The Parkland Shooting Galvanized people across the country demand that elected officials think a bit about gun violence and pray about it.
The signs are not promising. Can anything be done? Sure – but probably not by politicians.
Governments everywhere are growing in impotence due to a host of tectonic global shifts, while the world is polarizing into two increasingly hostile tribes that hold very different orientations toward territory, tradition, and force. A dwindling minority of Americans – largely, Republicans – own guns, while only 3 percent have the lion’s share of high-powered firearms. But in that 3 percent are the only people who are members of our Luddite Governing Party Economics and politics to be removed cares about.
Ultimately, they – not most Americans – favor background checks, banning assault weapons, and set the nation’s policy of gun-like on almost all issues. Thus, not surprisingly, in the days after the massacre at his school, Parkland students watched from the gallery as their legislators voted to hold any debate this year by force of arms. There will almost certainly be no meaningful government action against gun violence.
Gun proponents argue that their status is protected by the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms”. Whether or not the constitution actually grants an unlimited right to itself, say, intercontinental ballistic missiles (which the Free Dictionary cites as examples of “weapons”), however, limits Government Total reduction does not mean as a solution anyone Solution. For example, the First Amendment’s assurances of “no law” repealing the freedom of expression are more absolute than the second, with its qualifying language regarding “well regulated militias”: you have more on the street It has the constitutional right to contact anyone inside. Dishonest language, tell them that they deserve to be attacked or killed.
Yet hardly any of us choose to exercise that right – except that the incumbent president, who does so in most of his rallies – because we know it is wrong. In recent times, abusive speech was quite rare in this country, not because it was illegal, but because we had a culture that sufficiently stigmatized it. There is a difference between what you have the right to do, and what is right to do.
It is the latter – the question of what kind of society there is, what kind of government we do not want – on which we should pay more attention. As i wrote here Since the last mass shooting, America does not have a culture of violence because of our lax gun laws: We have gun laws because we live in a culture that actively supports gun violence. This – and earlier – can be changed.
Gun control and gun rights cartoons
As Krishnadeva Calamur noted in The Atlantic Parkland, Switzerland is the only country in the world to have confronted us both on the level of firearms possession (and again, not all of it closely) and the laxity of its gun laws – yet, the Swiss has experienced a mass Haven’t done shooting since 2001. Why the difference? The Swiss have a “culture of responsibility and security”; America, not so much. Of course, there is one section of American society that has a heavy concentration of guns, yet virtually no firing: the military. The culture there – unlike gun proponents now insists on civilian streets and schools – is to heavily regulate their use and not carry them everywhere (you know, like the real word in the Constitution). Very simple, safe societies, though they may have guns, do not glorify and fetish them.
Legal codes are more often codified than changing the status quo. An earlier generation of young Americans ended a war and entered an era of greater tolerance by changing society than by changing politicians. Just need to focus here.
Conservatives have long used commercial pressure against stores selling dirty magazines or, say, sports leagues whose players express non-conservative views, despite the First Amendment. Despite the Second Amendment, most Americans who want to stem the rising tide of washing guns in this country can do the same: initiate boycotts against sporting goods shops and others like Walmart that pump firearms into their communities We do. Or films that glorify their use. Or advertisements that endorse such films or TV shows, or producers who sell their products through outlets that also sell guns.
Those who invest in the stock market may insist that mutual funds take their money out of gun stocks, and that anyone with pension funds – especially millions of school teachers in this country – own funds. Can demand Since Congress has banned public funding of research to reduce gun violence (on the contrary, say, reducing automobile deaths, on which we have made dramatic progress without removing cars), private efforts to do so Can – Something to be reminded of for all those profitable insurance companies.
Successful community programs around the country have called for parents to allow voluntary searches of troubled children’s rooms by school and police officers, which would be short-circulating Columbine and Parkland. Most shooters increasingly know their intentions on social media; It warns not only all of us, but also the government. 39 State Legislatures – You know, those who think that children need more rather than fewer guns to be safe – prohibit guns in their own buildings; Owners of every business and household can articulate whether they feel the same way about their qualities: as nonviolent movements around the world have demonstrated, the more people display their ideas through simple statements such as colorful gestures Do, as many others are involved in it, as long as the equipment overwhelms the weapons of moral force.
Every American should be able to choose their home with weapons if necessary (despite the evidence that a gun only makes their owner more secure). But stocking and branding military-grade weapons in most communities across this country does not make you a hero. You are at risk from this. We do not need a government to make us socially and economically unacceptable.