Kynes,
RE: illegal arms and Mexico.
I can't dispute that logic. After all, we have plenty of illegal arms, too, smuggled from the USA.
But FYI, we have (had) plenty of home invasions, as well, generally among the Asian community (ahemtriadscough). We also have other gang problems including out-in-the-open executions at coffee shops or "bubble-tea" lounges.
Yet ,we still don't feel the need to be armed to the teeth at all times.
I don't believe this is strictly a "crime" or "meth-PCP-Crack-crazed" issue, either. It's probably John Wayne's and Charlton Heston's fault.
Our greatest hero (of the last 40 years, anyway) was a man with cancer who ran across the country on one leg and a prosthetic.
America (from my perspective) prefers the traditional "Rambo" who will blaze a path through a bunch of "bad guys" to save that poor sap who got popped in the leg by a sniper (in a war he probably didn't want in the first place).
I suspect therein lies the fundamental pivot. But I stand to be corrected.
We also don't go around the world creating boogeymen for our MI-complex to profit on, while reinforcing the irrational fears of the populace (in the event of Red Menace, duck and cover). That might be another factor which has played into the median American's psyche, especially during the 20th century.
So, I guess I agree; the issue is more complex in America considering the history and priorities.
Never mind the inflection point was probably passed loooooooonnnnnnnng ago; therefore, it may not even be a feasible option to propose less armaments.
But, what about 4 or 5 generations from now? Considering the influence of global communication in geo-political change, those anachronistic values which have sustained the "gun culture" will be hard-pressed to continue unabated; people will simply be more informed or into "new" things.
Or maybe the gunpowder method will be surpassed by new classes of "home" protection, like portable rail-guns or chemical "immobilizers". Hell, why not zap intruders with Tesla-coils and sonic-weapons?
Who knows, though...maybe the US will become what Mexico is today, and it'll be Canada and Mexico trying to keep the American "fat-backs," with man-boobs like "cantaloupes", from rolling their gelatinous carcasses across the ditches along the 49th. Or maybe tie a bunch of them together and make a raft on course for Cuba!
We can't let dem terk er jerbs!
But I digress...if you want to champion the anecdote of Dr. Gunemdown, go ahead; however, don't forget about the other people who died that day because of the easy access. After all, how did the fuck-up get the gun in the first place?
"Freedom" (undefined) is never without cost.
View attachment 3213144
america's "gun culture" has been blown out of all proportion by the media.
american gun owners dont sit around in the dark cleaning their guns, making lists and masturbating with Hoppes No 9
those of us who grew up with guns, enjoy shooting, and keep em on hand for defense do so because thats the american way.
why do you think there are no shooting rampages at NRA meetings, gun shows or shooting ranges, despite the noteable presence of firearms at all those locations?
because GOOD people with guns reduce crime, while "Gun Free Zones" create a safe and pleasant working environment for frootloops who decide to try for the high score.
everyone recognizes that cowardly shitheels who shoot up schools, or hijack airliners only do so because they know their victims will be unarmed and easy prey.
canada and most of europe have decided that ALL their people should be easy prey, because they really dont give a shit if a few get murdered by a nutcase who has no compunction about breaking laws, but the real benefit to disarming the populace is that it makes the people defenseless against the government when they decide to do shit that deserves a violent uprising.
throughout history, arms control has had ONE purpose, and it has nothing to do with public safety.
disarming the populace is solely to secure government control, and ensure the powerful are protected from their victims.
your arguments may SEEM rational but they are really just rationalizations to justify arms control and enable people control.
Why not go for a grenade then? Chuck one or two down the stairs at the intruder and that's as efficient a defense method as there is gonna be. We don't need guns because we have plenty of methods that are as efficient as it needs to be. Americans always go on about how they have to have guns because otherwise they will get shot instead. It's a circle. You need guns because you've let the bad guys obtain them without breaking a sweat. Here, the bad guys rarely ever have guns, and history has rather taught us that if the bad guy does not have a gun, then there is no need for the home owner to have a gun. We are intelligent enough to know that we don't need guns.
