Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David
He's a nice little story lifted right out of today's newspaper. Right here in my fair city a 17 yr. old is on trial for killing his mother and shooting his father. Seems when he was 16 he went out and bought a video game against his parents orders. When they found out the father, a minister, took the game away and put it in a lock box with his 9mm hand gun. Well, the kid found the box, pried it open, went into the living room and told his mom and his right reverend dad to close their eyes because he had a surprise for them. Bang, bang, now mommy's dead and Rev. Dad is shot in the head. The kid could get life without parole. I guess it was his right, but why a minister feels the need to own a hand gun i do not exactly know. I guess he did the right thing keeping it locked up, but that still didn't help. Yep, guns don't kill people, people do, but i would be willing to bet that if the kid didn't find the gun when he retrieved his video game that mommy might just be alive today. From all reports the kid is really sorry for what he did. If the means were absent at his moment of anger this tragedy might have never occurred. So much for a "well regulated militia".  |
Sad story and wrong conclusions. Where is the problem here? The type of society and itīs culture-education? Or the guns? I believe something went very wrong with the education of this boy, as many other boys do not make such kind of things, even having access to fireweapons. Who was responsible for this facts? The persons involved, or the guns?
We cannot make rules over exceptions, even if they have great publicity. How many people have guns in their houses and never get involved in crimes? Let me tell you: the vast majority. How many incidents of this kind do we have? Very few, proportionally, though very publicited. Do we know how many people is saved per year thanks to gun possession? No, we have a very incomplete information, since this is not a matter of interest for the media.
But do not avoid the facts: gun, or any other kind of weapons control, do not stop the crime incidence. The sickness is not in the guns, but in other places. Gun forbidding is a crime in a society where the government cannot garantee the security of the population, and the people need some kind of protection. Somebody here speaks about society taking decisions. But the politicians who take decsisions do not really represent the public will, or the society, they ony attend power groups. Gun manofacturers are not the only who make lobbying. Anti-gun organizations also does, and also the different churches. I wonder if the ones subscribing the idea of the supression of guns, can garantee the security of the rest of the population. Not all people can live in secure cities or areas, protected by their money or their kind of job.
But we talk about many things at the same time. The problem are not the guns, or their type, but who owns them and who uses them. Maybe this is the real control it must be excersised. But the criminal elements always have access to guns, laws or not. Controls never control but the good citizens. Somebody mentioned the efficacy of the police as complement of the gun control. But then again, the problem is in the society, as corruption always will permit the distribution of guns, as it will be a big business in a society where guns are forbidden, as in England. And the result of this new prohibition? The same crime rates, more police and political corruption, a better area of opportunity for the organized crime and itīs subsecuent invigoration and so on. More gun killings for the control of this new market among the gangs, if people demands more guns. Less defense for the rest of the society in front of this wave of new violence. The pave to hell is full of good intentions, as we say.
Letīs make a better and more productive effort, trying to change the social conditions which produces violence. Though, it will take more personal involvement, not as easy as to applaud useless laws from a confortable chair in home. The problem is that erroneous laws are very difficult to erradicate. Much bureaucracy lives of this kind of laws, over the shoulders of the tax payers. More police to control, but less real control. Less liberties for the honest individuals and more powerful mob gangs (and politicians).
By the way, I am not an anarchist. I worked for several years in the training of police officers, forensics and lawyers for the General Attorneyīs Office of the State (in Mexico, it has the responsability of the investigation and prosecution of crime, and it is a different institution than in the USA). And I am also a certificated trainer on "Weapons and Police Shooting" by the National System of Public Security, which is a federal and local network of all the institutions dedicated to justice enforcement. I have a pragmatic view of this subjects because I know the conditions of this area. And also, I am alive because I had a fireweapon to defend myself as a private person against an armed attacker. And I wish all the decent people, like Celtan, could have the same opportunity in the same conditions (are you decent, Celtan?)
