Tuesday, November 21, 2017

Are Mass Murders Uniquely American?

I noticed this post from Clayton Cramer over at Of Arms and the Law on Sunday, but have not had time until now to post it here. I used to read Clayton Camer all the time, but sadly of late I have not been as wide ranging due to limited time to do so. Cramer has an interesting take on the whole problem of mass murder when he asks Is Mass Murder Exceptionally American?

Cramer points out that none other than Barack Hussein Obama claimed that mass shootings and mass murder doesn't happen elsewhere in the world.  He implied that we Americans are particularly bloodthirsty, and therefore need to have our guns taken away by our betters.  But is that really the case?
The recent tragedies in Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs, Texas, are causing many Americans to wonder, “Is this kind of mass murder peculiarly American?”
The facts suggest otherwise.
There is nothing exceptionally American about mass murder or even firearms mass murder —even though some of the rhetoric accompanying these tragic events portrays the U.S. as singularly plagued by them.
After defining what is meant by the term "mass murder" and clearly excluding the genocides of the 20th Century committed by governments against their own people, Cramer goes on to document a number of mass killings that have taken place around the world. Moreover, he shows that even in places with gun control of the sort the gun grabbers so want to do in our country, that mass murders with firearms still occur. But the other thing that comes to light is that if a person has murder in their heart, anything can be turned into a weapon: vehicles, knives, clubs, it really doesn't matter.

The gun grabbers are generally aware of these statistics as well.  They know their arguments will not stand up to the facts.  So what is their motive?  Frankly, I believe the Left wants to take away the guns from the average citizen in order to gain a monopoly of force that will allow them to dictate their desires on this great country.  Sure, we could protest, but they don't have to listen.  Everything would then be like Obamacare where they imposed it over our protests, and even continue to keep it even after we elected a new government.  The Second Amendment is the only real threat the people have!  And then only if we are willing to use it. We may not yet be willing to use the Second Amendment, but as my last post makes clear, it is inevitable unless something changes.

2 comments:

  1. Was talking to an Australian. He said the very conservative in that country are
    equivalent to our progressives. But they
    don't like idiots with guns nor massacres, so the right wing fixed the
    Aussies problem. Here, a
    bumpstock aficionado mows em down and congress wants to pass concealed carry
    from/to any state. As long as that wimp
    LaPierre runs the country, we won't have to worry about pushing the 2nd Amendment
    down the throats of the majority of people who have no interest in firearms.
    Really, fellow grumpy old man, I wouldn't worry in the least, no one wants to grab your guns; they are just
    upset with all the freefire zones in what passes for a democracy. T'aint your
    fault, we know that...but the idiots with
    high powered toys make you look bad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear BB-Idaho,

    I hate to be disagreeable, but in fact the gun grabbers in this country want to do what they did in Australia. There they did a mandatory "buy back." But as you will realize, since the government never owned them, they couldn't actually "buy back" anything, and since it was mandatory, it was hardly a voluntary effort. The fact that many turned them in to save the government the effort of going house to house and attempting to take the guns proves nothing about here. I would expect that here there might be a lot of noncompliance.

    While I personally would never buy a bump stock, and would have no use for one, at this point, one can not grant one more inch to the gun grabbers. The idea of saying that because one nut committed a crime with bump stocks, then they must be banned is akin to a kindergarten teacher saying that since one person tossed a spit ball, the entire class must stay in from recess. We are not children, and we should not be treated like children.

    As far as LaPierre "ruling the country," I literally laughed out loud. Blaming the NRA for keeping the gun grabbers at bay is a farce. The NRA is the reason we have the various gun control acts we do have. It is the reason we can not give another inch.

    I have been involved in the gun debates since 1977 when I bought my first revolver. The NRA was instrumental in the passage of Gun Control Act of 1968. As a result, the government knows about every gun I have ever purchased, even though they theoretically should not know. Is this a problem? If the government ever turns truly tyrannical, they know where to find my guns. That is not what the 2nd Amendment was supposed to protect.

    Be safe, and yes, I still adore listening to the Seekers.

    Wade

    ReplyDelete