If you believe the gun fanatics, we are all safer if we carry guns around with us because then if someone starts shooting, then you or others with guns can shoot them first. The problem with that logic is that when people go around carrying guns, they are tempted to use them to resolve conflicts that could have been settled amicably or with at worst a fistfight. The latter, while undesirable, usually does not end up with someone dead or seriously injured unless the beating is carried to an extreme. When there is a crowd, others will usually step in to stop it. But when guns become involved, bystanders will understandably flee the scene or lie low..
We see another example of what can happen when people unnecessarily carry guns around when last night, seven juveniles between the ages of 12 and 17 were shot outside a mall in Indiana because a conflict arose among them.
Police officers patrolling the area heard shots fired near the Circle Centre Mall shortly after 11.30pm, said the deputy chief of the Indianapolis metropolitan police department, Tanya Terry.
The officers found “a large group of juveniles” at the scene, including six who had gunshot wounds and were transported to area hospitals, Terry said during a news briefing at the scene early Sunday morning.
…“Once again, we have a situation in which young people are resolving conflict with firearms, and it has to stop,” Terry said. “Conflict should not lead to somebody pulling out a gun and trying to resolve it. The consequences are eternal.”
Investigators believe there was more than one gun used in the shooting, Terry said.
We had a similar situation on February 14 when guns were fired during the Super Bowl parade for the Kansas City Chiefs.
The mass shooting that unfolded amid throngs of people at the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl celebration, killing one person and wounding almost two dozen others, appeared to stem from a dispute between several people, authorities said Thursday.
Police Chief Stacey Graves said the 22 people injured Wednesday ranged between 8 and 47 years old, with half under 16. A mother of two was killed.
Police said they detained three juveniles but released one who they determined wasn’t involved in the shooting, leaving two in custody. No charges have been filed. Police are looking for others who may have been involved and are calling for witnesses, victims and people with cellphone video of the violence to call a dedicated hotline.
Note that 800 police were in attendance at the parade but having all these supposedly ‘good guys with guns’ scattered all over the place could not stop the harm caused by a handful of ‘bad guys’ with guns.
People are not very good at controlling strong emotions, especially anger, and some react to perceived provocations of any kind with violence. It does not take a leap of logic to see that such people will reach for whatever means at hand that will enable them to resort with maximum force. Having a gun will almost inevitably end up with it being used. A corollary to the old adage that one should not take a gun to a knife fight is that if you happen to have a gun if any kind of fight breaks out, you are likely to end up using it, with lasting and tragic consequences to all involved.
Why are juveniles going around in the streets to shopping malls and parades carrying guns in the first place? That seems insane. It is because of the incessant propaganda of the the gun nuts in the US who have said that not only is it one’s right to do so, it is actually desirable.
It does not help that part of the gun-carrying ideology is “preparedness” and being ready to use a weapon at a moment’s notice. Being prepared to shoot someone at any time is a great way of making it more likely that someone will shoot someone at a moment’s notice -- or even by accident.
I should have thought that obvious -- because other juveniles are going around in the streets to shopping malls and parades carrying guns.
These stories could be interpreted (if you were so motivated) to actually validate that urge. Consider the mall in Indiana incident: the police refer to it as young people “resolving conflict with firearms”. Another way of looking at it is that most likely one group of young people got aggressive with firearms probably in the expectation that they were simply going to prevail unopposed, and this time encountered a group with the resources available to shoot back. Fuck around -- find out, as they say.
Put another way, which would you prefer:
1. be one of a group of youths who are set upon by an armed group of your peers, while you are unarmed?
2. be one of a group of youths who are set upon by an armed group of your peers, while you are armed and in a position to at least defend yourself?
3. be one of a group of youths who don’t live in a violent shithole?
USAians -- if you love your kids, emigrate.
Feels like people LARPing or cosplaying as someone in an action film who can pull a trigger and have their problems solved by sound effect alone. And of course the gory aftermath conveniently slides off screen before anyone has to really process it.
I kind of wonder if the gun nuts that get involved in actual shootings are shocked afterward or if they scramble to reimagine recent events before such realizations can happen.
I’ve often complained people don’t seem to understand what “begging the question” means. Nearly 100% of the time, I see people use it to mean, “raising the question”. This is not what it means. It means assuming the answer to the question in the premise.
Fortunately, sonofroj has come to my rescue and given a crystal clear example of begging the question in his idiotic comment #2. Thanks sonofroj.
Now all I have to do it point to that braindead comment to explain what “begging the question” means 😉