Its Not The Gun’s Fault

Its Not The Guns Fault

Mass shootings are a horrendous event and a problem of immense problems and not just for the United States. Different nations have different sorts of mass killings, but death is death and regardless how it is meted out we need to understand its origins in angry young men.

The simplest solution seems to be an outright ban on guns. The reasoning is simple enough for a child or politician to understand. No guns mean no shootings. It does not mean no bombings, vehicular homicide or knifings.

The biggest issue with a total gun ban applied to the United States, is that it is not feasible. Were it even possible to ban guns the ban would not address the root of the problem; the angry young man.

Some liberals may find the argument disingenuous, but it is still holds true. Guns do not kill people. But is it more honest to claim, people kill people?

Eliminating the tool used in murder does not eliminate the problem of the person who uses the tool as an implement to murder others. Even were it possible to eliminate all guns it would not eliminate murder or even mass murder and might cause more problems that it solves.

What would the police do if they had no access to guns?

Are politicians willing to forgo the presence of armed security used for their protection? Are you willing to have your nation eliminate its guns, but other nations keep theirs?

A response might be that we need to eliminate guns from private arsenals, not the state. If this solves the problem, the problem is not the guns but the user. No one ever explains why a person is trustworthy if they are in uniform on the job but not if they are at home?

Why do statistics not demonstrate that the more guns one owns, the more likely one will engage in a mass shooting event? This would be the case if guns were the problem.

Indeed, have there been any mass shootings committed by a gun dealer or collector?

But let’s assume we can and have eliminated guns from those who would commit a gun crime. Surely stabbings would result in fewer deaths. But what of vehicular slaughter and vehicles used as terrorist devices? A vehicle driven through a parade of Christmas shoppers kills more people faster than a gun.

If guns are not the real problem, why implement a solution that does not deal with the actual issue? Does it make you feel better if others are as helpless as you? Does it make you feel as if something is being done?

It may seem to be a non-judgemental comment to say guns are the problem. If guns are the problem everyone with a gun can be considered a potential murderer. But is that not the problem. Those who wish to eliminate guns believe we are all potential killers, and the best remedy is to prevent us from wrecking carnage upon our fellow man.

If owning a gun is a problem, then gun owners are a problem. The desire to own a gun suggests a potential desire to murder others. No other conclusion is possible. If we are not all potential murderers and people buy guns only to facilitate this urge, taking away guns would not solve anything.

It is logically true that we all have the capacity to kill. We all have the means and sufficient knowledge of methods of killing, to kill, but if we were all potential killers guns would not be safe in anyone’s hands.

Soldiers would not need the amount of training that is required to turn a civilian into a soldier, if we were all instinctive killers. Most people have a hard time killing other people even when justified, even when trained, even when required to by the state. The last thing the vast majority of gun owners want to do is kill someone.

So, yes, virtually all men can be made into soldiers and all men have a theoretical ability to kill, but we all have a chance to win the lottery. The actual levers that turn a person into a murderer are turned by the purchase of a firearm.

If all men are not potential killers and purchasing a firearm is not a sufficient condition to turn citizen into a murderous psychopath, what differentiates killers from citizens?

The way the question is asked indicates the answer. Killers are not citizens. They have resigned from the body politic. They are rogue agents at war with society.

Why blame the gun because the killer decided to pick it for his purposes?

The issue for liberals is that guns do represent something potentially dangerous to them. This is psychic traumatizing and because the trauma is below the level of conscious thought it causes a severe emotional reaction. All liberals can think of is get rid of the thing that is causing such a visceral reaction in me.

Liberals reason that if guns create severe emotional reactions, eliminate guns and remove the triggering element. But making drugs illegal, banning them in effect, did not stop drug overdoses nor eliminate the taking of drugs nor did it eliminate drug cartels, who are the cause of uncountable deaths in Latin America and their northern neighbors.

Making prostitution illegal did not stop women from selling their bodies. As liberals tell Republicans, banning abortions do not stop women from getting abortions. Why do liberals suppose banning guns will prevent murder or even gun ownership if banning abortions do not stop babies being aborted?

Even if we decide to ban guns, governments ought to first eliminate all illegal guns, then proceed to undergo the expense and trouble of banning legal firearms.

The reality is that saying people kill people or guns kill people serves to take the conversation in the wrong direction. People and guns do kill people, but it is also true that people and guns do not kill people. The statements are not untrue empirically. Both can be tested and proven true, however, both are analytically incoherent. They are untrue because they create category errors.

If people kill people, do we ban people? If guns kill people, do we imprison the gun? Do we analyse why a certain gun did not kill people but killed deer instead?

One person may kill another person or can kill other persons. Guns can and are used for killing people. Lots of other people do not kill people and rocks can also be used for killing. Analytically honest statements lack the drama of their synthetic counterparts but that is because they reflect reality better.

Good persons do not kill other good persons and their guns do not kill good persons. If we know the person is a good person the possession of a gun is not an issue, or we would not issue guns to police officers.

The Swiss do not permit anyone who has committed a crime to own a gun. Not only do they prevent people who cannot follow rules from owning guns they also provide a lot of rules for good people to follow to ensure they will not unintentionally harm someone with their gun.

While it may seem a reasonable solution to the problem of mass murder to eliminate guns it is only because we do not value good citizens.

If society chooses to wait until the moment when a desire to kill people is demonstrated, before responding, we are waiting too long. We are committing a serious category error. Only citizens have a right to be armed.

It is well known governments dehumanize the enemy in times of war. It is known that normal people are traumatized by the killing of another person. It is not the possession of a gun that gives rise to murder. It is the failure to see the other person as human. This is not a person who ought to have the benefits of citizenship.

This is a facet of gun crime that is not discussed. It is the psychic change that turns a person from citizen into alien. The alienated youth that no longer feels he belongs no longer views guns as a tool. The gun becomes a weapon for wrecking vengeance.

The key change is when the person is no longer autonomous being but a victim of circumstance. His life is taken over by events.

There is no material difference between a gun used as an offensive weapon and a gun used for defense. The difference is the mind of the user. There are no assault rifles. There are only guns turned to the purpose of assault by a person with the intent of gaining justice.

But until we learn what makes a citizen, determine who has earned the right to be a citizen and who the alien is, we will continue to have guns fall into the wrong hands.