Guns don't kill People... Really?

normality - seven lads, no guns
normality - seven lads, no guns | Source

People kill people...

except, they don't. Not normally. I was brought up in a town of 50,000 people, on the West coast of Scotland. My childhood and teenage years were the 50s and 60s. Our parents had lived through the horrors of the 2nd World War. Now, they were living through the peacetime hardships of shortages and rationing. But of one thing they were certain: the killing had been an aberration; normality had returned, where people live in peace. Where people don't kill people. Where people don't need guns.

On cue, within minutes of every new firearm atrocity, the tired old gun lobbyists (hereinafter, the Globbies, ok?) crawl out of the woodwork with their tired old incantation- Guns don't kill people... People kill people, and every time I shake my head and think- not in my World, they don't. And before any Globby tells me that small-town Scotland is a very sheltered corner of the planet- check my Profile page for where I've lived and worked since leaving there. I still say, forty years later- not in my World, they don't.

Source

Guns don't kill People... Bullets kill people

It's a truism that without ammunition a gun is a pretty useless weapon. It could serve as a bludgeon of sorts, but the balance is all wrong, It would be no match for a baseball bat, far less a machete. But we're getting ahead of ourselves here. Let's step back and quietly consider some aspects of violence.

For one adult to kill another in unarmed combat, assuming both are in reasonable health and physical condition, is actually no mean feat. It requires either great effort and determination, or considerable knowledge and technique. Or, just conceivably, diabolical 'luck'. It also requires an absolute awareness and total involvement with what you are doing, something the vast majority of people would pull back from, in total revulsion at the enormity of the act, and its consequences.

Bring a knife into the equation and everything changes. We are all capable of lashing out in anger and, with a knife in hand, a single strike can be fatal (though usually it is not). But again, let's step back, to small-town Scotland and the day one lad brought a flick-knife to school.

He had no intention of using it, of course. He just wanted his moment of glory impressing his friends or maybe frightening a few juniors. Inevitably, he was uncovered and the knife confiscated. On the following morning the Headmaster addressed the school: Unable to make an impression on his fellows on equal terms, the culprit had sought an unfair advantage. In trying to command fear in others, he had merely betrayed his own fear. In trying to be the bully he was not physically cut out to be, he had shown himself to be - a coward. The psychology was exactly right. No-one ever again brought a knife to school.

The Headmaster was right. A knife is a coward's weapon. Yet, while it gives an unfair advantage, it still requires a degree of closeness to, and interaction with, the victim. A quick and lethal thrust does not compare with the white-knuckled sweaty intensity of wringing out a life, bare hands around the throat, and yet... A knife will still transmit its passage back from blade to haft to hand. You will feel the changes from cloth to soft tissue, to muscle wall, to vital organ. The scrape of steel on bone. You will know what you have done and most of us could not do it, or live with it afterwards. Quite literally, you will have blood on your hands.

At best, then, the knife is a half-way house. The true coward's weapon would further reduce the involvement between killer and victim. This is where the gun comes in. The gun, or at least its bullet, kills at a distance. There is no need for the killer to feel any involvement whatsoever with the victim. You point, s/he dies. It feels no different from shooting at a target. Easier still is the automatic assault weapon where you don't even need to know who or how many have died. Isn't this the very epitome of cowardice?

Guns don't kill people... Cowards kill people

What we've seen thus far is a progression, from unarmed equals, to knife-wielding wimps, to gun-toting cowards, to the craven cowards with automatic weapons. Is this the limit of inhumanity? Sadly no, it is not. Crasser still are those who kill by proxy, who pay others to do their dirty work. Those who profit from the manufacture and sale of weapons. Those who foment conflicts and wars to advance such sales and maximise their personal fortunes.

As it is simply distasteful to dwell too long among such miserable specimens, let's look instead at the opposite end of this continuum to see what manner of people can be found there. These are the people who never pull a gun or draw a knife. Who rarely if ever raise a fist. Who will argue and agree to differ. Who will walk away and get on with their lives. Some are quite famous: Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Aung San Suu Kyi, Siddhartha Gautama, Jesus of Nazareth. Most are relative unknowns on the World stage: me, my friends and work colleagues, the grocer on the corner.

Oh, and most of the women in the World.

Thank you for reading.

gun control starts at home
gun control starts at home | Source

Postscript, March 2013

In a little over six months, this hub attracted more than 500 comments. Some of the discussion was informative and constructive, some less so. If I were starting over, I would write the article slightly differently, but only slightly. In particular, I would be more careful and accurate in my use of such terms as automatic, semi-automatic, assault, military, etc. This is because some gun enthusiasts pick up on any technical inaccuracy and try to use it to discredit the work and the author. This is, of course, a mere distraction; what matters is: can the gun in question be used to kill a large number of people quickly, say twenty in thirty seconds? If the answer is yes, then it is surely legitimate to ask whether such a weapon has any place in civilian hands.

I also take the view that the desire to own such a weapon is of itself reason enough to seriously question any civilian's mental fitness for such ownership.

I am not calling for a ban. I am not calling anyone insane. I am not even talking solely about America. But anywhere in the World, it must be valid to question any expressed desire to proliferate highly lethal fire-power through society at large.

Again, thank you for reading and thanks to all open-minded respondents who have contributed positively to the discussion in the comments section below.

Second Postscript, March 2013

Reluctantly, I have closed the comments section as it was being hijacked by a highly vocal minority. I added this final summary:

The situation is really very simple. Gun technology has evolved to the point where, for a small outlay and with no training at all, it is possible for someone to acquire and (if so inclined) to deploy weaponry capable of, and arguably designed for, fast mass extermination.

This situation did not obtain at the time the American Constitution and particularly the Second Amendment were drawn up.

It is the right, even the democratic duty, of all citizens to decide for themselves if they are happy with the situation. If a majority is happy, no action is indicated; if unhappy, further action, perhaps legislation is called for.

And that is my and everyone's final comment on this hub. I am closing the comments section as it has degenerated into a showcase for tiresome bullies. My sincere thanks to all who supported my efforts to encourage rational dialogue. Onwards and upwards!

Third Postscript - April 2013

I have reopened the comments section, but with moderation activated, in case any new readers would like to express a view. Closing it went against the grain, but there was no other way to control the situation.

Fourth Postscript - August 2013

Comments are again fully open as I just don't have time to be forever moderating. However, wholly inappropriate comments will be deleted.

More by this Author


Comments, newest on top: 645 comments

Irish Shrew profile image

Irish Shrew 2 years ago from Midwest

Despite the politics that, I believe, brought this issue to the foreground, despite all the rhetoric, all the hidden agendas- I want each and every one of us to think about the babies that were killed in every country, every state, and every city these last 20 years. Just recently the shooter was a 7th grader trying to kill his own peers. A retired cop because he was angry with a man texting his child during the previews of a movie. Please, forget who we vote for or what side we are on. Most of us are parents, all of us are humans. Each one of us have experienced hurt, loss, being made fun of, bad day, loss of patience, etc. If we killed everyone that made us feel these things, we would be an only child, a orphan, a widow/widower, etc. When did guns supersede communication? Logical thinking? I welcome every man or woman that decides to intrude my home with a fair warning- I protect mine with all of the utmost in common sense, and quick action that I can muster. You might think you are safe because I don't have a gun that you can use against me. I will sacrifice it all- as long as children stop dying at the behest of a gun and its user.


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 2 years ago from Essex, UK

ThinkN-do; You say that:

'SUICIDE is an increasing number; we have a larger problem here and it isn't Firearms.'

There is, however, a connection. Many suicides are spur of the moment actions at a time of utter despair. If suicide is not easy, if it takes effort, if it means going out and buying pills or finding a high building to jump from, then many would-be suicides have time to think, and the moment will pass. But if an efficient tool for instant suicide like a gun is readily available at home, then it will be used.


Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 2 years ago

Weapons seem necessary. Deception seems necessary. All the evils that can be thought up seem necessary because of the wickedness of this world. Lies seem necessary.

It is the lack of direction. It is a choice of the true bullies to deceive.

And - there are places one should not go without proper armor or defense. I can name some close to me.

But to continue to glorify the need for lies, deception, and weapons clearly shows the allegiance to a negative world.

This is historically written. It is Biblical. It is of the first written facts of war - the battle of Kadesh. Rulers particularly need lies.

Lies come from the same source as always. People who hold mostly to weapons and lies are serving the negative ruler of this Earth.

Call Satan or the wind whatever you want.

It changes nothing.

There is a benevolent God.

There is a Satan.

To deny the truth is to deny the benevolent God.

To perpetuate death, deception, lies - is to promote the negative.

Guns, weapons are negative. To suppose that we will always need them, therefore we must always have them is to become the bully, the liar, the deceiver.

Things have not changed for thousands of years.

I can't believe an insurance man who creates nothing and preys upon tragedy of humanity would want anything but weapons. There is no use for an insurance salesman.

There is no morality in political parties that profess morality when people are bought and sold.

We have Lost Vegas, Reno, etc. Unbridled capitalism is prostitution.

Guns? These vipers have many weapons of mass destruction and television the one of the most harmful.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 2 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Happy New Year, ThinkN-Do and Jandee.

Maybe the main reason for firearm suicide is guilt at possessing lethal weaponry ;)


ThinkN-Do profile image

ThinkN-Do 2 years ago from Pac NW

CDC Stats:

Assault (homicide) dropped from among the 15 leading causes of death for the first time since 1965.

The two major component causes of all firearm injury deaths in 2010 were suicide (61.2%) and homicide (35.0%).

The age-adjusted death rate for firearm suicide increased 3.4% in 2010 from 2009, whereas the death rate for firearm homicide decreased 5.3%.

In 2010, a total of 40,393 persons died of drug-induced causes in the United States

In 2010, 42,917 deaths occurred as the result of poisonings, 23.7% of all injury deaths.

The majority of poisoning deaths were either unintentional (77.0%) or suicides (15.4%).

Bottom line, most firearm deaths are suicide and the majority of those are white males.

Furthermore, SUICIDE is an increasing number; we have a larger problem here and it isn't Firearms.

Happy New Year 2014 and Happy Orthodox Christmas Eve . . .


jandee profile image

jandee 2 years ago from Liverpool.U.K

Happy New Year to Paraglider and all of you ANTI-GUN-Brigade.

best from jandee


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 2 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

thegecko - happy new year! Interesting indeed :)


thegecko profile image

thegecko 2 years ago from San Diego, CA

Interesting recent article at NBC News going over possible causes of rising crime from the 70's on and the recent decline the past decade titled, "Are the Xbox and unleaded gas helping keep you safe from violent crime?"


Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 3 years ago

As the story below tells us - MONSANTO can kill as many people as they want to. And - it is sanctioned by most every facet of our government and private industry because of a lack of "humanity", a dearth of selfishness, and laziness because nobody wants to farm but corporations. Nobody respects hard work. People attain wealth - not by working - but a modern slavery.

Let the punishment FIT THE CRIME - and that is especially necessary for the repetitious politician that is BOUGHT in America. These thugs like Art Pope of North Carolina, the Koch brothers, et al, bully thieves with money who use their money for modern enslavement.

All "power" be it money or weapons should work for humanity - not self-promotion.

But thieves run free here in the land of fake elections and those are the only elections we have. No new policies will be introduced. We are cave-people with suits.

But, alas, I am redundant:

"BREAKING NEWS: El Salvador bans Roundup and 2,4-D! Over the last two years, the Center for Public Integrity has examined how a rare type of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is killing thousands of agricultural workers along Central America’s Pacific Coast, as well as in Sri Lanka and India. Scientists have yet to definitively uncover the cause of the malady, although emerging evidence points to toxic heavy metals contained in pesticides as a potential culprit. Meanwhile, in the USA, we grow more GMOs, spray more Roundup, and wait for the approval of Agent Orange 2,4-D resistant corn, now in the pipeline."


Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 3 years ago

What "we" have is UNBRIDLED capitalism and the dollar,euro, Federal Reserve notes, rubles, etc. dictate that "we", you, they can "buy" whatever, whoever, whenever and screw it up, screw us up, screw them up, etc. Unbridled "anything" means monopoly, pollution, torture, sickness, death - as long as the "money" remains protected.

Corporations have more power and money than governments.

There are more "private security personnel" for corporations than for countries.

MONEY kills people. Stupid selfish money kills people in billions of ways.

Money buys privacy, attorneys, gates, "security personnel", etc. Most people are "herded" into their gated communities. Some are prisons. Some are fortresses.

It's all designed to protect the wealth. Arm sales mean revenue for corporations. It's all about the "worship" of stuff, intelligence, property, etc.

When countries and people prize wealth and power over decency, compassion, etc. we have "a weapon" of some sort to use against those who also want a piece of the pie.

When people are disrespected enough, when there is adverse policy toward the disenfranchised - the disenfranchised buy their weapons from the same manufacturers through different channels.

There is NO consistency for "crime punishment".

If there were most of our "leaders" would be in prison or executed.

We have no to little morality coming down from the very people elected to uphold some fairness, some justice, our civilization, etc.

The Koch brothers are still free and sleazy.

There is little to no consistent morality from elected morons.

People think power is their morality. Power is a gun, poison, or commodities to "wield" over their fellow man.

We even use these stupid "intelligent words" against those who disagree.

Ask the Mennonites. They have been around the world and their message of "no guns, no military service, no war is NOT accepted by modern day intellectuals or bozos.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

Okay, I concede... guns don't kill people... bullets kill people. Guns are merely a delivery system. The bullets are what actually cause physical harm or death.

Any support for a bullet ban?

While we're at it... I think I solved the smoking problem too. Just outlaw nicotine.

Or we can just go with the even more ridiculous solution of actually entering all mentally ill people, people dishonorably discharged from the military, and people with gun related offenses into the proper systems so they cannot legally buy weapons. If this is about stopping 'bad guys' with guys, how come we allow so many people, that so many people and professionals know have no business owning a gun, purchase guns?

But even solving this issue would be unconstitutional and preposterous. Right? ...


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

thegecko & jandee - a new commentator, Credence2, added a comment to the hub. Immediately, Jack and Will jumped on him almost as if they had been hiding in the shadows waiting for the last few months.I allowed their comments but warned them in these terms:

"Now please - I've given both of you more column inches than everyone else put together. I don't need to hear from either of you again. Good day to you both."

Both immediately responded in their usual charmless style. Maybe they thought they were 'standing their ground'. I deleted both comments (and also jandee's which was a reaction to the deleted comments and therefore no longer made sense). The comments section is open again, but these two are not welcome and will be deleted.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

"In the US, more people are killed in street fights than are killed by 'assault' weapons."

Where do people come up with these bogus 'facts?' We've already gone over the stats, but if you want another recent source of info, look up the CDC 2010 Mortality Multiple Cause Micro Data. You will find that there were a reported 16k+ deaths from homicides caused by assault in the U.S. and of these, 11k+ were by use of firearms. That leaves a remaining 5k to unspecified types of assault, which would include street fights.

Death by hand-to-hand combat doesn't even come close to death by firearm.

Come on.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Hi jandee

same old same old! Hope all's well :)


jandee profile image

jandee 3 years ago from Liverpool.U.K

Paraglider,

good on yer........

best from jandee.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Jack and Will - in a country that has so lost the plot that it has allowed a gun culture to become a norm, the short term answer to an immediate local issue may indeed be to draw and possibly fire a gun. The difference between us is that you have neither the experience (it would seem) nor the imagination even to conceive, far less work towards, a better society, one in which the prevailing social contract is not based on an undercurrent of violence and counter-violence.

Now please - I've given both of you more column inches than everyone else put together. I don't need to hear from either of you again. Good day to you both.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"I say that a 'real man' does not need to hide behind a pistol."

Suppose you are a frail man, or someone who is not athletic at all. Are you still expected to be a 'real' man and take a beating? In the US, more people are killed in street fights than are killed by 'assault' weapons. And that does not include all the devastating fight injuries, which can range from broken bones to brain damage.

Why do you think a gun is called the great equalizer? With a gun, even a small woman can defend herself against a big man.

Only bullies and their lackey audiences demand that their victims take a beating like a 'real' man.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

para sez: Jack - don't you think you've already poured enough poison onto my hub's comments section?

Jack replies: I consider it more a mercy act of shining a light into the darkness.

But neither you or cred can actually dispute what I just posted.

Sometimes when the doctor gives you medicine to make you feel better and to cure you of your sickness it may taste like poison... and you may even think it IS poison.

But if you take it properly it is amazing just how much better you feel in the end.

:-) :-)


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Credence2 - there was a terrible school shooting incident in Dunblane, Scotland, in 1996. Fortunately it did not result in a backlash of arming the people. Loss of innocence, increased vigilance, yes, but running scared, no.

Jack - don't you think you've already poured enough poison onto my hub's comments section?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cred sez: My late auntie used to say ' use your head for something else besides a hat rack'

Jack replies: Martin certainly used Z's head for something besides a coat rack. He used it as a punching bag and a sidewalk denter.

But that's okay with cred. It's more moral to die at the hands of a young thug than to defend your life with a firearm.


Credence2 profile image

Credence2 3 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

Hello, Paraglider, you said "Unable to make an impression on his fellows on equal terms, the culprit had sought an unfair advantage. In trying to command fear in others, he had merely betrayed his own fear. In trying to be the bully he was not physically cut out to be, he had shown himself to be - a coward. "

That is my description of George Zimmerman, spot on! This was certainly one of the topics where I have been very involved. If memory served was there not something involving a madman shooting in Scotland some 20 years ago? As you say, Scotland is one of those places that remain peacefully quiet and undisturbed.

I say that a 'real man' does not need to hide behind a pistol. In America, we have gun nuts that would take a pistol with them to the supermarket or church. If you have a mindset to feel that you need a gun everytime you go out, it has to affect your subconsious to the point where you are going to be drawn to an opportunity to use it, in place of your head. My late auntie used to say ' use your head for something else besides a hat rack' Great article thanks.... I have written on the topic, if you are so inclined, look into it sometime.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Micky - good to see you, and welcome! I agree that a version of the Golden Rule turns up in all or most viable philosophies. But there is always the defeatist crowd ready to dismiss it as idealism and trot out their old tired excuses for why it can't work.


Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 3 years ago

Nothing new. Those with power and agendas wield power. They do it with guns. They do it with secrecy and backdoor deals. I live in America and I can see clearly the "frontier justice" by judges, courts, law-makers - those of power. Too often they ignore truth to get the results they desire. Disagree with their "findings" and you can "find" yourself, your life and family with their "attitude adjustment.

And this is why I'd rather not participate in even the hubpage rebuttals. You need not look further than right here in hubpage world for their frontier justice.

Cowards wield unjust vengeful power over others - no matter the weapon. Guns? Words? Censorship? Social ostracizing?

Weapons may be inevitable.

The promotion and love of weapons is proof that man does not evolve and/or that weapons will not allow evolving.


Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 3 years ago

The reliance on weapons is more evidence of man's inability to evolve. Great teachers for thousands of years have spoken the Golden Rule.

Meanwhile for thousands of years of recorded history - the "man" with the biggest "gun" rewrites history with lies - especially about "his" or "her" bravery, strength, and deeds. History is still re-written with lies by brutal conquerors unable to follow the wisest of men and women. Gun owners may be philosophers but "pro-gunners" offer nothing for the future of humanity.

We will love our brother and sisters as ourselves or it's dogs eating dogs.

"Maybe what we should be asking is... why does America have more criminals? Simple...we have far more minorities. 70% of all gun crime is committed by blacks and Hispanics. We don't have a gun problem so much as we have a race problem."

And what if the cowboy hats were surrounded by "blacks and Hispanics"? The cowboys would be accused of more crimes. But educating the cowboy about the injustice system of 3,000 years of written history is futile. There is no evolving for the "pretend cowboy".

This piece of tripe is from a cowboy hat that is supposed to be a symbol of the old west and the "code of the west".

The better weapons allow everyone to be bullies.

The "cowboy hats" cannot solve problems. They romanticize problems.

Every religion but also every society has some form of the Golden Rule or it is no civilized society - just "civilized barbarians".


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Explain that to the Justice Dept, Jandee. Those are their stats, not mine, and they keep track by race, as does the rest of the world.


jandee profile image

jandee 3 years ago from Liverpool.U.K

Will,are you from Apache blood or maybe Crow ?(of course,as you must know, we all came from Africa ! mate! Therefore we are all foreigners,except Africans in Africa ,

jandee


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

I don't think it can be as simple as that. Many countries are multi-ethnic. In fact it's probably the norm in the developed world. In the Middle East, it's not uncommon for the locals to be in a minority by as much as ten to one. Minorities are not intrinsically violent. It has more to do with social cohesion, or the lack of it.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Maybe what we should be asking is... why does America have more criminals?"

Simple...we have far more minorities. 70% of all gun crime is committed by blacks and Hispanics. We don't have a gun problem so much as we have a race problem.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

What, wait, bad things happen out there too? Danger Will Robinson! The world is about to implode! It's the end of reality as we know it!


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Or more fear of criminals, maybe? Some pretty nasty things happen here too, but we don't have obsessive, fear-mongering media hyping everyone into a state of paranoia.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

Maybe what we should be asking is... why does America have more criminals?


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Mike - I don't live in Scotland. I live in the Middle East. The culture of gun ownership among law-abiding citizens is an American phenomenon. Most countries get along fine without it, even though there is crime in every country. Americans need to get out more, to see how people live in the free world ;-)


Mike 3 years ago

@para

Again, this is not Scotland. We have a high murder rate due to criminals, not firearms. As for police using firearms for "raids in gangland," those areas exist within every major city in America and that is where most of them patrol. Those areas are where the murders are. There is no major problem with "domestic" shootings. They rarely ever happen and 99.999% of gun owners are law-abiding citizens.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Mike - it's hard to see how I can be missing the point in my own article ;)

But your stats actually confirm what others have said before: namely that the great majority of shootings are gang related. And I'd venture to suggest that a large proportion of the remainder are 'domestic'.

All of which confirms that for normal community policing guns are not necessary, though they may well be needed for raids in gangland. And similarly, for day to day life in most communities, there is no case for the citizen to be armed.

We have a crime problem in Scotland too, but we get along nicely without a gun culture. The proliferation of lethal fire power through society is an aberration.


Mike 3 years ago

@para

"Generally, you don't need an armed police force. You need the police (specially trained ones) to be able to use guns on special missions where there is no alternative."

That may be true is Scotland, but it's definitely not true in the United States. I think you're missing the point. We don't have a gun problem here, we have a crime problem. Our criminals are the reason for the high number of gun related deaths. They are not going to listen to an unarmed police officer with a funny hat and a whistle. Their aggressiveness and disregard for the law is also the reason many American own firearms for personal protection.

Here is a little info on murders in America:

Chicago had over 500 murders last year and also has some of the nation's strictest gun laws to include registration. Chicago’s murder rate was 15.65 per 100,000 people. The average for the U.S was 4.2 and the state of Illinois had 5.6.

A breakdown of Chicago murders show that 83% of those murdered in Chicago last year had criminal records. In Philadelphia, it’s 75%. In Milwaukee it’s 77% percent. In New Orleans, it’s 64%. In Baltimore, it’s 91%. Many were felons who had served time. And as many as 80% of the homicides were gang related.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Will, you're wasting everyone's time again. I won't approve any further comments from you unless they contain some original argument; in other words, unless they add something of substance to the discussion.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

First you said:

"The obvious inference is that you think everyone should be equally armed with lethal weapons. In what way have I misinterpreted you?"

But now you say:

"Obviously no one would suggest ownership of a gun should be compulsory - That would be a very strange society indeed!!"

But that's the risk you take when you insist on putting words in your opponent's mouth.


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 3 years ago from Essex, UK

Will says: 'I think we should have the right to arms IF we choose to have them. Clear enough?'

Absolutely clear Will, but not really relevant to the point. Obviously no one would suggest ownership of a gun should be compulsory - That would be a very strange society indeed!! But in your post which I drew attention to, you did seem to make clear that you believe it beneficial for everyone - men and women - to be equally armed with guns ie: lethal weapons. Anyway, readers can choose if they wish to look back at the post and see if they take the same inference as I did.

Feel free to reply Will but I won't reply again to this particular thread. I actually wrote a recent hub about Internet commenting in which I criticised people who try to monopolise a Comments section with their point of view, or who deviate from the subject of the hub - after posting 3 exchanges with you, it would therefore be hypocritical of me to keep commenting on this particular aspect of Paraglider's hub.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

I think I know where I was confused. I thought by party you meant more than one person. You were just referencing a single individual, correct?


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"The obvious inference is that you think everyone should be equally armed with lethal weapons. In what way have I misinterpreted you?"

I think we should have the right to arms IF we choose to have them.

Clear enough?


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

All shooters are equal but some are more equal than others...

I've noticed the same inconsistency from several of the pro-gun respondents: on the one hand, they say a gun makes everyone equal; on the other, they want for themselves the greater fire-power of their AR-15s.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

" If they are armed, they would be more equal regardless of the size of the party attacking them."

Could you elaborate please?


ThinkN-Do profile image

ThinkN-Do 3 years ago from Pac NW

I believe Wills point was everyone has the right to choose under the current laws. He did not say everyone "should be armed". If they are armed, they would be more equal regardless of the size of the party attacking them. Again, that does not imply that everyone "should be armed". The right to bear arms is your choice, not a mandate.


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 3 years ago from Essex, UK

Will; you made clear that you felt it was a good thing that since the invention of guns, women and smaller men have had access to these guns ('lethal weapons') because that made them the equal of 'big, strong and highly trained men'. The obvious inference is that you think everyone should be equally armed with lethal weapons. In what way have I misinterpreted you?


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"It's difficult to know where to begin with this, because it's wrong on so many counts, but suffice it to say that this boils down to a suggestion that everyone should be equally armed with lethal weapons."

Which of course is not what is says at all, but that's the refuge of someone who declares you wrong but can't actually dispute it.


Paraglider profile image

Paraglider 3 years ago from Kyle, Scotland Author

Talisker - yes, that just about sums up the contribution to the discussion from certain parties!

thegecko and Greensleeves Hubs - valid points, both. But unlikely to influence one who owns 'the truth'!


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 3 years ago from Essex, UK

Willstar says: 'Before the invention of the gun, big, strong, and highly trained men had the advantage and ruled the world. All weapons prior to the gun required great skill and strength, so women and smaller men were necessarily subservient. It was the era of Goliaths, and the era of bullies. But with the invention the gun, a small man (or a woman) was easily the equal of a Goliath, and the era of bullies was over.'

It's difficult to know where to begin with this, because it's wrong on so many counts, but suffice it to say that this boils down to a suggestion that everyone should be equally armed with lethal weapons. All that really means is that everyone should have an equal chance of being killed by lethal weapons - men, women and children. Unfortunately, such a policy means that they also all have a GREATER chance of being killed by lethal weapons. The evidence bears out that that is exactly what happens.


thegecko profile image

thegecko 3 years ago from San Diego, CA

Weapons before the gun started leveling the playing field way before then.

I would also send your argument to all the women who lived from the birth of the gun to today. I'm sure they feel its been instrumental in achieving their equality (sarcasm).


Talisker profile image

Talisker 3 years ago from UK

When I taught a class of Year 2. There was one boy in particular who used to put his fingers in his ears and should "Blah blah blah!!" whenever an adult told him off or disagreed with him. He was 6.

:-)

For what it's worth. I think your hub was well written and thought provoking.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 3 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Because it's the truth.


    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working