Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Personal' started by monicabilongame, Oct 2, 2015.
From the blog of a friend of mine in the States. Not a pretty sight.
Can't remember aa the numbers exactly but there've been more mass shooting this year than there have been days in the year, so more than one a year.
There've been 45 school shootings this year in the USA which is easily more than one per school weeki (even if there are no more)
In the USA, in 2015 so far more than 9000 people have been killed in mass shootings. Think about that. More than 9000 people in mass shootings and that's not counting all the other gun crime.
Until the right not to be shot is considered more important than the right to bear arms, it won't stop.
These figures are truly horrifying. Yet Americans still want to hang on to their 'right to hold a gun'? Obama tried to say something yesterday but not sure how much effect it will have.
That calendar is quite shocking.
It would be interesting to know the stories behind those statistics. Are these mass shootings gang-related, a family member going berserk and wiping out his family with a handy gun - and what else?
Obama hasn't a hope in hell of doing anything about it: the genie is well and truly out of the bottle over there.
The number of deaths by motor vehicle collision in the US is very similar.
A professor on the news this morning says that nothing will change because Congress won't support it, even though the American people do.
The issue is that there is not just "one" America. You've vast swathes of that enormous land mass where the right to bear arms is the gospel they live by. It's that frontier, pioneering spirit that is in their blood, and no rational argument will hold sway in those circumstances.
Bet if a shooter got into Congress and wiped out a dozen or so Congressmen they might change their votes....
Interesting that the gunman is alleged to have singled out Christians.
I hadn't seen that he'd singled out Christians. I just saw that he asked people their religion and to the christians he said that they'd see God 'in a minute'. I assumed he'd shot any others anyway and just didn't make the same remark to them.
This is the point that stands out for me. Surely keeping innocent people safe matters more than a document agreed in 1787.
The statistics are compelling.
No US president or congress will touch the forefathers' declaration of the right to bear arms. It is seen as being as anti -US and freedom as you can get. It is tragic how many are killed but it is not worth putting too much energy into this as it just ain't gonna happen. There may be some tightening up of documents needed to get a gun, but believing they can or will be banned is a pipe dream.
The answer's simple - preserve the right to bear arms that were available in 1787...So let them carry muskets!
for the purposes of a well regulated militia.
This is driven by money. Gun manufacturers have too much control over US politics. The Constitution is an excuse.
Then why is support for gun control not over-whelming? Gun manufacturers do not control people's minds,
The narrative I hear in other forums, and also from my pro-gun friends in America, boils down to either
1) the belief that guns are essential for self-defense (the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun blah blah), because...
2) criminals aren't going to listen to gun control laws anyway so it's essential that everyone owns a gun in order to level the playing field.
Very few of the pro-gun nuts I've heard from seem to be able to differentiate between banning guns and bringing in stricter gun control, and if they can, they consider either option to be both unconstitutional and unenforceable. What is missing from any rational debate with these people is the understanding that if you make guns less accessible, there is less opportunity for people to be killed by guns. They seem to think that effective background checks and proper documentation of firearms simply mean all the criminals stay armed and all the good guys are left defenseless, which is kind of confusing really because that's completely not what it's saying.
There's been a lot of comments about how these mass shootings tend to occur in places where guns are banned (see point 1) which seems to rely on the belief that just owning a gun will magically endow you with cat-like reflexes and military-grade sniper skills so you can quickly and safely neutralise any threats, which lets face it, is BS. The best way to prevent gun massacres is to give everyone guns apparently.
Then there's the fact that places like the UK, Australia, Canada etc with stricter gun laws aren't completely crime free, which proves that guns are 100% necessary (see point 2). Sure, there's a black market for guns here in the UK, but we don't have the same gun problem because illegal guns are hard to get hold of unless you have a lot of money and/or the right contacts. It isn't fool-proof, but it means there's less chance of a gun being used by someone who is angry or upset or having some kind of mental health crisis simply because they can't get their hands on a gun on a whim. It's like they think that because gun control won't completely eliminate all gun crime completely, it's pointless bringing it in. It's utterly nuts.
A BBC correspondent in America summed the situation up well on Friday. He said the NRA has got all politicians in their pocket. Even the ones that favour gun control. They need gun money to get elected, just like all the others.
He went on to say that some of the debate over there is focused around the fact that the mass shootings are done by people with mental health problems. He asked how easy it would be for the mentally ill to buy guns and ammunition in the UK, expanded a little to say how simple it is over there, then concluded the problem of mass shootings don't exist in the UK on the same scale purely because of the laws that restrict gun ownership and their sales.
Of course it is, but we can't help sort it out for the Yanks other than by providing a statistic which shows gun control leads to fewer gun deaths. It's up to the Yanks to work out how that happens for themselves.