Why most of the world thinks Americans are stupid when it comes to gun control:

[Buck Turgidson]

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/25/us/louisiana-boy-kills-grandmother/index.html?hpt=hp_c2


I will highlight the interesting bits in BOLD

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
The victim was 87, public records show
The gun belonged to the caregiver, two CNN affiliates report
The boy won't face charges because he is younger than 10
The video game maker rejects any suggestion its game might have sparked killing
(CNN) -- An 8-year-old Louisiana boy intentionally shot and killed his elderly caregiver after playing a violent video game, authorities say.
Marie Smothers was pronounced dead at the scene with a gunshot wound to the head in a mobile home park in Slaughter, Louisiana, the East Feliciana Parish Sheriff's Department said in a prepared statement. Slaughter is about 20 miles north of Baton Rouge.


Now, I don't believe that video games cause any of this shit any more than I think Heavy Metal is the cause of teenage suicides, but if you are the kind of family that

- lives in a trailer park in a town called Slaughter
- 20 miles from a town whose French name translates to "red club"
- your last name is a euphemism for killing
- you let your 8 year old play GTA
- and you own a gun

KEEP IT LOCKED IN THE CABINET.

Again, causation is up for debate, but an ounce of prevention, JUST IN CASE SOME OF THESE ITEMS MAY HAVE SOME SMALL CONNECTION with gun violence, it worth a pound of cure.

And apparently this is the solution, which makes me understand why no one should vote Democrat:

""Vice President Joe Biden, who is heading an inquiry into the causes of gun violence, has floated the idea of taxing violent games and sending proceeds to help victims and their families, Forbes.com reported.""

I don't think I have ever heard of anything so stupid.

[Bleak Outlook]

Tax violent video games because "they're bad for you?" Ha! Next thing you know they'll be taxing cigarettes and alcohol because "they're bad for you."
Oh wait.

[William Bonney]

While I honestly believe that violence in society is getting really out of hand, I don't believe anything is a factor to its increase other than the fact that we are simply getting overcrowded, and as a result we have an increase of everything that comes with it, including violent crimes and mass killings when someone blows a gasket.  The media never mentions it, but read this story and notice the year it happened, and also why it happened:

http://hyphenbird.hubpages.com/hub/The-Bombing-at-the-Bath-School-Americas-First-School-Massacre-in-1927

I found this out of curiosity after the Virginia tech massacre earlier this year. 

Blaming video games or other things is blatantly scapegoating imo, and taxing is just another attempt at turning a profit and gouging us regular Joes. 

[Fake from State Jarm]

actually it's possible violence is decreasing, percentage-wise. but our perception of it is skewed by unprecedented exposure to information about it.

if you can find a way to control guns that the government can't abuse, that'd be great. but the gov which is currently police-raiding ppl for all kinds of minor offenses or even googling pressure cookers, the gov which drone strikes kids all over the world including 16 year old US citizens, is conceivably more dangerous than the american populace.

[Pterrydactyl]

Actually, I just did a FUCK-TON of research onto this.
One sec...


https://depaul.digication.com/rel_222_dave_collins/Summary_of_Insights212/published

http://www.cracked.com/article_20396_5-mind-blowing-facts-nobody-told-you-about-guns.html

That's my paper, and one of my best sources.

[Buck Turgidson]

Bummer your depaul link did not work - seems you need a password.

The second one is a great article.  My favourite quotes:

""Because if the players join the military, they're not going to shop for their own guns. The Army gives you one for free when you join. They actually get mad when you bring your own.  So what is the goal of that product placement? What is the "something like this" that they hope kids will use their product to do? What fantasy are the gun makers playing into here if the goal is to affect a purchase decision down the line?""


""But how many of those same people who are willing to shell out used-car money on "home defense" firearms don't, for instance, bother spending 20 bucks to keep a working fire extinguisher or carbon monoxide detector in the house?""

""you might as well be manipulating your butt cheeks to modulate your farts into a Skrillex track""

I think non-Americans get the God & dicks obsession and fantasies in the US - 'I wish I was in El Salvador, I'd jer k off with my gun and kill the poor'.  In fact I think this is exactly what most of the world thinks the problem is.  Lots of countries have guns - the Swiss proudly display theirs over the fireplace for example, and here in Belgium I can buy one fairly easily from a local shop.  The difference is that for the Swiss, it is all about the right to bear arms in defense of the state, and they all undergo mandatory military service  For the Belgians, it is about hunting & collecting Barbies.  Even in Oman, it is customary to see a dude walking down the street with his rifle, on his way to get a coffee or do some shopping.  These societies rarely turn guns on each other.  So, I think the problem is cultural. 

[Fake from State Jarm]

if gun murders overall are going down, is there actually a problem? or is it just political propaganda and a bunch of kids who believe that it's true because they heard it on the daily show?

I seem to recall jon stewart saying the only distinction between his entertainment-news and fox's was that he didn't pretend his show was anything more than satire. but that's a lie, they mix in their own sincere and passionately held opinions all the time. Take note of what they say without a punchline, with a serious tone, with cameras zooming in. This is what they want you to agree with, or what they know their target audience agrees with, fed back to them to affirm their political identities and let them feel right.

The problem with entertainment-news is that it's built around a subjective narrative that supports and embellishes what the audience already believes. That's what makes it entertaining, compelling, and it also makes it easier to organize mentally, so that it makes the world seem simpler. In turn this makes people feel informed, connected, and in a position to do something, when really, they still do not understand what is going on.

The problem with the liberal side of this is that they criticize it in the conservative side but pretend they aren't doing the same thing. The only difference is the target audience, they are packaging their misleading bs for a younger generation instead of an older one.

[Kenneth Kenstar]

It always drove me crazy that it was generally liberals who were for banning guns. It always made sense to me that liberals should be for gun ownership.

When it comes down to a voting booth, you are voting for either a candidate that wants to take Option A (guns) away from people or a candidate that wants to take Option B (birth control, abortions) away from people.

Obviously it's not really as simple as that, but in general it seems to be the case.

Anyway

I'm not advocating armed resistance against the government, but it seems to be that taking guns away right now without getting better control over the authority that takes away guns seems like a predictable blow up in our face.

The truth is, even if I was advocating armed resistance against the US government, it would be pointless because Americans really don't get pissed off and tear up the streets and riot like other western nations. They could take everyone's guns away forcibly right now and there might be isolated incidents that result from that action, but I wouldn't expect anything like this:

French student Riots 2006

These are French citizens our age having a riot of fun over a plan by the government to allow companies to sack young people without explanation as long as they are under 25.

They do this a lot. They are pros at it.

[Buck Turgidson]

Well, as an outsider, it seems like the problem is people are entrenched as "Liberals" or "Conservatives" - the lines are much starker than in most other western countries.

The knee-jerk reaction of throwing the word "Liberal" around whenever anyone mentions gun control seems like a way of embarassing small c Conservatives into staying with the party line. 

As a Canadian, when I say that I think we should have the right to bear arms, and if we had it we would probably not be subjected to so much corruption and abuse of power (not to mention separatists), people point to the US and ask if I would really prefer to live in such fear.  I am considered a freak.

I tell them that the US example is not the only way, and point to the Swiss model - a martial tradition, in which the right to bear arms is based on compulsary military service, and a level of patriotism that significantly deters them from shooting each other (and an economic system based on Nazi gold so there are no break-ins).

The US founding fathers were clear that the right was to bear arms in order to deter tyranny or invasion.  It was not the right to accessorize or glorify violence.  I think the US has lost its way, and faces the same problem it would if it were trying to disarm a tyrant - once someone has a gun, they are unlikely to ever give it up.  Biden's tax idea is actually a way of getting gun owners to sound like they are more interested in holding on to their money and guns that the welfare of their fellow American, and it will go nowhere...

Llamavore's comments on the media is interesting, because I always thought that Stewart uses exactly the same techniques as Fox, but smirks instead of frowns.  I miss Lou Dobbs.  Now HE was funny.

[Fake from State Jarm]

The knee-creeper reaction

I can't figure out what kind of book that sounds like the title of, but it sounds riveting

The US founding fathers were clear that the right was to bear arms in order to deter tyranny or invasion.  It was not the right to accessorize or glorify violence.

Accesorizing and glorifying violence aren't really matters of law, but of culture. Codifying those things into law would signify ridiculous micro-management. Limiting the availability of certain technologies makes sense, but you can do that more efficiently through patents and maybe licenses or taxes.

There's probably no limit to the number of modern cultural trends that the founding fathers didn't intend or even foresee.

Obviously it's not really as simple as that, but in general it seems to be the case.

at least a lot more parties are forming now and more and more people are looking to bring down the two-headed chimera of republican/democrat dominance

French student Riots 2006

can someone tell me what this video is about, apparently videos from california or anywhere else outside the USA are not viewable in my state

[Buck Turgidson]

It is just French riot scenes.  Looks like a lot of fun and opportunity to grab dirty hippie boobie.