Why? (Continued)

How unoriginal --that "question" was already "asked" in post 36. Try to keep up.

 

The following is taken from American Gun Facts: A Factual Look At Guns In America

The top two countries having gun ownership is America and Switzerland.

The top two counties with gun fatalities are Honduras and El Salvador --where there is restrictive control.

Honduras has a population of 8.2 million. It has the highest homicide rate in the world. Citizens are banned from owning guns.

Switzerland has 8.2 million citizens. It has the lowest homicide rate in the world. Guns are not banned in that country -- citizens are encouraged to but them.

The most violent country in the EU is the UK.
There are 2,034 violent crmes per 100,000 people each year. The UK has violent assaults every two minutes.

The crime rate in the UK is higher than 16 other industralized nations --including America.

America, in contrast has 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people each year.

In the U.S.A. 606 violent criminals were killed by police.

But 1,527 violent criminals are killed by citizens.

 

Nobody asked you. Go chase yourself.

 

Time for you to take your pills.

 

I wouldn’t be throwing rocks there OCD boy.

 

Statistically speaking, more heterogeneous populations tend to have more violent crime, and poverty tends to increase the rates of crime overall with a proportionally higher rate of violence. The Western Hemisphere is more diverse than Europe, our collective national identities much younger and our concepts of what it means to be a citizen are necessarily different than those in Europe.

Of course, perceived homogeneity or heterogeneity are largely psychological constructs, so perhaps violence would be reduced if by some means, our collective national identity were solidified?

 

No. That implies that in times past, when we had a more unified national identity, our forebears weren't capable of free thought. I think it's more accurate to assume that they believed that personal sacrifices for the collective good were worthwhile.

Also, individualism is overrated.

And I say that as a person who prefers to work alone rather than in teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Taken from an article (10/2/2013) called Are Guns the Problem? by Walter Williams.

"By 1910, the National Rifle Association had succeeded in establishing seventy-three NRA-affiliated high-school rifle clubs. The 1911 second edition of the Boy Scout Handbook made qualification in NRA's junior marksmanship program
a prerequisite for obtaining a Boy Scout of America merit badge in marksmanship. In 1918, the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. established its own Winchester Junior Rifle Corps. The program grew to 135,000 members by 1925. In New York City, gun clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training and Stuyvesant high schools. With so many guns in the hands of youngsters, did we see today's level of youth violence?"

 

Are guns, knives, bow and arrows, ropes, hammers even in the hands of a depressed person a good idea? If a person exhibits anti social (perhaps violent) behavior, what then?
Can anyone, after observing mood swings with a neighbor, report this to “Big Brother” for further observation without repercussion? Can we potentially ruin a persons very life by these actions?

 

Continuing with a bit more (certainly not all) of the article:

"What about gun availability? Catalogs and magazines from the 1940s, '50s, and '60s were full of gun advertisements directed to children and parents. For example, 'What Every Parent Should Know When a Boy or Girl Wants a Gun' was published by the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The 1902 Sears mail-order catalog had thirty-five pages of firearm advertisements. People just sent in their money, and a firearm was shipped. For most of our history, a person could simply walk into a hardware store, virtually anywhere in our country, and buy a gun. Few states bothered to have to have even age restrictions on buying guns."

 

If individualism is overrated, then what does America really have to offer the world? We have always had the distinction of leading through innovation, taking risks, being outspoken and allot of times being rewarded for it. So is that now a thing of the past? And if so, what are the implications moving forward?

 

Yes, absolutely and you don’t have to go back there that far to recall a time at least a gun was in every home... they were useful tools, for varment eradication, hunting, sports like trap shooting etc. Right up until the time your neighbor shoots his wife then himself, or the kid/young man down the block has a meltdown and randomly shoots 5 passers by. Then we get exposed to the other side of gun use. Now the question becomes, do we as a distinct American society choose to accept it as our own distinguishing characteristic...ie, elevated gun violence or do we do something about it?

 

Ideas are the domain of the individual, historically. Execution is the domain of the unified group.

The US would not have become the US if a number of men hadn't, for a greater cause, repurposed their individual talents for the benefit of the many.

African-American history would be very different if individuals hadn't found ways to align their abilities with the furtherance of a goal that they themselves would not realize in their own lifetimes.

Neither Nazi Germany nor the Empire of Japan were fully prepared for the unified force of the United States, and millions of Americans who "more than self their country loved...." and were willing to sweat, bleed and die to preserve it and its ideals.

The United States of America's greatness stems not from everyone doing solely what was in their own best interest: that brand of individualism has never caused nations to prosper. The United States was great when individuals found ways to use their individual gifts to serve a transcendent cause.

 

I totally agree... and we also allow for ingenuity & innovation which distinguishes us as both distinct and focused. I totally believe in our American system of capitalism that rewards hard work, intelligence and creativity.

 

So what is now being done to address this?

 

Let us not forget that it was also the NRA which fought those "Jim Crow" laws in the south that made it virtually impossible for the freed slaves to own firearms. The NRA seeks to uphold everyone's constitutional rights and I am a proud Lifetime member.