h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

So, I’m sitting here with my trusty “Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012” perusing the section on Law Enforcement, Courts, and Prisons. A combination of statistics, observation and watching true crime programs on the tube have led me to draw some conclusions about the notion that gun ownership somehow makes us safer.

First, you need to understand that I live in a community that very likely has more guns than people. I don’t ask everyone I meet whether or not they possess firearms, but given the general culture of this region, I think it is a fair assumption. There are times when the uber-conservative politics and fundamentalism of this area is genuinely oppressive. But I digress.

I do not own a firearm of any sort. If I ever move to the country I might buy a rifle or shotgun to use on varmints if necessary. I have no more objection to hunters owning weapons for that purpose than to fishermen owning fly rods. But handguns are more problematic and the open sale of automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles is ridiculous. The only reason they exist is to kill people.

As to safety, I figure if I don’t have a gun in the house, then no one can find it and shoot me with it.

Concerning the argument that if we enact any sort of gun control then only the professional criminals will own guns, making us as a society more vulnerable:

1. I don’t need a gun to protect myself from some stranger who breaks in to burglarize my home. The vast majority of burglars are non-violent, unarmed and break in when no one is home. They do like to steal guns, so if I have one and am robbed, they’ll take the gun. And if they try to break in while I am home, the dogs will bark their heads off, giving me time to find my baseball bat.

2. I don’t need a gun to protect myself from some crazed killer. Again, I’m more likely to be killed by a family member or acquaintance than a stranger. Unless your loved one is a career criminal, you probably won’t be killed by one. And if someone close to you wants you dead, they’ll find a way, with or without a gun.

3. Teen gang members kill other gang members, drug dealers kill other drug dealers, and organized crime family members kill other crime family members. None of the above are interested in a small town librarian.

4. I don’t remember any school shootings being committed by a career criminal. Or mall shootings, or restaurant shootings, or workplace shootings. They are committed by people with grudges of some sort with access to automatic weapons. If those people had to stop and reload a traditional rifle or shotgun, there would be time to disarm them and minimize the damage.

5. The majority of suicides are committed with guns. Having little or no access to proper medical care and counseling and plenty of access to cheap firearms is not a good combination for someone suffering from depression. I’m not suicidal, but if I were, having a gun would be more dangerous for me than not having one.

6. And the most ridiculous argument of all is that foreign powers are deterred from invading the US because the populace is so well armed. Funny, but I think all those billions of dollars spent annually on a wonderfully trained military, ICBMs, stealth fighters, aircraft carriers, etc., etc., etc., sort of makes it unnecessary for me to keep a shotgun well-oiled in case the Chinese storm Little DooDah. Hell, if they get this far, I figure I’ll just get out my wok and make them a stir-fry.

Finally, I would like to say that I don't think that the lives of children and other innocents is a fair trade for an individual's right to own assault weapons. And whereas guns don't kill people, bullets certainly do. In 2009 13,756 people were murdered in the US. 9,203 of those were murdered with firearms. Murdered. This doesn't include "justifiable homicides", accidental firearms deaths, suicides or injuries.

intresting

Hypatia, this is a wonderful summary of it all.

And forgive us, but we are over here laughing - and agreeing.

Pretty please, may I have this for ?

I think it should be shared, this wisdom and wit.

I couldn't have expressed my own feelings any better.

Help yourself.

I agree with Dmitri, this should be spread around.

And no, I've never been able to understand why some Americans so vehemently defend their 'right' to bear/own arms?

And those massive school shootings - what's up with that? Why don't we have those in Europe (although I do have a vague memory of some incident)?

'How come' rather than 'Why don't we'

I'm just impressed...

Thanks, Hyp. Much appreciated.

You must be like us - in western North Carolina, everybody gets killed by their relatives. The safest thing is not to live near your relatives.

Too true, Dmitri!

Thank you for this. As you can see, you're now on the schedule for next week's Post.

I am all for the 2nd Amendment despite having never owned a firearm of any kind. I am also for a ban on assault weapons. Hunters don't need to fire more than one round at a time.

Well put, Hyp. Ti, sadly we do - Germany, Scotland and Finland have had school shootings, sadly.

Did a rant on this that went up yesterday - had a bout of provocativeness...
http://cobblestone.wordpress.com/2012/12/18/what-right-is-worth-the-lives-of-120000-children/

One of the things that infuriates me is that those who are so vocal about their right to gun ownership are the same people who have cheerfully relinquished much more important rights under the Patriot Act, like freedom from search and seizure and the right to due process. They're the same people who censor books and magazines and want to keep true science and history out of school books, so they don't care about the first amendment. They don't care about women's rights, the separation of church and state or the rights of workers to collective bargaining and a living wage. But don't take their guns away.

Yep. This. They shriek over any threats to their beloved 2nd amendment ignoring all the rest...

No, not ignoring... belittling and demonizing the ACLU which protects those other amendments.

Makes you think, doesn't it?

Hyp, thanks for those thoughtful comments. It is good to know that not all Americans carry arms, or wish to, which is rather how the picture is painted here but I do think the first step should be the banning of automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles. As you say there is no justification for their use, except perhaps in the military.

One report here made the point that the US does not take care of the mentally ill properly, and it is nearly always someone with a mental illness that does this kind of thing.

Our care of the mentally ill here is pretty diabolical, and the incidents here have generally been someone with mental problems of one sort or another. Guns are far fewer here but it is amazing that people who clearly have obsessions are still able to legally hold guns, so I am not sure we have a right to criticise.

We have problems here with people carrying knives, and of course those are legitimately freely available. Sadly many young disturbed people brought up in front of films, TV and the Internet don't not seem to realise that a gun shot or knife wound can kill. In fact I am not sure they understand the finality of death at all.

Websailor

I keep hearing that people with mental problems are likely to be a big part of the discussion about any possible gun control, as if they're always easily identifiable and are mostly responsible for shootings. This seems like a red herring to me, a diversionary bandwagon being jumped by people like the NRA to keep the status quo.

We hear that some of the multiple shootings of recent years were committed by people who might have been loners, had few friends, might have been obsessed with violent video games or black/death metal or grindcore, might have been bullied at school. As soon as we hear that the police are 'looking for motives' I reckon that's the first image that come mind for a lot of people, but is that enough to classify or diagnose someone as mentally ill? I'm no expert on psychological or psychiatric matters but I think you'd have to section a large proportion of teenagers if that were the case.

There's no justification I can think of for any gun that holds more than one round other than a six-shooter, a pistol with bullets in the handgrip (don't know what the correct term for that is... a clip?) or a bolt action (not sure if that's the right term either) rifle. Anything with a separate magazine has no place in any public domain, carried by any member of the public. There is no good reason for it.

Three kids barely escaped the death penalty because they were misfits who listened to death metal and dressed in black.

http://www.wm3.org/

BG, one of my staff members was obsessed by that case. She joined all the support groups and talked about it off and on for years. It's frightening to realize how close we could be to false imprisonment. One reason I'm pleased that forensics continues to progress is because it protects the innocent, rather than the guilty.