my wall.

But the AK would be deactivated, utterly useless. And I'd keep it that way. I am what you would say "Anti-gun", and "Anti-war", yet I'm still in love with weapons. It's complicated...

Let's start here. America is, as a collective entity, stupid. There's also a bunch of crime. There'd probably be a bunch of crime even if there were no guns or, in the scope of this topic, a "love of guns" (whatever that is).

Perhaps we should adress crime? Whether one of it's causes is "Masculinity", or, yanno, other things entirely; crime in general seems more of an issue.

Let's start here. America is, as a collective entity, stupid. There's also a bunch of crime. There'd probably be a bunch of crime even if there were no guns or, in the scope of this topic, a "love of guns" (whatever that is).

Perhaps we should adress crime? Whether one of it's causes is "Masculinity", or, yanno, other things entirely; crime in general seems more of an issue.

Give me a link to prove that America is stupid.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

Oh, and guns have very little to do with violent crime in the US.
Incidents involving a firearm represented 9% of the 4.7 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault in 2005

Looks like a lot of violent crime, 91 percent of which had nothing to do with a firearm...

So you attack a "stereotypical attitude" w/ a stereotype. Good job.

Not to mention his strawman of "gun culture".

It's about the stereotypical American attitude that everything can be achieved through violence.

So you attack a "stereotypical attitude" w/ a stereotype. Good job.

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?

Well, to work with your comparison, I, personally, would vehemently oppose any movement to arrest people for yelling "God hates fags!" at funerals, but I would dearly love to convince them that that is a really freaking lousy way to use their 1st Amendment rights.

Similarly, it is not unreasonable to suggest that, while banning guns might not be a good solution, convincing people that they are dangerous tools which should be taken seriously, not status symbols or proof of one's masculinity/gangsta-ness/etc. is almost certainly a necessary step in decreasing gun violence.

Well, to work with your comparison, I, personally, would vehemently oppose any movement to arrest people for yelling "God hates fags!" at funerals, but I would dearly love to convince them that that is a really freaking lousy way to use their 1st Amendment rights.

Similarly, it is not unreasonable to suggest that, while banning guns might not be a good solution, convincing people that they are dangerous tools which should be taken seriously, not status symbols or proof of one's masculinity/gangsta-ness/etc. is almost certainly a necessary step in decreasing gun violence.

I agree. And the things you mentioned really have little to do w/ "gun culture" but more to do w/ criminal culture.

Not to mention his strawman of "gun culture".My strawman of "gun culture" ?
I know a few people who moved from the US to Europe so their children won't have to grow up with the level of violence of US cities. And you can't tell me that you are living in a peaceful nation with such numbers of imprisoned people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Prisons#Population_statistics).

My strawman of "gun culture" ?
I know a few people who moved from the US to Europe so their children won't have to grow up with the level of violence of US cities. And you can't tell me that you are living in a peaceful nation with such numbers of imprisoned people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Prisons#Population_statistics).

and all crimes are gun crimes?

Yeah, let's get rid of the gun culture. Who needs it? I'm big, trained in unarmed combat, knife fighting, and stick fighting. When I decide to fuck someone up for cutting me off in traffic, saying something I don't like or just looking at me wrong I don't want to have to worry about getting shot.

You take away guns, people will find another way to kill people, probably knives.

and good luck banning kitchen knives, that'll blow over well..

The mentally unstable will find a way to accomplish their ends no matter what it may be, if its not guns he would've built homemade bombs.

Guns don't kill people, idiots do.

Yeah, let's get rid of the gun culture. Who needs it? I'm big, trained in unarmed combat, knife fighting, and stick fighting. When I decide to fuck someone up for cutting me off in traffic, saying something I don't like or just looking at me wrong I don't want to have to worry about getting shot.

That almost sounds like a prison come-on. :fluffle:

My strawman of "gun culture" ?
I know a few people who moved from the US to Europe so their children won't have to grow up with the level of violence of US cities. And you can't tell me that you are living in a peaceful nation with such numbers of imprisoned people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Prisons#Population_statistics).

Yes, your strawman of "gun culture".

This is "gun culture":

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/single/10492/

This is "Criminal Culture":

http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2006/no-snitching-movement-has.html

That almost sounds like a prison come-on. :fluffle:

I've never been anyplace worse than a county jail in my life.

We need to get rid of the gun culture that is prevalent in the US.

*SNIP*

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?

I agree, to a large extent. The gun culture is one of the main problems and one that must be changed if one is serious about redusing gun-related crime in the US.

By gun culture I mean among other things the US fascination with and love of guns and gun ownership; the glorification of guns and gun violence, notably in movies, on the TV, in music and in computer games; the easy access to guns and the idea that ownership of guns are a right on par with the right to life and the right to free speech; the idea that guns will solve the majority of problems, including as a miracle-tool in every facet of self-defence from a simple mugging to a tyrannical government; the legitimacy of killing another human; the idea that bigger guns are better, and more powerful guns that shoots faster and holds more bullets is a thing to strive for; that all types of gun-control are bad; that one needs proper training to use a gun, and one should store it safely etc, etc.

You may not agree with every point, but that doesn't matter. The main point is that something needs to change when it comes to the attitudes in society towards guns and the use of guns. Without that change... Well, then there will never be any reduction in gun-related violence.

It's a nice pipe dream. But that's all it is.
No, it can be done, if one is willing to do what is needed. The culture of smoking in the US is dying, is it not? At least compared to how it used to be?

And besides, when other countries can have more guns but not suffer as the US does, with about 30,000 gun related deaths each year, why should't the US be able to do it?

Without that change... Well, then there will never be any reduction in gun-related violence.

And all the other violence? I think figuring that out would do a good deal of the work in 'gun-realted violence' for us.

And all the other violence? I think figuring that out would do a good deal of the work in 'gun-realted violence' for us.

Indeed, that is true.

I focus on gun-related due to the exceptionally high numbers of gun-related homicides in the US, but any decrease in violence would be good.

gun culture is a way of life for many people in parts of the country. taking away gun culture is taking away the way of life for many many people. they grew up around guns, thier parents grew up around guns, their grandparents grew up around guns. its a way of life for them and taking that way of life from them is just wrong. they have the right to have their guns and as long as they are responsible with their right it will always be their right.

1. I didn't bring up gun culture.
2. This http://www.theothersideofkim.com/images/2005files/DBrown-ARI.jpg is disgusting.

Why is that picture disgusting? I see nothing disgusting about it.

Yes, your strawman of "gun culture".

This is "gun culture":

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/single/10492/

This is "Criminal Culture":

http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2006/no-snitching-movement-has.html
1. I didn't bring up gun culture.
2. This http://www.theothersideofkim.com/images/2005files/DBrown-ARI.jpg is disgusting.

What's wrong with loving guns?
http://www.scottbieser.com/images/Checkpoint_Fred_700.jpg
Thanks a lot, Scott.

yeah, guns make these folks so "kewl"... :rolleyes:

Where in his statement did he say they owned firearms to be "kewl"?

gun culture is a way of life for many people in parts of the country. taking away gun culture is taking away the way of life for many many people. they grew up around guns, thier parents grew up around guns, their grandparents grew up around guns. its a way of life for them and taking that way of life from them is just wrong. they have the right to have their guns and as long as they are responsible with their right it will always be their right.yeah, guns make these folks so "kewl"... :rolleyes:

Why is that picture disgusting? I see nothing disgusting about it.

If you have an irrational reaction of fear and revulsion when you see a gun it looks disgusting to see a kid shooting. For those of us who aren't crazy, there is nothing disgusting about it.

Where in his statement did he say they owned firearms to be "kewl"?I don't know. Did I say he did?

If you have an irrational reaction of fear and revulsion when you see a gun it looks disgusting to see a kid shooting. For those of us who aren't crazy, there is nothing disgusting about it.


Oh, ok. I thought maybe the link was supposed to be something gross, and I just got re-directed to a picture of a little kid shooting a pistol.

We need to get rid of the gun culture that is prevalent in the US. No, Virginia Tech didn’t set me off; it was the very first statement from the White House in regards to the tragedy at VT that did it. Among the first statements made was this gem:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070416-1.html

Think about this for a second, a great tragedy has happened, 32 (+1) lives were lost and yet... yet the first thing out of the White House is a reassurance to the members of the NRA that the government won’t be coming after their guns. And I am not singling out just President Bush in this; today (My time at least), Senator Reid echoed the same: http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/04/18/ap/politics/d8oin2go1.txt

In the current gun control thread, the normal gun nuts are baying their standard of “If only everyone was armed, this wouldn’t have happened” as if adding more fire to a raging inferno is a good idea. Now we can debate that point till the cows come home (and probably will), but again, it speaks volumes about the gun culture in the US.

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

The gun nuts are also right in that other countries also have guns, sometimes more per capita than the US, but they do not have the same issues regarding gun crimes and deaths that the US has.

They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?


Murder is an invention as old as man. It was not a product of the gun era; in all of history you can find examples of murder; Julius Ceasar, for instance. Crime is encouraged by culture and the individual; not guns.

Banning guns won't solve murder; people will find other ways to do it. There is no basis for the belief that restricting gun ownership or use will significantly reduce violent crime. While it would be stretching the truth to say that gun ownership prevents crime, it certainly does not cause it.

Florida has the nation's highest violent crime rate and 8.6 gun dealers per 10,000 people. North Dakota has the lowest violent crime rate and 25.8 gun dealers per 10,000 people. This is consistent with crime and gun dealer rates in other states. (U.S. News & World Report, 1/17/94). There is no correlation between gun sales and crime.

The countries of Switzerland, Israel, Denmark, and Finland have the world's very highest per capita gun ownership and some of the world's lowest rime rates (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 78). Therefore, there is no correlation between gun ownership and crime.

Jamaica has much stricter gun control than the U.S. and much higher murder rates. Yet Jamaica has six times as many gun deaths per capita as our murder capital, Washington, D.C. (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 78-79). There is no correlation between gun laws and crime.

One gets the impression from television and newspapers that so-called assault rifles are responsible for most murders since headlines often tell of maniacs shooting masses of people. In fact, only 4% of homicides involve any kind of rifle and less than 1% involve assault weapons (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 150, 154).

The anti-assault rifle craze in the media is analogous to coverage of aircraft crashes. Although many more people are killed in care accidents, it is the isolated case of an airliner crash that gets the publicity because the story is more sensational. Likewise, the coverage of murders with "assault rifles" distorts the truth that assault rifles kill very few people.

In Switzerland, every able-bodied adult male trains two or three weeks each year in the army and is required to keep an automatic assault rifle and ammunition in his home (Fodor's Guide to Switzerland, pp. 60-61). Yet violent crime is virtually non- existent in Switzerland.

Do you even LIVE in America? Worse yet, have you ever BEEN to America?

The constitution (not sure if you've heard of it) ensures that, as my AP history teacher puts it, that "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed."


If you know much of US law, you'll see the vast majority is based on the constitution, much like the relationship between the bible and Christianity.

As for editing culture? Are you saying we should stop the NRA from meeting (yet another HUGE violation of the constitution), have government-edited news and media, etc.?


You must also acknowledge the lasting effect of banning gun sales and/or seizing them from the general public. Now, not only do the police not have guns, but "good people" (law-abiding citizens) don't have a way of defence. The "bad people" (those who use guns other than for hunting, law enforcement, self-defence, and so on) have access to guns. If guns never were allowed, in theory this solution would work, but the horse is out of the barn. Or should we violate the constitution again and have the police storm houses and potential warehouses seizing guns?

Guns also are a great way of preventing invasion or tyranny (the main reason Hitler would never have invaded the U.S. is because we were armed).

So as you see, eliminating "gun culture" (a.k.a. eliminating guns) isn't as easy as it sounds.

Kreynoria;12557809']Murder is an invention as old as man. It was not a product of the gun era; in all of history you can find examples of murder; Julius Ceasar, for instance. Crime is encouraged by culture and the individual; not guns.

Banning guns won't solve murder; people will find other ways to do it. There is no basis for the belief that restricting gun ownership or use will significantly reduce violent crime. While it would be stretching the truth to say that gun ownership prevents crime, it certainly does not cause it.

Florida has the nation's highest violent crime rate and 8.6 gun dealers per 10,000 people. North Dakota has the lowest violent crime rate and 25.8 gun dealers per 10,000 people. This is consistent with crime and gun dealer rates in other states. (U.S. News & World Report, 1/17/94). There is no correlation between gun sales and crime.

The countries of Switzerland, Israel, Denmark, and Finland have the world's very highest per capita gun ownership and some of the world's lowest rime rates (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 78). Therefore, there is no correlation between gun ownership and crime.

Jamaica has much stricter gun control than the U.S. and much higher murder rates. Yet Jamaica has six times as many gun deaths per capita as our murder capital, Washington, D.C. (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 78-79). There is no correlation between gun laws and crime.

One gets the impression from television and newspapers that so-called assault rifles are responsible for most murders since headlines often tell of maniacs shooting masses of people. In fact, only 4% of homicides involve any kind of rifle and less than 1% involve assault weapons (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 150, 154).

The anti-assault rifle craze in the media is analogous to coverage of aircraft crashes. Although many more people are killed in care accidents, it is the isolated case of an airliner crash that gets the publicity because the story is more sensational. Likewise, the coverage of murders with "assault rifles" distorts the truth that assault rifles kill very few people.

In Switzerland, every able-bodied adult male trains two or three weeks each year in the army and is required to keep an automatic assault rifle and ammunition in his home (Fodor's Guide to Switzerland, pp. 60-61). Yet violent crime is virtually non- existent in Switzerland.

So you agree with him that it's the culture that is the problem?

Is that why Europe has not recently been invaded?

That comment is irrelevant. It is because the European Union and NATO provide a system of deterrance; if you invade Europe, you're basically at war with 3/4ths of Europe, Canada, and the United States.

Guns also are a great way of preventing invasion or tyranny Is that why Europe has not recently been invaded?

So you agree with him that it's the culture that is the problem?

No. What I mean is that guns and weapons did not precede crime and murder.

Kreynoria;12557822']That comment is irrelevant. It is because the European Union and NATO provide a system of deterrance; if you invade Europe, you're basically at war with 3/4ths of Europe, Canada, and the United States.So in fact Alacea's claim was baseless?

ha
They are right in one other fact, taking away the guns won’t solve the problem; we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?

I don't know that I agree with everything you said. I like hunting and shooting for sport and honestly believe if one of the responsible professors had his concealed weapons permit, was trained, and armed lives could of been spared.

However I agree with your last statement to an extent, their is nothing desirable about a bullet wound and shoot outs, and it is pretty dumb glorifying them in popular media.
At the same time I also think why arent their more mass killing involving blades from popular Fantasy movies...but then realise oh ya... that kind of nerd is much more sensible then Wanna be gangstas with the "I want a gun cos it's cool" attitude.

I had a thought for prevention. All legally acquired guns are registered, make that registry public, after all why would I care if someone knew I owned a gun? Then Businesses, schools, ect.. can all check those public records for any of their students or employees.

then when you have concerned creative writing teachers tell you they are concerned about student_X because he writes about shooting people you can check his records and see..oh hey, he just bought a gun. lets be concerned.

If those Records are already public...why dont schools do this? This wasn't just some random thing, the kid that shot up VT did write some creepy stuff.

My point is their are many steps that SHOULD be taken and I find it sad that no one uses any similar methods to insure public safety and just blames guns after the fact. It seems like such a pitiful excuse.

So in fact Alacea's claim was baseless?

Alacea said it was a great way, not the only way.

Kreynoria;12557830']No. What I mean is that guns and weapons did not precede crime and murder.Right. Guns and weapons only made crime and murder easier.

So in fact Alacea's claim was baseless?

Yes. I think that Hitler did not invade the United States because it was impractical; it was across an ocean and Germany had very little naval power to speak of; he had a wary, grudging respect for America's economic power and large population as well.

Alacea said it was a great way, not the only way.Is there an example?

Right. Guns and weapons only made crime and murder easier.

Even without guns, you can use a huge variety of common household items to kill someone: knives, hammers, razors, wrenches, saws. You could strangle someone, break their neck, drown them in the bathtub, smash their head off a piece of furniture. You can find rocks and maybe loose bricks in your yard that make ready weapons. You can beat someone to death with a baseball bat, stab a screwdriver into their stomach, or shove a fork into their eye.

There will always be ways to kill people; banning guns won't solve murder.

As for editing culture? Are you saying we should stop the NRA from meeting (yet another HUGE violation of the constitution), have government-edited news and media, etc.?
Such drastic actions aren't warranted. But a change in attitude is. The same way people have changed their minds about smoking, some people need to change their minds about the "coolness" and usefulness of guns (beyond their legal use). As Dinaverg pointed out, it's more about violence than about guns, really...

You must also acknowledge the lasting effect of banning gun sales and/or seizing them from the general public. Now, not only do the police not have guns, but "good people" (law-abiding citizens) don't have a way of defence. The "bad people" (those who use guns other than for hunting, law enforcement, self-defence, and so on) have access to guns. If guns never were allowed, in theory this solution would work, but the horse is out of the barn. Or should we violate the constitution again and have the police storm houses and potential warehouses seizing guns?
Few, if any, are seriously suggesting banning guns. But let me ask you: When does the "good people" become "bad people"?

Guns also are a great way of preventing invasion or tyranny (the main reason Hitler would never have invaded the U.S. is because we were armed).
This is just silly speculation. There is no proof that Hitler avoided thinking about invading the US because of the armed civilians.

So as you see, eliminating "gun culture" (a.k.a. eliminating guns) isn't as easy as it sounds.
Did anyone say it would be easy?

Kreynoria;12557858']Yes. I think that Hitler did not invade the United States because it was impractical; it was across an ocean and Germany had very little naval power to speak of; he had a wary, grudging respect for America's economic power and large population as well.I wasn't referring to the idiotic Hitler-comment at all.

Oh, ok. I thought maybe the link was supposed to be something gross, and I just got re-directed to a picture of a little kid shooting a pistol.

But it's easier to say that adults teaching youth about firearms and safety is "disgusting" when they have no clue what they're talking about and want to demonize firearm owners.

Ignorance is bliss.

Is there an example?

An example of what? How not to get invaded? Well, one way could be to belong to a multi-national alliance (like the EU or Nato), one way could be to have a significant portion of a populace to be armed, one way could be to build a wall between one nation and another, or maybe the populace could continuously sing Pat Boone songs (to scare away any would-be invaders)*.







*the last example is of course, a joke. Or is it?

Kreynoria;12557830']No. What I mean is that guns and weapons did not precede crime and murder.

Yet your previous post only strengthen the argument that it's the culture, not merely the presence of guns, that is the problem. The culture of violence, if you will...

Oh, ok. I thought maybe the link was supposed to be something gross, and I just got re-directed to a picture of a little kid shooting a pistol.You don't find little kids shooting pistols disgusting (as symptoms of a culture of violence) ? Well, I do. But on the other hand, I also find meat eaters disgusting.

Kreynoria;12557858']Yes. I think that Hitler did not invade the United States because it was impractical; it was across an ocean and Germany had very little naval power to speak of; he had a wary, grudging respect for America's economic power and large population as well.

i dunno, i'd have gone with the old "Hitler didn't invade america cause he couldn't bloody cross the channel" argument. but i'm kindof closed-minded when it comes to history.

You don't find little kids shooting pistols disgusting? I do. But on the other hand, I also find meat eaters disgusting.


What about a little kid shooting a pistol is disgusting? Isn't it better to teach children firearms safety now (like what a firearm is capable of if misused, how to know if a firearm safety is on, etc), instead of after a child finds a firearm (in the home, in the woods, etc), and accidentally kills their best friend?

As far as meat eating, that's a subject for another thread (although I have no problem with your decision, it means more meat for me :D).

You don't find little kids shooting pistols disgusting (as symptoms of a culture of violence) ? Well, I do. But on the other hand, I also find meat eaters disgusting.

So you find wolves, tigers, lions, leopards, dogs, snakes, birds, alligators, crocodiles, and most people disgusting? But let's not change the subject.

I don't think the culture of violence is specific to any country or region, but is rather something innate to nature and to man. I think that it will be impossible to eliminate this, although we could certainly educate the young about guns the way we do with drugs.

Well, it's related. It's also along the lines of socially accepted culture of violence.

How is it related?

What about a little kid shooting a pistol is disgusting? Isn't it better to teach children firearms safety now (like what a firearm is capable of if misused, how to know if a firearm safety is on, etc), instead of after a child finds a firearm (in the home, in the woods, etc), and accidentally kills their best friend?Teaching kids firearms is teaching them to solve problems the "easy" way, isn't it?

As far as meat eating, that's a subject for another thread .Well, it's related. It's also along the lines of socially accepted culture of violence.

Meat eating is not violence; it is simply a part of nature, a way that animals evolved to eat.

Let's try not to hijack it though with meat eating, keep the topic on gun control.

Kreynoria;12557858']Yes. I think that Hitler did not invade the United States because it was impractical; it was across an ocean and Germany had very little naval power to speak of; he had a wary, grudging respect for America's economic power and large population as well.

Hitler probably wouldn't have crossed the Atlantic, partly because he couldn't make it in one piece, and because the U.S. had many guns. If the U.S. "disarmed", the large advantage of an armed-population is lost.

My point was that invading the U.S. would be nearly impossible even without the American military, as civillians would put up a huge fight. Look at Iraq, they use inferior weaponry, and only a small fraction of their forces are insurgents, yet they have put a major dent in America's armed forces.

Gravlen, "good people" become "bad people" when they go to college campuses and kill 32 people and turn the gun on themselves, and now everyone wants their freedoms taken away.

I wish to correct myself, a gun-ban wouldn't be "easy", it'd be "impossible".

Now, I know it may be hard for some of you, but I don't recall once resorting to insulting some of the more obnoxious amateur debaters here, at least not by name.

Teaching kids firearms is teaching them to solve problems the "easy" way, isn't it?


Boy, can we take things out of context. Teaching kids how to shoot firearms not only increases motor skills but also safety and responsibility. But you don't care about that, you only want to equate firearms w/ murder.

Boy, can we take things out of context. Teaching kids how to shoot firearms not only increases motor skills but also safety and responsibility. But you don't care about that, you only want to equate firearms w/ murder.

i learned all about safety and responsibility playing Duckhunter, not to mention motor skills. i wonder if the Wii will get a handgun too? personally, i thought the idea of blasting the hell out of ducks with the bazooka was the best, but i never had a bazooka. :(

Teaching kids firearms is teaching them to solve problems the "easy" way, isn't it?

Well, it's related. It's also along the lines of socially accepted culture of violence.


Not in the slightest. I was taught that there's usually multiple ways to solve a problem with another person, and that violence should always be the last resort. I was also taught that violence with a firearm is only reserved for life or death situations, after all other solutions are tried and fail.

Also, eating meat isn't a socially accepted culture of violence, it's part of how our bodies are designed. From our canine teeth (designed to tear into meat), to our intestines (which are short like a meat eater's, while still being long enough to also digest plant material).

Kreynoria;12557917']I don't think the culture of violence is specific to any country or region, but is rather something innate to nature and to man. I think that it will be impossible to eliminate this, although we could certainly educate the young about guns the way we do with drugs.
What is the explanation for the fact that the homicide rate in the US is 5.9 per 100,000 people, while the rate in all the European Union countries are lower?
(Not to mention that Norway has a homicide rate of only 0.78 per 100,000 despite a high rate of gun ownership)

Why this difference if it's innate to nature and to man?
Kreynoria;12557931']Let's try not to hijack it though with meat eating, keep the topic on gun control.

The thread is not about gun control...

So as a part of nature animals raise millions and millions of other animals to put them in fridges in pieces? Getting meat on your plate involves no violence? And you eat meat because you just don't give a shit for an animal's life as long as it fills your belly?


Yeah, pretty much.

Kreynoria;12557931']Meat eating is not violence; it is simply a part of nature, a way that animals evolved to eat.So as a part of nature animals raise millions and millions of other animals to put them in fridges in pieces? Getting meat on your plate involves no violence? And you eat meat because you just don't give a shit for an animal's life as long as it fills your belly?
And I really do see the connexion to wearing and using guns: both comes from a mindset that out of selfishness has only low regard for life.

Boy, can we take things out of context. Teaching kids how to shoot firearms not only increases motor skills but also safety and responsibility. But you don't care about that, you only want to equate firearms w/ murder.Firearms have been created for warfare. And there are certainly better ways to teach kids motor skills than teaching them how to use killing tools.

Teaching kids firearms is teaching them to solve problems the "easy" way, isn't it?

I think he meant teaching them the proper safety techniques and respect for the tool. Not just teaching them just how to load and aim, but also how to avoid accidents, how to clean them, and proper defense techniques that need not be fatal.

Well, it's related. It's also along the lines of socially accepted culture of violence.

Then the culture of violence has existed throughout the entire history of civilization, and has enveloped each country regardless of crime rate.

So as a part of nature animals raise millions and millions of other animals to put them in fridges in pieces? Getting meat on your plate involves no violence? And you eat meat because you just don't give a shit for an animal's life as long as it fills your belly?
And I really do see the connexion to wearing and using guns: both comes from a mindset that out of selfishness has only low regard for life.

Yes. Bears eat other animals, tigers eat other animals, snakes eat other animals. Are they immoral? Humans have a much higher population, and therefore must eat correspondingly more meat than other animals. Meat eating isn't selfishness, it's nature.

What about the lives of those plants you eat? Plants are living creatures. Do you not give a shit about plants so long as it fills your belly?

And before that is taken out of context, I do eat plants and think humans should eat plants and that it is not morally wrong to eat plants.

I am simply saying that you cannot claim the moral high ground by not eating animals because plants are just as alive as animals.

I think he meant teaching them the proper safety techniques and respect for the tool. Not just teaching them just how to load and aim, but also how to avoid accidents, how to clean them, and proper defense techniques that need not be fatal.


Thank you. :)

Kreynoria;12557980']Yes. Bears eat other animals, tigers eat other animals, snakes eat other animals. Are they immoral? Humans have a much higher population, and therefore must eat correspondingly more meat than other animals. Meat eating isn't selfishness, it's nature.

What about the lives of those plants you eat? Plants are living creatures. Do you not give a shit about plants so long as it fills your belly?

Not to mention the billions of insects, millions of rodents, and the occasional fox or badger that get killed when pesticides are sprayed and farm machinery rolls over the fields just so he can get his nice, cruelty-free imitation meat flavored soy mess. You just can't get around killing something if you want to continue to survive.

both comes from a mindset that out of selfishness has only low regard for life.

I would pause here to ask you your idea on what self-defense means. I personally consider it wrong to expect others to be solely responsible for defending my life: whether you are a gun owner, a martial artist, or just keep yourself in peak fitness, I believe you are doing your part in your natural right and duty to defend your life from threats.

Do you believe defense should only be the business of those who are charged with it by society (such as police), and if you do, how can they guarentee anyones safety without despotism- even with despotism? I believe it wrong to charge other people with your defense, and I believe on a local level, you will always do it better than them, as they can only respond after the fact.

Cars kill far more people than guns every year, but we don't see any major movements to ban cars, restrict car ownership, or equate cars with murder.

A gun is a tool, just like a car. In the wrong hands it becomes a lethal murder weapon. But a responsible user who uses it to hunt or for self-defense (with lethal fire as the absolute last resort) is using it in the fashion intended as a tool. Likewise, in the hands of a drunk or reckless driver a car is a three-ton missile on wheels, capable of creating lethal collisions or crushing a pedestrian. But a safe, responsible user of a car will probably never kill someone with it.

Firearms have been created for warfare. And there are certainly better ways to teach kids motor skills than teaching them how to use killing tools.

So now you get to define "better" and make it objective instead of subjective along w/ including the other bits you selectively deleted.

I think he meant teaching them the proper safety techniques and respect for the tool. Not just teaching them just how to load and aim, but also how to avoid accidents, how to clean them, and proper defense techniques that need not be fatal.


Of course, but the UB wouldn't be able to make absurd arguments if he recognized reality.

Kreynoria;12558021']Cars kill far more people than guns every year, but we don't see any major movements to ban cars, restrict car ownership, or equate cars with murder.
Restricting the lawful use of cars however...

Even law-abiding citizens need a license to drive, don't they... And they can loose it by being careless without hurting anybody too.

No breathalyzer tests on the shooting range either... Nor mandatory training.
Kreynoria;12558021']
A gun is a tool, just like a car. In the wrong hands it becomes a lethal murder weapon. But a responsible user who uses it to hunt or for self-defense (with lethal fire as the absolute last resort) is using it in the fashion intended as a tool. Likewise, in the hands of a drunk or reckless driver a car is a three-ton missile on wheels, capable of creating lethal collisions or crushing a pedestrian. But a safe, responsible user of a car will probably never kill someone with it.
And here too there are cultural differences, for example between the US and the EU. The car culture is more prevalent in the US, in the same way as the gun culture is.

But in the end, the car is not a gun.

<snip>

But in the end, the car is not a gun.

True. Guns aren't a threat to the environment, kill fewer people annually in the US and Europe, and don't expose me to the risk of being killed or mutilated when I'm just trying to get to and from work.

True. Guns aren't a threat to the environment, kill fewer people annually in the US and Europe, and don't expose me to the risk of being killed or mutilated when I'm just trying to get to and from work.

Indeed. But regardless, what can we do about the random violence in the US? How can we reduce the 30,000 something gun-related deaths a year?

At least with cars one tries to make both the cars and the roads safer, even reduce emissions (outside the US at least) and impose rather strict penalties on abuse (like drunk driving, speeding, driving without a license, with a damaged car etc) even if it doesn't hurt others in an effort to reduce deaths. And information campaigns too, to try to educate people and change the way they act...

Indeed. But regardless, what can we do about the random violence in the US? How can we reduce the 30,000 something gun-related deaths a year?

At least with cars one tries to make both the cars and the roads safer, even reduce emissions (outside the US at least) and impose rather strict penalties on abuse (like drunk driving, speeding, driving without a license, with a damaged car etc) even if it doesn't hurt others in an effort to reduce deaths. And information campaigns too, to try to educate people and change the way they act...

We could try to bring some manufacturing jobs back to depressed rural and inner city areas, put more money into early education programs for little kids and schools for older kids, enforce strict laws against violent criminals, and even legalize and regulate drugs. Hard as all that might be it's got to be easier than changing a whole culture and trying to get three hundred million guns off the street, particularly when people like me will never give up their guns.

I'm thinking that if the US can't get rid of gun-culture, then they need to work on a superior and more effective counter-culture.

Like Kevlar-Culture for instance.

Indeed. But regardless, what can we do about the random violence in the US? How can we reduce the 30,000 something gun-related deaths a year?



One one point, over half the 30K is suicide and the US has a lower per capita than most of the west.

On the other, DCD made some good points plus stop encouraging the type of violent culture that is emphasized in the other link that UB convieniently ignored.

As far as policy, the President believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed.


QFT 120 effin percent!!! The 2nd amendment, the actions of one asshole doesn't give anybody the right to violate the rights of the majority! WAY TO DUBYA!!!

We could try to bring some manufacturing jobs back to depressed rural and inner city areas, put more money into early education programs for little kids and schools for older kids, enforce strict laws against violent criminals, and even legalize and regulate drugs. Hard as all that might be it's got to be easier than changing a whole culture and trying to get three hundred million guns off the street, particularly when people like me will never give up their guns.
See, that's one step, but I don't believe it is enough. Lack of communication and options for troubled kids are also needed - not simply education, but venues where thay can talk about their problems and vent their anger, for example.

And indeed, make it less "cool" to put a cap in someone's ass...
One one point, over half the 30K is suicide and the US has a lower per capita than most of the west.
Lower per capita what? :confused:

Are you saying that the rest of the west don't count suicide, while the US do?

On the other, DCD made some good points plus stop encouraging the type of violent culture that is emphasized in the other link that UB convieniently ignored.
Yeah, I think that's what needs to be done. Change peoples attitude towards using guns wrongfully.

QFT 120 effin percent!!! The 2nd amendment, the actions of one asshole doesn't give anybody the right to violate the rights of the majority! WAY TO DUBYA!!!

Wrong thread. Seems like you want the Gun Control (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=524276) thread.

Lower per capita what? :confused:

Are you saying that the rest of the west don't count suicide, while the US do?



Lower suicide rate. I never said anything about the west not counting suicide.

Wrong thread. Seems like you want the Gun Control (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=524276) thread.



I got the right thread, NERVUN posted the white houses remarks here and I agreed with them.

I got the right thread, NERVUN posted the white houses remarks here and I agreed with them.

The topic isn't the quote, it's the culture of gun ownership-this isn't arguing 2nd Amendment rights but the near worship of guns in America and what can be done about it. For this discussion "People kill people" is taken as a given and the discussion is what to do about that. Your comment is on the 2nd ammendment itself which is being discussed in the other thread.

The only relevance your comment had here was to demonstrate that gun worship does in fact exist and lives in you.

Lower suicide rate. I never said anything about the west not counting suicide.

Yeah, that's what I didn't understand...

Do you have any numbers by the way? I'm wondering how the US is ranked compared to Europe. All I know is that most of the suicides in the US is done by way of gun.

QFT 120 effin percent!!! The 2nd amendment, the actions of one asshole doesn't give anybody the right to violate the rights of the majority! WAY TO DUBYA!!!

That post lowered my IQ by 5.

Yeah, that's what I didn't understand...

Do you have any numbers by the way? I'm wondering how the US is ranked compared to Europe. All I know is that most of the suicides in the US is done by way of gun.

Here's the data from the WHO:

http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suiciderates/en/

Go to sleep on page 2, wake up on page 11. Ok, this is gonna take a while, please bear with me on the multi-posts.

But what's the "whole issue"? You say you want to get rid of the "love of guns" but not guns themselves. Effectively that's the same thing.
No, it's not. Like I said, look at the other countries that have guns and access to guns and yet DON'T have the same problems with gun violence and acidents. The whole issue is the obession with guns that the US has, the notion that you NEED a gun or that by getting one you WILL have power and respect.

As I said, the guns control us now, not the other way around. I liken it to an alcoholic and his booze. You can (and many people do) drink responcibly and safely, but when you get to the stage of alcholoism, where you suddenly NEED the booze...

That's where we are at right now.

On more careful reading, of your OP, I'll give you a cautious maybe, how's that. (I apologise for the rather knee jerk reaction. I hope you understand where it comes from, especially on these boards...)
Oh I can understand from being on this board a while, but in a way, you have proven my point. I didn't say ANYTHING about removing guns, and yet everyone comes charging in here for yet another gun control debate. This, I think, is the problem. We, as a nation, a people, and a culture, are unable to effectivly debate about this due to the gun culture.

The reason it's cautious is this: how do you plan to effectively change the "gun culture" without disarming the populace?
Don't know yet, sleep did not bring the wisdom I sought on the subject (alas!). However, I have often been told that step one of solving a problem is admitting you have one and identifying just what that problem is. Given there's 11 pages on the thread and I'm pretty sure they are not full of people agreeing with me, I'd say we need to get back step one first. ;)

It's a nice pipe dream. But that's all it is.
Any dream is worth fighting for. Besides, it was said that racism and Jim Crow would always be prevallient and yet I just read how interracial marriages in the US have skyrocketed as of late and most youth in the US see nothing at all wrong with it, and that change was less than 50 years back. It CAN happen, if we really want it.

I think you're going to have a hard time making a change to that aspect of our culture without getting into historical revisionism.

The USA has a violent history. Sometimes violence was justified, sometimes not. Either way, guns are sort of symbolic of the romanticism that surrounds US history from the Revolution through Western expansion to WWII. For better or worse, this country wouldn't have come into being without them.

A picture of a Minuteman just isn't complete without his musket and powder horn. What Cowboy doesn't carry a six-shooter? And of course some of our most revered citizens are veterans from Wars, Especially WWII.

Personally, I don't own any guns at this time but as a history buff, I'd love to own an authentic Civil War rifle or musket, especially one that works.

All of this has led to a culture where having a firearm is a symbol of empowerment. (Not masculinity per se.) Citizen militias rising up to take on th egreatest military power of the 18th Century... Lone homesteaders using a shotgun or rifle to protect their land and family from hostile (sic) Indians... American warriors storming the beach at Normandy armed with nothing more than a semiautomatic rifle.

As much as I support the rights of individual gun ownership I do agree with Nevrun in that our culture does somewhat worship guns. Not a big deal if we're talking about a hunter with an impressive collection of rifles and shotguns, but a very big deal when this is applied to inner city gangbangers or heavily armed bankrobbers.
Exactly!

"I don't want to take away free speech, I just want to take away the love of free speech"

I don't understand what you are talking about, can you explain this to me?
I'll try my best. Think about what guns symbolise to many people in the US. Think about our culture and how often we make guns the focial point or the ultimate tool. Think about our media, how often at the end of an action movie, or a western, or a police drama, or hell, just about ANYTHING, are guns (or their future equivlent) used to solve the problem, usually by killing the "bad" guy?

Listen (Well, read) to how often on these boards do people for guns state how they NEED guns. They NEED big guns. They NEED AP rounds. It's their RIGHT. They don't NEED them, they WANT them, there's a big difference.
We are OBSESSED. That's the best way I can put it. Other countries have guns, some have far more (per capita) than the US and yet only third world countries with active wars post more gun related deaths than the US. Why?

Because we seemingly have decided that the answer to just about everything comes out of a gun. Fear for your life? Get a gun. Want to protect your children? Get a gun. Want to have power and control? Get a gun. Pissed off at your partner for cheating? Get a gun.

We can't even debate about a responce to the VT tragedy because of how much we love our guns. It really does sound like an alcoholic and booze. There's a problem here.

I believe, actually having grown up with a hunting family and friends, I KNOW guns can be handled safely and treated as the tool that they are. But the tool is controling us and we need to deal with that.

That explain it?

Go to sleep on page 2, wake up on page 11. Ok, this is gonna take a while, please bear with me on the multi-posts.


No, it's not. Like I said, look at the other countries that have guns and access to guns and yet DON'T have the same problems with gun violence and acidents. The whole issue is the obession with guns that the US has, the notion that you NEED a gun or that by getting one you WILL have power and respect.

As I said, the guns control us now, not the other way around. I liken it to an alcoholic and his booze. You can (and many people do) drink responcibly and safely, but when you get to the stage of alcholoism, where you suddenly NEED the booze...

That's where we are at right now.

See, now I completely disagree. The "gun culture" is more associated w/ the family that I linked to that goes shooting and spends time together. You're still referencing it to abuse and the criminal/violent culture. While there are extremists, they are far from the majority.

Why? Shouldn't the only thing that matters be behavior?
The love of guns (which, I admit is not the best of terms) is what is leading to the behavores.

You want to what, control people's emotions?

Outlaw a "culture?" What's next? Well, that hippie culture. Hey that Hispanic culture. We need more control over what cultures people have!
I think you missed my point, I want to remove this notion in the US that somehow guns are glorious and that having one will solve all of your problems, present or future. That is, I believe, the major problem.

Look, I like swords. I think they are beautiful peices of artwork. I love their design and handling. If my wife would let me, I would fill my walls with them (or as much as I could afford). However, I understand that they are designed to kill and are tools for such. I don't think that getting a sword somehow will help me in my life. I don't think that having one will somehow prove my manhood. But, I DON'T need one and I don't romantise the damn sword. There's nothing wrong with me owning one, and I see nothing at all wrong with people having guns. It's the romantic image, the western gunfighter mentality, the notion that somehow guns are tied up with your idendity that I find alarming and needs to be changed.

It's not going to be easy is what I am trying to say I guess, but I'm sure you already knew that.
Sadly, yes. But I think it's worth fighting for.

Another reason i want to have a gun for protection is in the event law and order breaks down. What if we had a New Orleans on a massive countrywide scale or California dumps into the sea, or there is a nuclear war, or a plague or a meteor or zombies or a severe nationwide long term power outage or one of a million other things that could happen that would leave you unable to defend yourself and no higher authority that could serve this function either. When its shit hits the fan time i want a gun. Thats not culture, thats basic survival.
And here we have exhibit A for proof of my statement.

Think about what you have just said. Shit does happen, yeah, but you have equated a gun above everything else in terms of your survival.

The "American Gun Culture" that so many non-americans refer to with such disgust is part of the foundation of our nation and this same "culture" has helped to liberate many nations and peoples (quite possibly your own) during the 20th century. First of all the shooter is not an american citizen , so how was he part of the culture. secondly, i am not familiar with Virginia`s law but in my home state of Illinois his trip to the nut-hut is more than enough to disqualify him from EVER owning a firearm. WHY is the focus on gun ownership? because it is so much easier to blame an inanimate object that to blame the system that allows troubled people to carry on in whatever fashion they want, because they may be a threat to the rest of us but they haven`t done anything yet. the warning signs were ther for this individual and what did the system do...........NOT A GODDAMN THING. as for you non-americans who are disgusted by the way we do things here, why have your countrymen wanted to come here since our founding? the "gun culture" is as american as apple pie and like it or not it`s here to stay. yes, it was a tragedy what happened. yes, it could have been prevented.......but by a lot more ways than gun control. Gun Control is Victim Disarmament.

I'm still trying to grasp the idea of 'gun culture' as well. I see several 'cultures' with an unnatural fixation for guns, such as 'gangsta' culture, but I don't see one overlapping gun culture.
Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees.

Despite that, I hold the Second Amendment of the Constitution in very high regard. My support of it and the attempted erosion of it by numerous sources both in and out of government is what's driving me to own a gun.

Now I ask you, Am I part of 'gun culture'? I'm many flavors of nut, but I don't think I'm a gun nut. :)
Well, I like I said, I have no issues with people owning or using guns. Honestly. I am tilting aginst the obession with guns that people have. That, I think, is unhealthy.

Kreynoria;12557879']There will always be ways to kill people; banning guns won't solve murder.

Except that all of those items, except perhaps when the chainsaw is being used at melee range, are not as effective weapons as a pistol.

Kreynoria;12558021']Cars kill far more people than guns every year, but we don't see any major movements to ban cars, restrict car ownership, or equate cars with murder.

Perhaps, but in most countries you need a license to use the car. Thus effectively restricting car ownership to those who have demonstrated they can drive safely (even if they usually don't, I'm looking at you fellow Toronto drivers).

Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees.


Well, I like I said, I have no issues with people owning or using guns. Honestly. I am tilting aginst the obession with guns that people have. That, I think, is unhealthy.
And what may i inquire are you obsessed with that i might deem to be unhealthy?

yeah, I mean I have guns, but I only shoot them at the range.....is that making me dangerous? does liking to do that make me a violent person? am I part of the "gun culture"?
Sorry, I was asleep you know. :p

No, having and using a gun does not make one dangerous. Likeing guns does not make one dangerous. Elevating guns above just about everything else...

That makes one obsessed.

I see it`s you and me against the anti`s yet again. How do you suppose that happened ?

gun culture is a way of life for many people in parts of the country. taking away gun culture is taking away the way of life for many many people. they grew up around guns, thier parents grew up around guns, their grandparents grew up around guns. its a way of life for them and taking that way of life from them is just wrong. they have the right to have their guns and as long as they are responsible with their right it will always be their right.
*sighs* Please re-read where I said I am not in favore of taking away guns. I want to change the national feeling of worshiping guns.

That post lowered my IQ by 5.



So it went from 20 to 15? Got anything intelligent to say and not flamebaiting spam?

Kreynoria;12557809']*SNIP*
Thank you for playing. Now please re-read what I wrote and actually respond to it instead of a kneejerk reaction.

K'Thx'Bi.

Do you even LIVE in America? Worse yet, have you ever BEEN to America?
I want you to look over at that little location part next to my posts where it says that I am an American in Nagano Prefecture, Japan. Yes, I not only have been to America I was born and raised there.

The constitution (not sure if you've heard of it) ensures that, as my AP history teacher puts it, that "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed."

If you know much of US law, you'll see the vast majority is based on the constitution, much like the relationship between the bible and Christianity.

As for editing culture? Are you saying we should stop the NRA from meeting (yet another HUGE violation of the constitution), have government-edited news and media, etc.?

You must also acknowledge the lasting effect of banning gun sales and/or seizing them from the general public. Now, not only do the police not have guns, but "good people" (law-abiding citizens) don't have a way of defence. The "bad people" (those who use guns other than for hunting, law enforcement, self-defence, and so on) have access to guns. If guns never were allowed, in theory this solution would work, but the horse is out of the barn. Or should we violate the constitution again and have the police storm houses and potential warehouses seizing guns?

Guns also are a great way of preventing invasion or tyranny (the main reason Hitler would never have invaded the U.S. is because we were armed).
And here we have exhibit B for poof of my OP. Thank you.

So as you see, eliminating "gun culture" (a.k.a. eliminating guns) isn't as easy as it sounds.
No, it's not a.k.a. eliminating guns. Try to re-read and give her another go.

The topic isn't the quote, it's the culture of gun ownership-this isn't arguing 2nd Amendment rights but the near worship of guns in America and what can be done about it. For this discussion "People kill people" is taken as a given and the discussion is what to do about that. Your comment is on the 2nd ammendment itself which is being discussed in the other thread.

The only relevance your comment had here was to demonstrate that gun worship does in fact exist and lives in you.



It's nice that a liberal can now in fact know everything there is to know about a person based on 1 post. I don't even own a gun...Jeez.


There is no gun worship, it's just a catch phrase Liberals use to clamor for banning them. The fact is there are mentally disturbed people out there, angry racist and sick people. They want to harm others and a gun is the fastest way to do it, this has been going on since the beginning of time. Look at Hitler, Napoleon...Keep going back and people killing is always there. Thrill kills, anger, jealousy, for power, for money, for love...There are countless reasons why people do it and a gun is just another way of inflicting harm or death. What was it before guns? Swords? Knifes? Blunt objects? Their hands? It's not gun worship but something deeper and very few are willing to figure out what that is, but I won't steal people rights just to get a quick fix. America's quick fix scaorgoat culture, thats what this is.

Kreynoria;12557879']There will always be ways to kill people; banning guns won't solve murder.
Where the hell did I say to ban guns? Really now.

So it went from 20 to 15? Got anything intelligent to say and not flamebaiting spam?

There's....something off here...I just can'tSo it went from 20 to 15?Got anything intelligent to say and not flamebaiting spam?seem to place my finger on it...

Where the hell did I say to ban guns? Really now.



The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people.


Seems to me that you said something different.

Being an American will inevitably cause you..er..I use this term loosely "intellectuals" to scoff at my opinion. Gun control is not the issue, and though Michael Moore will doubtlessly make a title that makes no sense about this incident in about two years, this is about a single event. It is a rarity. Unlike YOUR civil wars and bouts with economic depression it is an isolated incident. We don't have this sort of stuff go down daily, 'kay? Not everything you see in the American films is American real life. We don't have hardcore cops with nothing to lose busting down the meth houses that pop up in every neighborhood. We don't have random-ass school shootings. This is the worst we've ever had, and it's hard to imagine a larger massacre happening in the near future. So how about you guys butt out of OUR tradgedy, climb down off your golden throne's of esteemed knowledge, melt down those thrones, and use the gold to jumpstart your flailing economies.

secondly, i am not familiar with Virginia`s law but in my home state of Illinois his trip to the nut-hut is more than enough to disqualify him from EVER owning a firearm.

The "nut-hut"? Wow. That's...extraordinarily offensive.

The "nut-hut"? Wow. That's...extraordinarily offensive.



I think it's funny.:D

People who say nut-hut make us other Americans look barbaric. Don't mind if I appologise on his behalf. >_>

Why? Shouldn't the only thing that matters be behavior?

You want to what, control people's emotions?It's not an emotion, it's a mindset.

See, now I completely disagree. The "gun culture" is more associated w/ the family that I linked to that goes shooting and spends time together. You're still referencing it to abuse and the criminal/violent culture. While there are extremists, they are far from the majority.
No, I disagree. This culture is worshipping guns. It's gone beyond sport and play to worship. It's not just the cirminal element, it's everything that goes along with the notion that Guns=Best Solution.

The "American Gun Culture" that so many non-americans refer to with such disgust is part of the foundation of our nation and this same "culture" has helped to liberate many nations and peoples (quite possibly your own) during the 20th century. First of all the shooter is not an american citizen , so how was he part of the culture. secondly, i am not familiar with Virginia`s law but in my home state of Illinois his trip to the nut-hut is more than enough to disqualify him from EVER owning a firearm. WHY is the focus on gun ownership? because it is so much easier to blame an inanimate object that to blame the system that allows troubled people to carry on in whatever fashion they want, because they may be a threat to the rest of us but they haven`t done anything yet. the warning signs were ther for this individual and what did the system do...........NOT A GODDAMN THING. as for you non-americans who are disgusted by the way we do things here, why have your countrymen wanted to come here since our founding? the "gun culture" is as american as apple pie and like it or not it`s here to stay. yes, it was a tragedy what happened. yes, it could have been prevented.......but by a lot more ways than gun control. Gun Control is Victim Disarmament.
Ok. A. I AM an American (as you will note in my location bar), so getting Holier than Thou ain't gonna work. B. Said shooter moved to the US when he was 6, plenty of time to become a part of the culture. C. I did not blaim the gun, if you had read my posts, you would have seen that. And finally I now lable you Exhibit C as proof of my OP.

And what may i inquire are you obsessed with that i might deem to be unhealthy?
Don't know, what do you consider unhealthy?

There is no gun worship, it's just a catch phrase Liberals use to clamor for banning them. The fact is there are mentally disturbed people out there, angry racist and sick people. They want to harm others and a gun is the fastest way to do it, this has been going on since the beginning of time. Look at Hitler, Napoleon...Keep going back and people killing is always there. Thrill kills, anger, jealousy, for power, for money, for love...There are countless reasons why people do it and a gun is just another way of inflicting harm or death. What was it before guns? Swords? Knifes? Blunt objects? Their hands? It's not gun worship but something deeper and very few are willing to figure out what that is, but I won't steal people rights just to get a quick fix. America's quick fix scaorgoat culture, thats what this is.
Really? Have you LOOKED at the US lately? Perhaps it is due to being outside of it in a country that does not have such a worshipful gun culture that I seem to be seeing it more clearly than you. Like I said, forest for the trees.

And, again, please point out where I said anything about banning guns. Please, I'd really like to see this as you all seem to think this is what I am proposing, and yet I don't recall writing that at all, quite the opposet actually.

No, I disagree. This culture is worshipping guns. It's gone beyond sport and play to worship. It's not just the cirminal element, it's everything that goes along with the notion that Guns=Best Solution.

It's true. One need only to take a look at the most popular movies, video games, songs...all reflective of our national affair with guns.

It's not an emotion, it's a mindset.

A mindset driven by emotion, if you can make such a distinction.

Thoughts?

Personally, I think you need to give us a clearer definition of precisely what you think the "gun culture" in the US is.

We do not have any nationally consistent bias when it comes to the issue of guns. Different people in the same room are often in opposition over the issue of ownership, regardless of how well they've thought it through. Like with most issues there's some psychos at either extreme, but in general there are those who think people should be allowed to own guns if they wish (which group, unfortunately, includes the compulsory gun ownership crowd) and those who think that no one should be allowed to own guns. The main point of contention between the two sides is one of personal choice: in the main, the pro-gun lobby wants people to have a choice and operates in fear that the choice will be removed, while the anti-gun lobby wants to remove the choice because they live in fear of people actually making it.

So, what is it that you actually mean when you say "gun culture" in the US? It seems to me that the culture is one of debate and uncertainty, which is how most issues are here. And I don't think I'd have it any other way.

Personally, I think you need to give us a clearer definition of precisely what you think the "gun culture" in the US is.

We do not have any nationally consistent bias when it comes to the issue of guns. Different people in the same room are often in opposition over the issue of ownership, regardless of how well they've thought it through. Like with most issues there's some psychos at either extreme, but in general there are those who think people should be allowed to own guns if they wish (which group, unfortunately, includes the compulsory gun ownership crowd) and those who think that no one should be allowed to own guns. The main point of contention between the two sides is one of personal choice: in the main, the pro-gun lobby wants people to have a choice and operates in fear that the choice will be removed, while the anti-gun lobby wants to remove the choice because they live in fear of people actually making it.

So, what is it that you actually mean when you say "gun culture" in the US? It seems to me that the culture is one of debate and uncertainty, which is how most issues are here. And I don't think I'd have it any other way.
No, I mean gun culture in how guns, or rather the worship of guns, have permiated the cultural fabric of the US, making the gun more than a simple tool into a symbol.

Is that why Europe has not recently been invaded?

what do you call recent. i remember in the early 20th centruy something about european countries being invaded.

I assume i am among the "gun nuts" you reference in the OP.

A few things need clearing up

1) I advocate licensed CCW, which selects the more responsible and law-abiding people, both through the trouble involved in getting one and the background check required.

2) I believe that had CCW been permitted on campus, there is a reasonable likelihood that someone - one of the small minority of people who get CCW permits - would have been able to end Cho's killing spree before it got as far as it did. Saving even one life would have been immesurably good.

3) I do not have a gun to wave around or to get respect, I have a gun to shoot Seung Cho with, or to shoot a mugger with, or an armed robber, or some other dangerous maniac. No one except that unfortunate degenerate ever gets to see the gun, that's why it's called "concealed carry."

No ammount of magic or voodoo can make american culture and american problems go away. It is a fact and a reality of life, and there is nothing wrong with being prepared to live in it.

There's nothing wrong with the gun culture, it's how people, mainly how the younger generation (30 and below in my opinion) perceive it.

I'm 17, I hate the NRA, yet I keep a rifle in my room. Lots of people would probably freak out if they saw it, but I have absolutley no intention of shooting anyone with it, unless of course they break into my house, but even then, I'd use the bayonet, rather than the bullets.

Call me crazy. Call me a gun-nut. Call me whatever you want. I however, understand that guns need to be respected, and handled in a safe fasion.

Unfortunatly, guns nowadays are seen as mere tools which are used for shooting stuff for your own general amusement, while being reckless with disregard for any sort of life in the process.

People also don't understand what a real gunshot wound would be like. The best way is to take a firearm designed to kill people, and shoot a jug of water or a watermelon. The consequences are apparently very similar to shooting a real person, since the body is mostly water.

But I guess there are few people who look them like I do, seeing as how the NRA exploits firearms and makes sure that every single lunatic in the country can get one, while the gun control activists see them as tools that are only designed to kill humans.

But that's just my opinion.

I assume i am among the "gun nuts" you reference in the OP.
Amoung others.

A few things need clearing up
Wrong thread.

No ammount of magic or voodoo can make american culture and american problems go away. It is a fact and a reality of life, and there is nothing wrong with being prepared to live in it.
See, that's where we differ. Personally I feel that when I'm up to my neck in shit, it is far better to look for a way to get out of, or at least reduce said shit instead of just shrugging and not only accepting the shit but adding to it.

Of course right now I'm debating with people the idea that being up to our necks in shit might not be a good idea in the first place.

No, I mean gun culture in how guns, or rather the worship of guns, have permiated the cultural fabric of the US, making the gun more than a simple tool into a symbol.

Well, I haven't seen anyone making any burnt offerings to any AK-47s lately, nor have I seen anyone putting anything in the collection plate at the local Church of Gun. I think you have a serious misconception about how people in the US view firearms.

Like I said, the nation is as divided on this issue as they are on most others that may be gathered under the banner of "controversial." What happens with these controversial issues here is that the 2 primary rival political factions immediately take one side of the issue as their own in an attempt to alienate those who are not members of the party and give the members of the party who aren't into thinking for themselves a rock of dogma to cling to. I believe that this is the "gun symbolism" of which you speak. But, while a good deal of the country seems to have a problem with critical thinking, there are members of both parties who stand on their own side of the issue because they have reasoned, valid arguments that they've arrived at through their own faculties and not because they're towing the party line.

Not every American is a gun nut. In fact, California is one of the toughest pro-gun control states, with tougher laws than many foreign countries. Texas is just about the polar opposite. The rest of the states fall somewhere in the middle. The views on the issue are as diverse as the people, and it's only one of the things that we wax pedantic about. You might as well accuse us of having an SUV culture, or a political party culture. We argue about all kinds of shit, sometimes just to do it. There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture.

In fact, California is one of the toughest pro-gun control states, with tougher laws than many foreign countries. Texas is just about the polar opposite.

Actually, the polar opposite of California's restrictive gun laws would be Vermont, oddly enough.

Well, I haven't seen anyone making any burnt offerings to any AK-47s lately, nor have I seen anyone putting anything in the collection plate at the local Church of Gun. I think you have a serious misconception about how people in the US view firearms.
As noted, I was born and raised in the US (Nevada actually), you really want to tell me that? Please, I grew up in the US, I know the media very well, I know the normal actions and reactions of both the control and anti-control groups and I know (not to mention am from) gun owning families who treat guns as tools and do not worship them.

I know the gun culture of the US very well, thank you.

Not every American is a gun nut.
Never said that they were.

There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture.
And therein lies my point. Our culture is a culture of guns. We need to change that.

I know the gun culture of the US very well, thank you.

Then please start talking like you do. I wasn't asking for your credentials, which anyone could invent, I was replying to your question and noted that it seemed to demonstrate a stereotypical ignorance of the realities of US culture.

Never said that they were.

Indeed not. You simply said that a "gun culture" existed in which people believed that guns were the solution to their problems. I'll agree that it seems that many people want to believe that "if everyone who doesn't think the same way I do would just die/disappear, then things would be better." I'd say along that vein it isn't guns but violence that is the culture, and guns are simply a tool of it. I'd also say that that such a paradigm is neither unique to the US nor even to this period of human history, and predates the invention of the firearm by several millennia.

And therein lies my point. Our culture is a culture of guns. We need to change that.

"There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture" somehow contains the point that there is a culture of guns, even though it specifically stated that there isn't any culture of guns? I'm afraid I don't follow.

Actually, the polar opposite of California's restrictive gun laws would be Vermont, oddly enough.

Excellent. And yet it's so quiet most of us forget it's even there. ;)

Then please start talking like you do. I wasn't asking for your credentials, which anyone could invent, I was replying to your question and noted that it seemed to demonstrate a stereotypical ignorance of the realities of US culture.
Or perhaps getting out of the US lets me see the culture for a bit, and honestly I am sick and tired of it. There is a massive problem with how the gun is held that, guess what, I haven't encountered elsewhere. Given those elsewheres post less deaths due to firearms than the US, even if they have more guns logically I can conclude that the problem is with my culture, not the gun itself.

Indeed not. You simply said that a "gun culture" existed in which people believed that guns were the solution to their problems. I'll agree that it seems that many people want to believe that "if everyone who doesn't think the same way I do would just die/disappear, then things would be better."
And yet we have another brilliant display of logic leaps that takes one statement I made and extrapulates a whole bunch of stuff I never mentioned.

Amazing. Exhibit D.

I'd say along that vein it isn't guns but violence that is the culture, and guns are simply a tool of it. I'd also say that that such a paradigm is neither unique to the US nor even to this period of human history, and predates the invention of the firearm by several millennia.
*sighs* Say it with me now... it isn't the guns that I am after. I isn't the guns that I am after. It. Isn't. The. Guns. That. I. Am. After.

Wash, rince, and repeat.

"There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture" somehow contains the point that there is a culture of guns, even though it specifically stated that there isn't any culture of guns? I'm afraid I don't follow.
Forest for the trees, forest for the trees.

I've explained this a number of times in this thread and have no real wish to explain this one yet again.

Anyone who tried to take my gun would end up with a smoking hole in their forehead.

That is all I will say on the matter.

Anyone who tried to take my gun would end up with a smoking hole in their forehead.

That is all I will say on the matter.
:headbang:

Amoung others.


Wrong thread.


See, that's where we differ. Personally I feel that when I'm up to my neck in shit, it is far better to look for a way to get out of, or at least reduce said shit instead of just shrugging and not only accepting the shit but adding to it.

Of course right now I'm debating with people the idea that being up to our necks in shit might not be a good idea in the first place.

Right thread.

I was responding to three characterizations YOU made in YOUR OP in THIS thread.

1) gun nuts think everyone should have a gun,
2) gun nuts say everyone having a gun would have prevented tragedy
3) gun nuts have guns to wave around and 'get respect'

Whether or not we are indeed up to our necks in shit is debatable - I for one am not afraid of guns or 'gun culture'

Whether or not there is any escape from this 'shit' is also debatable. I suppose leaving the country does work though, so +1 there.

:headbang:

I see a concussion in your future.

Given those elsewheres post less deaths due to firearms than the US, even if they have more guns logically I can conclude that the problem is with my culture, not the gun itself.

The idea that there are negative aspects of US culture is something that we agree on, though I'm not going to get into the issue of violence, death and crime in anti-gun countries vs. the US. However, your leap to "there exists a culture that worships guns and thinks they are the solution to many/most/all of life's problems" is a bit much.

And yet we have another brilliant display of logic leaps that takes one statement I made and extrapulates a whole bunch of stuff I never mentioned.

I don't really see any extrapolation, leaps of logic, nor any attempt to attribute to you anything more than the statement which appeared in your OP. Unless you deny that this is part of your OP:

The NRA is right, guns don’t kill people; people kill people. People who seem to think that the solution to all their issues come out of the barrel of a gun. People who think that they are in the Old West where a man has to stand his ground at high noon, finger on the trigger of a gun. People who seem to think that what they see in movie gun fights is true, and that waving around a gun gains you instant respect and power.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you've said there and the context in which you've said it with the creation of this thread and your subsequent posts in it, you seem to think that enough people in the US believe that guns are the solution to their problems that there is a culture of guns. The part that came after the attribution was mine, not yours, and made the case that it has nothing to do with guns, but with violence, which is not a US problem but a human problem, and which point you completely failed to address.

Say it with me now... it isn't the guns that I am after. etc, etc

Again, you seem to have completely failed to comprehend what I have written. Let me try a different, more obtuse angle:

You made it clear from the beginning that you're not interested in debating gun control here, as there are already several other threads on that topic. I understand this, and question the validity of the statement that there is a "gun culture" in the US when you define "gun culture" as "how guns, or rather the worship of guns, have permiated(sic) the cultural fabric of the US, making the gun more than a simple tool into a symbol." While guns have attained a cultural symbolism, to pick the label "gun culture" over "abortion culture" or "media culture" or "gasoline culture" merely shows your own obsession with the subject. Again, guns and the symbolism thereof are PART of a greater culture, they are not THE culture, and not the only thing Americans obsess over and talk about.

Forest for the trees, forest for the trees.

You keep saying those words. I do not think that means what you think it means.

I've explained this a number of times in this thread and have no real wish to explain this one yet again.

I know it's terribly bothersome, but I can't find where in the thread you've explained how "There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture" supports the idea that there is a culture of guns in the US. Would you mind cutting and pasting a bit for the slow among us?

*blinks*
I said that the NRA is right in that guns don't kill people; people kill people and you take that as "I want to ban all yer guns?"

That's a new one, really. I mean, that is so out of left field I am left gasping at the leap of illogic that produced it. Could you please explain WHY you think a statement that I believe the National Rifle Association is correct means that I favore banning guns?


Dude! I was defending you! Jesus christ! The other person said you wanted to ban guns and I pointed out you said something different.

Really? Have you LOOKED at the US lately? Perhaps it is due to being outside of it in a country that does not have such a worshipful gun culture that I seem to be seeing it more clearly than you. Like I said, forest for the trees.


I LIVE HERE! Maybe because I actually live here is why I AM looking at this more clearly than YOU! Did you even read my post?



Do YOU LOOK at Japan at all anymore?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/04/17/japan.mayor.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories


A mayor got killed by...SHOCK....A GUN!

Right thread.

1) gun nuts think everyone should have a gun,
No, I said that gun nuts in the current gun control thread think that everyone should have a gun. This is true. It has also been said in this thread. It ain't a characterzation as it's been repeated often enough here.

2) gun nuts say everyone having a gun would have prevented tragedy
No, I said that people in that thread (yourself included) made that claim. This is also true. It also has been stated in a number of other places.

3) gun nuts have guns to wave around and 'get respect'
No, I said that many people (not just gun nuts) assume that having a gun will get them respect.

Try re-reading.

Whether or not we are indeed up to our necks in shit is debatable - I for one am not afraid of guns or 'gun culture'
Ah yes, because violence on par with the current mess in Iraq is SO wonderful and a good part of life. Why, I don't know what to do in Japan not having to seriously wonder if someone is carrying a gun when they approch me.

Whether or not there is any escape from this 'shit' is also debatable. I suppose leaving the country does work though, so +1 there.
Everything is doable, it is debatable if people really want to though. Persoanlly I'm starting to think a lot of you guys just like living in shit.

I see a concussion in your future.
I'm starting to feel that way because you are the xth person who came in to scream about not taking away his/her guns in a thread that isn't about that.

No, I said that gun nuts in the current gun control thread think that everyone should have a gun. This is true. It has also been said in this thread. It ain't a characterzation as it's been repeated often enough here.


No, I said that people in that thread (yourself included) made that claim. This is also true. It also has been stated in a number of other places.


No, I said that many people (not just gun nuts) assume that having a gun will get them respect.

Try re-reading.


Ah yes, because violence on par with the current mess in Iraq is SO wonderful and a good part of life. Why, I don't know what to do in Japan not having to seriously wonder if someone is carrying a gun when they approch me.


Everything is doable, it is debatable if people really want to though. Persoanlly I'm starting to think a lot of you guys just like living in shit.

1) I never asserted that everyone should carry a gun, only licensed CCW holdders, who are a small minority.

We don't have violence on par with what is going in in iraq...

You paint a much worse picture of life than what actually exists. America is not a war-zone on account of some kind of "gun culture" anarchy.

Do you have a proposal for "gettig us out of this mess" beside "people ought to think and act differently" ?

Do you have a proposal for "gettig us out of this mess" beside "people ought to think and act differently" ?

Differently how? Differently like a clown? Like we ought to think and act for you?

Sorry, couldn't resist the Joe Pesci bit. :)

how in god's name to you abolish the American gun culture.You'd have an easier time abolishing Christmas.

There is about 250 million guns in america, they are NOT going anywhere. people need to learn to live with it.

The idea that there are negative aspects of US culture is something that we agree on, though I'm not going to get into the issue of violence, death and crime in anti-gun countries vs. the US. However, your leap to "there exists a culture that worships guns and thinks they are the solution to many/most/all of life's problems" is a bit much.
"They'll take my gun from my cold dead hands." "The most important right is the 2nd amendment." "The 2nd amendment is what gurantees the others." "I should be able to have whatever I want, even a machine gun." "Have Gun, Will Travel." "All you need for freedom is your gun." "Annie Grab Your Gun." "Top Gun." "NYPD Blues." And on and on and on.

It's like saying, "Well, we Americans do have a problem with binge drinking and alcoholism in society, but we don't have a culture that exemplifies alcohol" in front of a typical beer comercial.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you've said there and the context in which you've said it with the creation of this thread and your subsequent posts in it, you seem to think that enough people in the US believe that guns are the solution to their problems that there is a culture of guns. The part that came after the attribution was mine, not yours, and made the case that it has nothing to do with guns, but with violence, which is not a US problem but a human problem, and which point you completely failed to address.
No, I have not. Violence is the ultimate consern, yes, but I am addressing the point of view beyond violence because that's what we always fail to do. I speak of the gun culture of the US because we have made it part and parcel of our culture and it isn't a GOOD part.

You made it clear from the beginning that you're not interested in debating gun control here, as there are already several other threads on that topic. I understand this, and question the validity of the statement that there is a "gun culture" in the US when you define "gun culture" as "how guns, or rather the worship of guns, have permiated(sic) the cultural fabric of the US, making the gun more than a simple tool into a symbol." While guns have attained a cultural symbolism, to pick the label "gun culture" over "abortion culture" or "media culture" or "gasoline culture" merely shows your own obsession with the subject. Again, guns and the symbolism thereof are PART of a greater culture, they are not THE culture, and not the only thing Americans obsess over and talk about.
No, they are NOT the only thing and there are, of course, other ills. HOWEVER, what you seem to be missing the point of is that the US culture as a whole has venerated the gun. Look at the culture, NOT just the crime stats, not just the acident stats, but media, language, beliefs, everything. See just how much a part of it guns are THEN you can see my point. That is, I think, what is causing a lot of problems.

Consider this: We cannot debate gun control. This thread has proved it. We try to, but either you're in the "Cold dead hands" catagory or you're in the "Melt them all down" catagory. Why can't we debate this? Because of the position that guns are held in our culture. Why is it that when kids get bullied they think of getting a gun and confronting their attackers? Because of the culture of guns in the US. Why is it that after each shooting we have arm everyone or disarm everyone arguments? Because of the culture of guns.

We've had people wander into this thread telling us just how much they love their guns and you want to tell me that there isn't a gun culture?

You keep saying those words. I do not think that means what you think it means.
I think they do. I've been trying to explain the problem for 13 pages now and yet many people keep missing the target. Yet, funnily enough, people outside the US don't seem to have the issue.

I know it's terribly bothersome, but I can't find where in the thread you've explained how "There isn't any culture of guns, guns are just part of the culture" supports the idea that there is a culture of guns in the US. Would you mind cutting and pasting a bit for the slow among us?
To clarify: I have explained how guns are venerated within our culture. Look at pages 11 and 12.

Dude! I was defending you! Jesus christ! The other person said you wanted to ban guns and I pointed out you said something different.
My appologies. You are indeed correct and I was looking for an attack where none was. Gomen nasai. _/(-_-)\_

My appologies. You are indeed correct and I was looking for an attack where none was. Gomen nasai. _/(-_-)\_


Think nothing of it...But what does Gomen nasai mean?

we need to take away the gun culture, the one that worships guns and makes people confuse wanting a gun with needing one.

Thoughts?

Yeah, here's my thought: as people that desire to remain free, we DO need guns.

Do YOU LOOK at Japan at all anymore?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/04/17/japan.mayor.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories


A mayor got killed by...SHOCK....A GUN!
And? I didn't say that removing the gun culture of the US would make gun violence disapere. However; consider this, when talking about both the Nagasaki shootings and the VT tragedy to my Japanese friends (as well as Canadian, Australian, and British ones), they all talked about the need to look more carefully at loner students, about how to address campus safety, and what can be done for mentally ill people. They did not suddenly start clammering for either arming everyone (or even part of the population) or demanding the every gun be melted down to make decorative tie clips.

Now look at the talking heads in the US and on this board. Look at the reactions to Columbine or the Amish shootings.

THAT'S what I am talking about.

Think nothing of it...But what does Gomen nasai mean?
I am very sorry.

We don't have violence on par with what is going in in iraq...
Really? I though Sen McCain just said so.

You paint a much worse picture of life than what actually exists. America is not a war-zone on account of some kind of "gun culture" anarchy.
Let me try with a paraell. There is also an alcohol culture in the US. I'm sure you can agree, looking at beer comericals, athletic events, and the problems we have with bindge drinking. Now, does that mean every minute of every day there is an acident or death due to alchohol? No. Does that mean that every drinker is in fact an alcoholic? No. Does that mean that all alcohol should be locked up in the Pit never to been seen (or drunk) again? No.

But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem with how alcohol is viewed and used in the US.

Do you have a proposal for "gettig us out of this mess" beside "people ought to think and act differently" ?
Nope, I'm still trying to convince Huston we have a problem. Haven't gotten around to solving it yet.

Really? I though Sen McCain just said so.


Let me try with a paraell. There is also an alcohol culture in the US. I'm sure you can agree, looking at beer comericals, athletic events, and the problems we have with bindge drinking. Now, does that mean every minute of every day there is an acident or death due to alchohol? No. Does that mean that every drinker is in fact an alcoholic? No. Does that mean that all alcohol should be locked up in the Pit never to been seen (or drunk) again? No.

But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem with how alcohol is viewed and used in the US.


Nope, I'm still trying to convince Huston we have a problem. Haven't gotten around to solving it yet.


Sen. McCain is a worthless hack, who cares what he says or thinks?

Sen. McCain is a worthless hack, who cares what he says or thinks?
Well at least we can agree on THAT. ;)

A mindset driven by emotion, if you can make such a distinction.I'm not entirely sure that it is driven by emotion. If everyone who loved guns did so because they're afraid of not having them, then that might work. But not everyone who loves guns does so for this reason.

Anyone who tried to take my gun would end up with a smoking hole in their forehead.

That is all I will say on the matter.This is a perfect example of the gun culture that NERVUN keeps referring to.

There is about 250 million guns in america, they are NOT going anywhere. people need to learn to live with it.
Wouldn't it be fun if, just for a change of pace, people read the thread before posting in it?

The entire point of the thread is addressing the GUN CULTURE. Not the presence of the guns themselves. There are other gun control threads around if you want to talk about the guns themselves.

It's a nice pipe dream. But that's all it is.

No! Cultures evolve, cultures change (some quicker than others.) Culture is created by (or IS) the lives of people of that culture. Therefore, people can change their culture.

Culture also forms people. Culture is bigger than any of the individuals who make it, so it's easy to conclude that the individual can't change it. But wrong.

Get attitude, but not so much that you end up being a one-person culture, and you too can help to change the culture you are part of.

*he-hem*

Now for the joke: You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.

EDIT: "Wouldn't it be fun if, just for a change of pace, people read the thread before posting in it?" Yeah of course it would, but I lost my head somewhere in the first fifty posts and cut loose. Doh.

How the hell did MY thread end up with a poll?

How the hell did MY thread end up with a poll?

I think you'll find it's my thread now, Mr. NERVUN.

I think you'll find it's my thread now, Mr. NERVUN.

That's cheap.
I used to like you.

EDIT: Since that's apparently not clear enough, here it is in more words. You have a clever prank which would be funny, welcome even in a less important thread. If you'd used it on my "I got bit by a baddass serpent" thread I'd be laughing like a drain.
But in a childish bid for attention, you cut it loose on the hottest thread around, without regard to NERVUN's sincere attempt to direct our attention constructively to a longstanding concern of NSG.
That's just plain cheap. You will probably need a mod's help to undo the fatuous 'pollizing' of this excellent thread.

OK. I'm clearly singing way out of tune. Leaving for one week now.

A little history lesson for you.

One of the first things Soviet Russia did, to ensure its control over the people, was to remove any of their rights to bear arms. So, if the time came for any sort of rebellion, they would not be able to overthrow the oppressive government.

And with a possible Hilary Clinton for President, I think we can expect oppressive government.

the thing is that you will never be able to take the guns or the culture away.
i for one will always be playing quake and soldierfront among another million violent video games, simply because i would much rather be immersed in a culture of fun and violence rather than one of happy rainbows and hippies.
im not sayin that somehting should be done...because it should. but when you think about it, there really is nothing that you can do about the problem. the culture and the guns will be aorund forever. and even if you take the guns away, rabid cults of vicious gun owners will illegally obtain weapons and decend upon the whitehouse.

thank you for your time, and sorry i wasted it.

That's cheap.
I used to like you.

EDIT: Since that's apparently not clear enough, here it is in more words. You have a clever prank which would be funny, welcome even in a less important thread. If you'd used it on my "I got bit by a baddass serpent" thread I'd be laughing like a drain.
But in a childish bid for attention, you cut it loose on the hottest thread around, without regard to NERVUN's sincere attempt to direct our attention constructively to a longstanding concern of NSG.
That's just plain cheap. You will probably need a mod's help to undo the fatuous 'pollizing' of this excellent thread.

A little humour never hurt anyone.

That brickbat sounds painful though.

A little history lesson for you.

One of the first things Soviet Russia did, to ensure its control over the people, was to remove any of their rights to bear arms. So, if the time came for any sort of rebellion, they would not be able to overthrow the oppressive government.

And with a possible Hilary Clinton for President, I think we can expect oppressive government.

And yet other contries have restricted the ownership of firearms and haven't become oppressive totalitarian dictatorships where as Saddam Hussain armed his population with AK47s and that was most definatly a dictatorship.

Private ownership of firearms doesn't guarantee safety from an oppressive government anymore that banning them guarantees that you will have one.

And with a possible Hilary Clinton for President, I think we can expect oppressive government.
Except she hasn't been elected and there are multiple branches of government involving both polarized sides of the country with a multitude of randoms thrown in. You can't willy nilly takeover the US like Russia. Russia was and is an entirely different culture.

And with a possible Hilary Clinton for President, I think we can expect oppressive government.
Wait, you think our government will BECOME oppressive if Clinton is elected?

BECOME?

We've got a government flat-out lying, breaking the law, stealing our money and giving it to their rich friends, stripping basic civil rights from 51% of the citizens in our country...and you're worried that our government may become oppressive if, heavens forfend, Hilary Clinton gets elected?

Talk about fucked up priorities.

Sorry, I was asleep you know. :p

No, having and using a gun does not make one dangerous. Likeing guns does not make one dangerous. Elevating guns above just about everything else...

That makes one obsessed.

well, putting an object above all others is obsession, don't you think? I mean there are people with unhealthy obsessions to all sorts of stuff right?

I read elsewhere your response to someone that I am too lazy to re-find... about our "gun culture" where you referenced bumper sticker type slogans and "Annie get your gun" the first of which being usually exaggerated, and the second a musical about a time when everyone needed guns.

If having plays, stickers, and t-shirts about something makes a "culture" and means everyone is "obsessed" and "worships" something.........I hate to say what kind of "cultures" I see in other countries......

I just think your whole "gun culture" thing is a crock. Like I said earlier, I can understand trying to pull back on the very real problem with violence in the world, and the very real problem within certain people groups with the "thug culture", but this "gun culture" I just don't buy outside of people who are excessively violent to begin with or who just want to break the law. You can't separate violence from violent people, or crimes from criminals, but you can separate guns from your "gun culture".......which tells me it's not that great of an idea of what's wrong.

If this is incoherent or rude please excuse me, I have not had much sleep and am trying to stay awake........I have already been accused of being "abrasive" today by my kid, so I apologize in advance. ;)

I think you'll find it's my thread now, Mr. NERVUN.
Dude... that's really not nice.

I mean, I can accept humorous posts and a copycat thread with said poll, but just because of Jolt's hiccup...

If you own a firearm for "household self defence", the chances that you will use it to defend your home and family is pretty low. More likely it will be used by yourself or a family member to comit suicide or to kill another family member in a crisis situation. But the most likely occurance is that the gun will be stolen and then used in further crime. Gun owners think guns keep them safe, but of course for most law abiding people, shooting someone, even an intruder, is very difficult. Thats why the army has to train troops to kill, because most soldiers are not psychopaths.

well, putting an object above all others is obsession, don't you think? I mean there are people with unhealthy obsessions to all sorts of stuff right?
Very true, but usually an obsession with junk food doesn't allow someone to go on a rampage and kill 32 college students.

I read elsewhere your response to someone that I am too lazy to re-find... about our "gun culture" where you referenced bumper sticker type slogans and "Annie get your gun" the first of which being usually exaggerated, and the second a musical about a time when everyone needed guns.
Taken a bit out of context. My point being that there IS a gun culture in the US. Perhaps a better way of saying it is that guns are elevated in our culture more than they should be.

If having plays, stickers, and t-shirts about something makes a "culture" and means everyone is "obsessed" and "worships" something.........I hate to say what kind of "cultures" I see in other countries......
They were quick examples.

I just think your whole "gun culture" thing is a crock. Like I said earlier, I can understand trying to pull back on the very real problem with violence in the world, and the very real problem within certain people groups with the "thug culture", but this "gun culture" I just don't buy outside of people who are excessively violent to begin with or who just want to break the law. You can't separate violence from violent people, or crimes from criminals, but you can separate guns from your "gun culture".......which tells me it's not that great of an idea of what's wrong.
See, that's the problem. I think you guys are assuming that I mean violence only, or gun owners only. I do not, I mean the love of guns that is in our culture. I mean turning on the damn TV and, whoops! There's a gun! I mean reading a book, and, gee, in the end a gun is used to solve the story (or plays a strong part). It has become, as I noted, just the same as alcohol in the US. That's why I say it's not JUST the criminals, it's how we, as a nation, view guns that I think needs to be changed. Quite honestly this thread has proved my point over and over again, the reason why we can't address things such as the VT Tragedy or Columbine or other such acts is that we cannot get around the 800 pound gorilla that is the US views of guns. How can we begin to really look for solutions when we are unable to see how we think of guns is affecting our reactions to them?

EDIT: And that's it for me folks. It's 10:30 over here and I'm rather tired so if you all want to post 11 more pages, go for it, but I won't respond till after 8am JST. G'Night!

If you own a firearm for "household self defence", the chances that you will use it to defend your home and family is pretty low. More likely it will be used by yourself or a family member to comit suicide or to kill another family member in a crisis situation. But the most likely occurance is that the gun will be stolen and then used in further crime. Gun owners think guns keep them safe, but of course for most law abiding people, shooting someone, even an intruder, is very difficult. Thats why the army has to train troops to kill, because most soldiers are not psychopaths.

And you have no clue on the matter, have a nice day!

When a gun is owned for personal security, if the owner does indeed find need to use it, the VAST majority of the time, the owner doesn't even need to chamber a round. Most common criminals who find themselves on the business end of a pistol, rifle, shotgun or carbine are more than willing to just give up then and there. It's a fairly powerful deterrent device, in that sense.

Second, domestic gun use is rare, and accidents are even more so. Suicide can be easily accomplished with little more than a leather belt, a safety razor, a bathtub filled with water, or a bottle of prescription meds and some booze.

Very true, but usually an obsession with junk food doesn't allow someone to go on a rampage and kill 32 college students.

Of course, Cho's obsession was not with guns, from what we can tell, rather he was obsessed with a paranoid idea of persecution. It's not the "US Gun Culture" that caused this event, rather it was some mentally ill individuals delusions of grandeur and persecution.

And you have no clue on the matter, have a nice day!

When a gun is owned for personal security, if the owner does indeed find need to use it, the VAST majority of the time, the owner doesn't even need to chamber a round. Most common criminals who find themselves on the business end of a pistol, rifle, shotgun or carbine are more than willing to just give up then and there. It's a fairly powerful deterrent device, in that sense.

Second, domestic gun use is rare, and accidents are even more so. Suicide can be easily accomplished with little more than a leather belt, a safety razor, a bathtub filled with water, or a bottle of prescription meds and some booze.

Which disproves what he said how?

See, that's the problem. I think you guys are assuming that I mean violence only, or gun owners only. I do not, I mean the love of guns that is in our culture. I mean turning on the damn TV and, whoops! There's a gun! I mean reading a book, and, gee, in the end a gun is used to solve the story (or plays a strong part). It has become, as I noted, just the same as alcohol in the US. That's why I say it's not JUST the criminals, it's how we, as a nation, view guns that I think needs to be changed. Quite honestly this thread has proved my point over and over again, the reason why we can't address things such as the VT Tragedy or Columbine or other such acts is that we cannot get around the 800 pound gorilla that is the US views of guns. How can we begin to really look for solutions when we are unable to see how we think of guns is affecting our reactions to them?

but......I need you to explain this to me further. :(

I assume i am among the "gun nuts" you reference in the OP.

A few things need clearing up

1) I advocate licensed CCW, which selects the more responsible and law-abiding people, both through the trouble involved in getting one and the background check required.

2) I believe that had CCW been permitted on campus, there is a reasonable likelihood that someone - one of the small minority of people who get CCW permits - would have been able to end Cho's killing spree before it got as far as it did. Saving even one life would have been immesurably good.

3) I do not have a gun to wave around or to get respect, I have a gun to shoot Seung Cho with, or to shoot a mugger with, or an armed robber, or some other dangerous maniac. No one except that unfortunate degenerate ever gets to see the gun, that's why it's called "concealed carry."

No ammount of magic or voodoo can make american culture and american problems go away. It is a fact and a reality of life, and there is nothing wrong with being prepared to live in it.

An interesting argument, and one that was actually discussed yesterday in class. Something to chew on: You can have teachers and no guns, or guns and no teachers. I can guarantee you that it is incredibly easy to get a CCW permit. And I can also guarantee that as soon as firearms are allowed in the classroom, no teacher will agree to teach under those conditions--at least not in any meaningful way, if at all.

Of course, Cho's obsession was not with guns, from what we can tell, rather he was obsessed with a paranoid idea of persecution. It's not the "US Gun Culture" that caused this event, rather it was some mentally ill individuals delusions of grandeur and persecution.
So it was the American Persecution Complex?

Which disproves what he said how?

His argument was that if confronted by an invader in one's home, you would have to discharge the weapon to defeat them. Over 95% of the time, the need for a weapons discharge isn't even there! Just point.

Further, he made false statistical claims as to the likelihood of gun use in one's home.

http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html

Here's a summary of the information on the regularity of the use of guns in self defense at home. This information would imply that you are far more likely to defend yourself with a gun, than you are to have a gun turned against you.

Here's violent crime statistics.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/guic.pdf