RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-dtjIikFzA

When a car accident kills people, it is a horrible accident. When a gun kills someone, it is an example of the product functioning as intended.


Gun Culture In America: Our Slow Motion Collective Mass Suicide.

By Dennis Trainor, Jr., Acronym TV

06 November 13

A report came over the AP wire last night that, if this were any other country in the world, would have been the top news story for days: "Multiple shots were fired inside a northern New Jersey mall shortly before closing time Monday night," read the opening line of the report and Americans, having been through this drill before, found a cable TV talking head or pieced together facts from the ever reliable twitter and were able to learn, in short order, that a man, described by eyewitnesses as wearing "body armor, black leather pants and a motorcycle helmet," was seen walking by Talbots in the Westfield Garden State Plaza in Paramus, New Jersey shooting his rifle into the air.

A huge local and state police presence responded the mall went into lockdown and the incident ended when the gunman apparently took his own life in a Footlocker store. Incidents like this always bring out the defenders of our gun culture in force. "Guns don't kill people, defenders of the homicidal gun culture are wont to say, people kill people. Except there is this: If I want to get from point A to B a car, bus or train will do the trick, because that is what they are designed to do. If I want to get in shape, a treadmill, (if I ever get on the treadmill – but enough about me) will do the trick because that is what a treadmill is designed to do. If I want to signal to the world I am sucker for branding and fashion and will pay more for an inferior products, DR. Dre's BEATS headphones will signal this to the world. And while Cars, when driven by drunk drivers; treadmills when run on by people with a heart condition, and fashion all can kill, the difference between all of those items and guns is simple: when guns kill, they have functioned as intended by their manufacture."

When a car accident kills people, it is a horrible accident. When a gun kills someone, it is an example of the product functioning as intended.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
-16 # albertchampion 2013-11-06 23:02
i am confused by what you are attempting to argue.

if you want to terminate deaths by firearms, then start at the source: the u.s. military.

disarm it.

that is the real heart of the weaponry beast. as long as it continues to be armed, then your idea of disarming a citizenry is specious. a fraud, even.

why do you think it to be more dangerous to have a handful of u.s. citizens killed or wounded in the conus, than for the usa to kill thousands all over the planet. and mostly as sport. and by a similar number of psychopaths.

all soldiers are psychopaths, don't you know.
 
 
0 # Johnny 2013-11-08 09:31
Don't think all soldiers are psychopaths, but definitely the politicians, generals, and admirals who command them are.
 
 
0 # Firefox11 2013-11-14 20:38
Quoting albertchampion:
i am confused by what you are attempting to argue.

if you want to terminate deaths by firearms, then start at the source: the u.s. military. Good idea as the military is selling its used hardware to local and state police thereby creating a police state that has military applications.

disarm it. Hard to do if it is the military, as part of their gear is weapons.

that is the real heart of the weaponry beast. as long as it continues to be armed, then your idea of disarming a citizenry is specious. a fraud, even.
Don't think that disarming this citizenry
is gonna happen anytime soon.

why do you think it to be more dangerous to have a handful of u.s. citizens killed or wounded in the conus, than for the usa to kill thousands all over the planet. and mostly as sport. and by a similar number of psychopaths.
Killing is killing, and the US believes in force as a government, and often as individuals.

all soldiers are psychopaths, don't you know.
They are certainly brainwashed; though not necessarily psychopaths. In battle, well over 50% soldiers do not discharge their weapons, partly due to an aversion to killing other members of their species.
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/hope_on_the_battlefield
 
 
+22 # jussayin 2013-11-06 23:30
Not all soldiers are psychopaths. Jimmy Massey and Bradley Manning are two who managed to maintain a conscience and speak out against what they saw happening. It's just that they were both persecuted for doing so. It seems easier to go with the flow for most though. Basic training is designed to stifle the conscience, dehumanize the perceived enemy, crush any hint of empathy and condition them to follow orders without thinking or asking questions. Combine this with leadership like the Bush gang and we get world wide terrorism in our name, paid for by us for generations, and we also make more enemies, which serves the arms makers very well. It was especially bad when our former prez and VP were both positioned to get richer from war. With psychopaths at the top of the chain of command you can't help but end up with complete disaster.
 
 
+1 # Susan1989 2013-11-07 08:58
Have you had the experiencebif doing basic training in the military? What evidence do you have that al soldiers are psychopaths?
 
 
+3 # Johnny 2013-11-08 09:36
"Basic training is designed to stifle the conscience, dehumanize the perceived enemy, crush any hint of empathy and condition them to follow orders without thinking or asking questions." In other words, basic training is designed to make all soldiers psychopaths. The scumbag banksters of the Bush, Clinton, Bush II, and Obomber regimes at the top of the chain of command need psychopathic mercenaries to carry out their imperialist ventures.
 
 
+15 # janie1893 2013-11-07 02:47
Get that amendment out of the Constitution and make the NRA illegal!
 
 
+2 # MidwesTom 2013-11-07 07:32
Explain to me why when we were a much poorer nation, and I was in high school and college; guns were everywhere. Guys traded them in the HS parking lot; guys had them in the dorm at college; yet nobody panicked. We were all too busy trying to decide how we would earn a living and who we would marry. Tin HS we all had jobs on weekends and during the summer, no time to get into trouble,

Are we simply too rich as a nation? How many parents work extra hours so their kids can play sports? As an employer I see many kids that simply do not know how to work. Do the government support programs make it possible for urban kids to have lots of free time?

I am not sure of the answers, but unless we change the culture, poor kids will keep joining gangs and killing each other, and wealthy kids will continue to crazy from boredom and kill people for no reason,
 
 
+2 # Susan1989 2013-11-07 09:02
I agree with you..many of our kids have been robbed of the opportunity to have pride in their efforts...schoo l is dumbed down, parents drive kids everywhere and are overinvolved in their lives...and they often are not expected to work or support themselves. Jobs in fast food are considered menial...with many young people taking unpaid internships after college...and still not getting paid. Lately I notice kids that are too old being pushed in strollers...wha t is happening?
 
 
0 # brux 2013-11-08 09:52
One thing might be that the poor and hopeless demographic has increased at a greater rate than the general population - meaning that we have lots of children/people who never were socialized, educated and grew up in hopeless circumstances, no jobs, no hope, drug abuse, neglect, etc ... and yet these people have as much right to obtain and possess a gun as anyone else. Many if not most of these guns are used in criminal ways.

There have always been criminals and robbers, and guns were meant to protect the innocent or weak from them ... hence the term "equalizer". They still can provide that function, yet because a large number of criminals have guns now everyone else is suppose to renounce and give up their right to bear arms or their ability to protect themselves.

Oh, and your stereotype about poor kids and especially rich kids are just silly, the vast majority of all kids and all people do not abuse their gun rights.
 
 
+1 # Jbctrader 2013-11-07 08:26
Just plain silliness. First, I like the cover pic on the video better than the spiky-hair fanatic soliloquist. Hyper rhetoric is great for preaching to the choir. But it isn't likely to build a compromise situation which both sides can live with. "Outlaw the NRA!" Come on. that's not likely a battle you can win. Change the Second Amendment!" There is a legal method in the system in place to do that. However, should be careful when it comes to changing the Constitution. There may very well be better methods of saving innocent lives (if that is really your goal) than giving up a constitutional right.
Just sayin'
 
 
-3 # skylinefirepest 2013-11-07 10:23
Good comment JBC, but if enough loonies did actually do away with the 2nd it would make instant criminals out of millions of people. I know that I would not give up mine in this crazy world of druggees and crazies!! And consider what one of the RSN readers wrote a while back...get the army to take them? If that was tried this country would go berserk! And I fail to see why owning a gun for the protection of my family is a bad thing when you read the crime reports in any newspaper. I live in a small town and we have had over a dozen shootings in the last two months...all drug related according to the popo. And some loonie wants me to give mine up? Not a chance.
 
 
+1 # Jbctrader 2013-11-07 11:58
"but if enough loonies did actually do away with the 2nd it would make instant criminals out of millions of people. "

I feel plenty of gun-control advocates are legitimately concerned about public safety. So are most folks of the 2nd stance.
Each side also has its share of loonies.
If we can treat each other with respect and look at the facts, I think we can come to a consensus. If the antis are concerned about safety, that issue can be worked on. If they can't be happy with improving public safety we might wonder if they actually have different intentions.

Perhaps both sides could quit using fear and panic tactics, stop demonizing the other side, and learn more about what the issues and problems really are.
 
 
+1 # Feral Dogz 2013-11-07 12:55
The "loonies" who want sane regulation of devices designed and marketed with the intention of shooting people are not killing people in random shootings. Nor are the 2nd amendment loonies preventing these shootings with their "concerns for public safety". This is more false equivalency bullshit.
 
 
+1 # MADASHELL 2013-11-07 15:09
A friend asked me today if I'd heard about the latest mass shooting. I said yes. I thought it was the latest, but no, it was a brand new one. Seems like there's at least one a day. I suspect not all of them are even reported anymore. Newspapers used to print stories of shootings. Now there are too many, and too commonplace. We are to accept this as the way our country is, and shrug them off. At least that's what everyone seems to be doing....
 
 
0 # Gorski 2013-11-07 20:56
I agree with everything in this video except on thing: his attitude toward hunting. I'm not a hunter and have only gone hunting a few times, never successfully. But saying it is not sport is not helpful. I don't care if its a sport or not. But it is good to be able to shoot deer and eat them where they are overpopulated and cause car accidents.
 
 
+1 # Feral Dogz 2013-11-08 13:29
These same problem deer could be rounded up, fattened and slaughtered like other animals people eat. The hunting part is indeed sport and not at all necessary (or very effective) in controlling unwanted populations in places with too much human population to permit people to go around with assault rifles looking for something to kill.
 
 
-1 # Gorski 2013-11-10 05:10
Feral Dogz
I don't think your comment is very helpful.
Are you serious about rounding up deer?
I guess you are being funny, because this not a realistic option in my hometown or anywhere.
Also, I don't know anyone who hunts with an assault rifle.
Although, I agree assault rifles should be banned, you will not get there by trying to tell Americans they can't have a rifle. You will actually cause the opposite reaction. You will cause people to not talk reasonably about placing restrictions on gun purchases and you will cause some (crazy) people to buy more guns.
Venison is indeed delicious, healthy, and an effective way of controlling the deer population in my hometown where deer have no natural predators and cause many car accidents.
In an ideal world maybe we would all be vegetarians (or at least eat less meat), deer would still have their natural predators left, and we would protect ourselves from those natural predators with bows.
I think hand guns, and assault rifles (the definition is tricky--as far as I can tell, it pretty much means rifles that look cool) should be illegal, and purchasing a rifle should be not something you can do easily at wallmart.
This is complex issue and you need the participation of those people who like guns (I am not one of them--though I like venison). If you do not take into account their (sometimes, very unfortunatley, crazy feeling) I don't think anything will ever be accomplished.
 
 
0 # Feral Dogz 2013-11-12 14:36
Yes, I'm serious about the roundup. A very popular hunting strategy is to employ beaters who move through an area, driving game toward the 'guns' who do the shooting. These animals could just as easily be corralled and handled like domesticated victims of carnivorous humans.

The NRA insists that weapons like the AR15 (semi-auto assault rifle) are intended and used for hunting.
 
 
0 # Gorski 2013-11-12 22:05
Let's differ the issue about purposefully eliminating dear from nature--how easy and/or desirable it is.

Instead lets focus on people who want to keep there guns (both the ones who live in places like Alaska and Wyoming where having a gun makes sense for protection AND those in the rest of country who for various reasons-- hunting/protect ion/fun--want to own a gun). If your desire is to (someday) eliminate guns from private possession (like here in South Korea), do you think it is an effective strategy to start by telling the people who could be on your side that we want to take away their grandfather's .22 rifle? Should we, at this point, tell the people who want to responsibly hunt (with or without their children) that they should not be able to have a hunting rifle? Maybe they they shouldn't be able to. But telling them this, at this point, will not be helpful. We need these people on our side. The first step is handguns and assault rifles. Did you see yesterday's Daily Show episode where Jason Jones interviews people about gun control legislation in Colorado? I think this piece illustrates my point pretty well. If you can convince people that the government is coming for their guns rather than that the government wants to de-glamorize guns, limit the sale of guns beyond what is needed, and prevent their sale to dangerous people, then the NRA has already won, again.
 
 
0 # Feral Dogz 2013-11-13 11:29
I don't think I wrote anything about eliminating deer from nature. The discussion was about dealing with problems of overpopulation in places overpopulated by humans. Shooting rifles with high muzzle velocities and long ranges in such places is illegal in most states in the USA. To suggest that "problems" with wildlife are a good reason not to have better regulation of firearms in a place where people are being shot on a daily basis by people who should never have a gun in the first place is ridiculous and irresponsible. Your arguments come straight from the NRA.

How bad does it have to get before people like you realize that most people want better gun regulation, but most people don't have millions of dollars to spend on lobbyists as the NRA, gun manufacturers and dealers do. Our gun laws are written, bought and paid for by vested interests who have no regard for public safety.
 
 
0 # Gorski 2013-11-13 20:36
I was talking about my home town, Nellysford Virginia, which is certainly not overpopulated by humans (at least relative to where 98% of American live).

Also, I was not suggesting that wildlife was a reason to have better regulations. This does not make any sense.

I was suggesting that people who hunt or have a good reason to own a gun (or even some of those who only think they have a good reason to own a gun) are also potentially people who want to eliminate easy access to needless weapons. Having these people's support is essential.

As I understand it, this would be the first step. There does not seem to be a more realistic option.

Please read my comment again. I think you may have missed my point and we may even agree, mostly.

What the John Stewart video I mentioned showed was that people are motivated by negative/threat ening policies much more than by positive ones. Even though most of the people in Colorado supported the gun regulations enacted by a legislator of that state, a minority of gun nuts were able recall him. You may think that the gun death's would be enough to motivate people to change the laws (and this has worked in liberal places). But I don't think it will be effective for over half the country. The NRA, etc will be able to spin it so that enough people think that the government is coming for their guns. Regulations cannot appear to fit NRA's distortions, at least in about 50% of the country.
 
 
0 # Gorski 2013-11-13 20:43
Also, I don't think anyone is even seriously talking about not allowing (or even limiting) the sale of hunting rifles to those who pass a background check. This might be the next step, especially in places where hunting is not reasonable.
I think making assault rifles (and hopefully, someday soon handguns) illegal would be enough to take the most of the glamour out of owning a gun.
I think that by overtly aiming for more than that at this point will be counterproducti ve.
 
 
-2 # Gorski 2013-11-10 05:08
Feral Dogz
I don't think your comment is very helpful.
Are you serious about rounding up deer?
I guess you are being funny, because this not a realistic option in my hometown or anywhere.
Also, I don't know anyone who hunts with an assault rifle.
Although, I agree assault rifles should be banned, you will not get there by trying to tell Americans they can't have a rifle. You will actually cause the opposite reaction. You will cause people to not talk reasonably about placing restrictions on gun purchases and you will cause some (crazy) people to buy more guns.
Venison is indeed delicious, healthy, and an effective way of controlling the deer population in my hometown where deer have no natural predators and cause many car accidents.
In an ideal world maybe we would all be vegetarians (or at least eat less meat), deer would still have their natural predators left, and we would protect ourselves from those natural predators with bows.
I think hand guns, and assault rifles (the definition is tricky--as far as I can tell, it pretty much means rifles that look cool) should be illegal, and purchasing a rifle should be not something you can do easily at wallmart.
This is complex issue and you need the participation of those people who like guns (I am not one of them--though I like venison). If you do not take into account their (sometimes, very unfortunatley, crazy feeling) I don't think anything will ever be accomplished.
 
RSNRSN