[Vision2020] The Petition
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 00:57:07 PST 2012
You make it seem like gun violence is a reality that we just have to accept. Yet it is particular to the US -- at least in terms of the rate and severity. And if you're right that folks who want to kill will use any method -- pipe bombs -- than why aren't there more pipe bombings of schools? Why are there in fact none?
Again, think of the biggest risk factor of owning a gun: suicide. Try the same argument on it. "Well, there's no use harping about the dangers of suicide from gun ownership. If someone really wants to kill himself, he could make a pipe bomb." That sounds like a very bad argument. No one is going to kill himself with a pipe bomb. What makes guns a threat when it comes to suicide is convenience. No assembly required. Perfect for someone who is unstable, depressed, and prone to rash judgments. THAT is why they are dangerous.
And guess what? Your guns are a safety risk to me because someone could steal them and use them against me. Something like this in fact just happened. So it's not an issue about personal rights vs. personal risks. Do you know how many stolen guns are in circulation? It is an issue of personal rights vs. public risks.
There are genuine debates here that as a contemporary society we need to have. I don't think these NRA arguments are helpful. If you can restrict speech -- which you can -- you can certainly control guns.
On Dec 18, 2012, at 11:04 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> These shootings don't just happen spur of the moment. They are planned and prepared for for a long time beforehand. If the people that commit these atrocities didn't have guns readily available, they would have stolen them or bought them on the black market. If these guys had really wanted to make their statements or whatever they thought they were doing, they could have made pipe bombs or a few molotov cocktails from common household chemicals. They could have ran their victims over with a vehicle. They could have terrorised them with a chainsaw, or set the school on fire.
>
> The sad fact is that the price we would have to pay to truly protect ourselves from these kinds of incidents is just too damned big. We would have to give up too many of our liberties for too little gain. Meanwhile, orders of magnitudes more people will die from cancer, heart attacks, traffic accidents, and other common causes.
>
> The same thing goes for protecting ourselves from terrorists. It's too costly, both in money and in civil liberties, and all we've done is made it worse.
>
> I don't know what the answer is. I just have an ugly feeling that whatever gestates from this current climate of fear and outrage will be worse than the current situation. The Law of Unintended Consequences is real and should be given due respect. We shouldn't just jump at the nearest boogie man, whether it's assault weapons or large magazines, without giving it the careful thought it requires. I doubt we are in a position to have that conversation on a national stage right now.
>
> In both cases (school shootings and terrorist attacks) the root causes are complex and are for the most part being ignored. Another sad fact is that in this world of sound bites and instant Internet memes no politician is going to look at the real causes. They will look for the low-hanging fruit, and pretend it's more than just putting a bandaid on a gaping wound.
>
> Paul
>
> On 12/18/2012 09:20 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
>> Matt,
>>
>> This sounds sensible. Again, I don't have a "plan" about what to do. More interested in exploring solutions -- and this does just that. I like the idea of stronger background checks.
>>
>> Note too that if you think of the latest episodes of gun violence -- the ones we've all heard about at least -- gun theft did not play a role. Most of the shooters were young, as well. In general, the school shooters were young and required their guns from family members, or purchased them themselves. These are not folks who are stealing guns.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Matt Decker <mattd2107 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>> I believe some want to ban these guns but allow current owners to be grandfathered in. This could allow these guns to be on the streets for years to come. I agree with stronger regulation into the future owners of guns. Maybe a longer waiting period along with stronger background checks. Classes or prior military would help as well.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
>>> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:06:10 -0800
>>> To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
>>> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition
>>>
>>> This makes no sense. Just to use an example, if you banned assault rifles, no one could steal them. I'm not saying that's what we should do. But we should look at ALL possible solutions. Again, research Australia and gun control. Best, Joe
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> They steal the guns. So I don't think the laws would change the situation, unless you ban their production.
>>>
>>> Donovan J. Arnold
>>>
>>> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
>>> To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
>>> Cc: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>; Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition
>>>
>>> Some form of gun control has got to be part of the solution. And I believe all the guns used in recent shootings were legally purchased. That's why some form of gun control has got to be part of the solution. Australia did it, so can we
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 7:11 PM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gun laws are not the answer to this problem. Not allowing for the public release of the gunman's name would go further then gun laws, as they usually do it for fame. Education of staff, students, and community members, and better protection of schools would also help. This kid did not get the guns legally, and no reasonable restrictive gun law would have prevented it. There are a host of other things that would have helped though.
>>>
>>> Donovan J. Arnold
>>>
>>> From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
>>> To: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 6:54 PM
>>> Subject: [Vision2020] The Petition
>>>
>>> <image.jpeg>
>>>
>>>
>>> Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
>>>
>>> "Moscow Cares"
>>> http://www.MoscowCares.com
>>>
>>> Tom Hansen
>>> Moscow, Idaho
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>> http://www.fsr.net/
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20121219/88b359f4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list