Sick of it all

[pegkerr]

Two men were shot to death in the middle of the night about a block and a half from my house last night. Apparently, there was an altercation at a party. Another woman was taken to the hospital. The girls could see the police tape wrapped around the trees, sealing off the block of the crime scene from where they got on the school bus. I drove by there this morning on my way to work. If I'd been a half an hour earlier, I would have seen the two corpses, one in the street, and one on a lawn. The girls were out there early enough that they could have seen the corpses, if they'd just walked down a half a block. I pray to God that they did not.

This week, two high school students were shot in a Minnesota school. One died, one is in critical condition. The shooter, a freshman, is by all accounts unable to explain why he did it.

Yesterday, a woman brought a gun into the county building a few blocks from where I work and shot to death her cousin, whom she'd been wrangling with in a probate case, and her cousin's attorney.

I am sick of news of violence. I am sick of news about guns.

Most of all, I am sick of my state, which just passed a conceal carry law, which will ensure that we'll have more guns out there. And I'm sick to death of my country, that allows things like this to happen, that seems to expect it, and perversely, accepts it as a regrettable but necessary price we have to pay for the "freedom" of the wonderful right to own guns.

Edited to add I didn't say that these crimes occurred because of the conceal carry law. The jury is still out on this question, although I'm inclined to think that with conceal carry, there are going to be more guns out there floating around, which can be filched by an impulsive kid or angry spouse, whether or not the permit holder is law-abiding.

But what I'm getting at is my own perceptions, my own personal visceral revulsion, looking the world around me, which has really gone up in the last several months. Security, as B says, also involves states of mind. Do I feel more secure since conceal carry was passed? I look at all those signs on just about every building I enter, I look at the news, and I look at the police tape a block and a half from my home, and I say, hell no. I don't.

And I absolutely hate it.

Comments

you don't know me...

[ishbel.livejournal.com]

.. but Amen to that.

[ari-o.livejournal.com]

Ugh. How awful.

We live in a city and this stuff happens frequently and we've driven past shootings and heard them only blocks away.

And this is Cambridge - the "People's Rebublic" bah.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

Man. Amen. I won't add to your news of guns, but, well, I know where you're comin' from.

[sternel.livejournal.com]

...i don't suppose you'd consider ever running for office? seeing as how people who fully engage their brains are such a rarity in politics, and always to be encouraged...

::hugs peg:: so much for the wonder of urban/suburban life, aye? i hope your girls didn't see it either. some things i think you're just never grown up enough to deal with.

[camfangrrl.livejournal.com]

Most of all, I am sick of my state, which just passed a conceal carry law, which will ensure that we'll have more guns out there. And I'm sick to death of my country, that allows things like this to happen, that seems to expect it, and perversely, accepts it as a regrettable but necessary price we have to pay for the "freedom" of the wonderful right to own guns.

Would it have been better if all the people above had lived in Sweden and been stabbed as the Swedish foreign minister was, or were bludgeoned to death as a man in France was for defending his son, or were strangled as a 17-year-old was in Mexico, or were beheaded as is done in Saudi Arabia, or were poisoned as a son did to his mother in Australia, or were electrocuted or put through shredders as happened in Iraq? I don't think so.

There is not a country on this earth, and not a time that ever existed, when a person who wanted another person dead could not find the way to accomplish the task. Even if guns were banned from your state, there are still plenty of weapons in the form of chemicals, ligatures, knives, even vehicles and hands, that can be legally obtained to deal out the death you want to protect your children from. It's always been true, it'll always be true.

[pegkerr.livejournal.com]

I'm not arguing that people in the United States are any less murderous than people in other countries. In fact we're 23rd on the list. The other methods you mention (except poisoning, I'll admit) require that the murderer get closer to the victim. Guns give the murderer a much greater advantage.

But we're fourth on the list for murders by firearms. Why the hell do we make it easy for people here?

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Although if you look at the list, it's a pretty sorry array of countries on top of us. And if you notice, the countries from which the previous commenter produced all of those examples were mostly not above the U.S. on the list. Be careful of people who respond to statistics with examples; it's cheating.

B

And a pretty sorry array on top of us here

[(Anonymous)]

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_ass_vic

The US is outpaced in victims of violent crimes by the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Finland, Denmark, France, Belgium, and Sweden.

Beware of people who only use selected statistics about one kind of violent crime; it's cheating.

[aynjel.livejournal.com]

[ Why the hell do we make it easy for people here? ]

Because we're a country that was founded by a revolution. Because our forefathers, before that revolution, were denied the ability to arm and defend themselves against their government, and they wanted to ensure that should there be a need for us to do so again, that we could.

It's hard to take away a few rights. Because it becomes impossible to draw the line and the more rights that are taken, the harder it is to get them back.

I've got to agree with what was said elsewhere; I don't think any of these people had conceal-carry permits.

I also find guns to be amazingly depersonalized weapons and agree that that's a problem. I also think that many of the people who own guns are amazingly under-educated about gun safety. I honestly don't think taking away guns is the answer. I think educating the people who own them--both in their use, and in a safe and appropriate way to store them--is probably the way to go. And cracking down on illegal sales of weapons. I also don't think gun registration is the way to go, either, because once there's a list of who has what, it can be taken away.

I think this is probably the only issue, politically, that drops me into the republican camp.

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

"Because we're a country that was founded by a revolution. Because our forefathers, before that revolution, were denied the ability to arm and defend themselves against their government, and they wanted to ensure that should there be a need for us to do so again, that we could."

I've read Congressional discussion of what is now the Second Amendment, and no right of rebellion was discussed. Might well have been discussed during the state ratification process, of course.

What _was_ discussed was a need for the militia, so that a professional army wouldn't be required except under extraordinary circumstances. Which is also why military budgets are for only two years -- we weren't supposed to have a professional army for longer than two years at most. That didn't work out as hoped.

[silme.livejournal.com]

And, of course, we can't forget that people in the US still are bludgeoned, knived and poisoned in the US -- in addition to all of the gun deaths that exist there. :(

I must look at the list and see who's above the US. I'm an American who's moved to the UK. Murder by firearms is still rare here, thank goodness. And the murder of the Swedish foreign minister -- well, if it truly is the fluke it's claimed to me, it could have been a lot worse had he possessed a gun rather than merely a knife. How many more might have been hurt/killed?

Bowling for Columbine makes a good case in point regarding Canada. Lots of guns, few murders with them. What is it with the US? Good question. :(

[aynjel.livejournal.com]

[ What is it with the US? ]

And that's the problem. It's pointing at guns and gun ownership and saying, "This is the problem," that irks me. I don't know that I'll ever own a gun, but I want to have the choice. (And believe me, if I were to ever buy a gun, I'd make certain I knew how and when to use it, and keep it locked up the rest of the time.) I think that there are other deeper-rooted social issues than whether or not we should own guns that somehow make violence an "appropriate solution" to problems. And I think that until we understand and address those problems and issues, that it's going to be far too easy to point at guns (and conceal-carry permits) and make that the demon.

[silme.livejournal.com]

Well, I've never owned a gun and I don't want to. And over here, unless I start hunting, it might be difficult for me to obtain one anyhow. (And I'm anti-fox hunt. I don't have a problem with hunting -- just the way the fox hunt is run.)

On the other hand, I don't see why hunters and other enthusiasts can't keep guns at their gun clubs, etc. Why do they need them at home?

When I taught in Colorado, I wasn't that far from Columbine... Our faculty and our students knew too many people there, including the teacher who died saving students.

[aynjel.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying that everyone should own a gun. I just wanted to clarify that. I just think that the people who want to own a gun should have a choice in the matter (though I do think they need to educate themselves thoroughly before they make that purchase).

I'd be perfectly content for gun-owners to keep their guns in gun-safes at appropriate places (like hunting clubs, or firing ranges, or whatever). But in a culture where fast-food is the norm and "gimme now" seems to be the motto, I think the best I could practically hope for is for people to keep their guns in gun-safes at home. The problem is that many people who own guns don't have gun-safes. In the horror stories of, "Let me show you my dad's gun!" the gun isn't always the problem. The lack of safety as far as the gun is concerned and the lack of control over that weapon is the problem: no gun-safe, loaded wherever it's "hidden", etc.

My sister used to go skeet shooting out in the desert. Fun, harmless sport. She kept her shotgun in the gun safe in her friend's garage with her friend's dad's shotguns. They only came out in the desert, and only got aimed at the skeet.

My office was close to Columbine when that happened. Again, I think that there were deeper-rooted issues behind that. It's just easier to point at the guns as the demons. I realize that if they hadn't had guns, that it's more likely no one would've died, but I think that there were probably other problems before they got their hands on the guns (which they probably saw as an "acceptable solution" to those problems).

[silme.livejournal.com]

Oh definitely, there were many problems with the boys at Columbine. However, had they had knives, it wouldn't have been nearly as dramatic, I should think -- just as you said. But yes. I've taught for 21 years. There are always lots of other issues regarding teenagers -- so many issues. It's amazing a lot of them are still alive, to be honest. :(

I am sort of happy the only fast food I have near me is fish and chips and kebabs. ;) It's 20-some miles to any American fast-food type place. And the nearest drive-in is probably about 50-60 miles away, if not further. :) I have a different perspective of the US living here.

[aynjel.livejournal.com]

I really think finding and understanding and dealing with underlying issues is the answer in most situations of criminal violence. In restructuring society so violence is not seen as an acceptable solution to every problem.

And I totally understand having a different perspective. I spent 6 weeks just outside of Amsterdam for business a few years ago and there was one "fast food" place nearby that I knew of. And it wasn't a drive-through and it wasn't a chain. Most of the restaurants were of the sit-down variety and a dinner took several hours. A delightful change of pace initially, but maddening when I didn't have the option of anything else (not even cooking my own food) two weeks into the trip.

[snippy]

I think more gun safety (and gun use) education is an excellent idea. I think it should be taught in public schools. I was taught gun safety and use as part of physical education/gym class, in high school, in a public high school in Oregon in the late 1970s.

[cakmpls.livejournal.com]

Because of a discussion about the concealed-carry law on a mailing list, I wrote my position paper on guns. One item is:
If I could magically change the universe, all handguns would disappear from the face of the earth, never to return, with the possible exception of historical collectibles that were unalterably inoperable (remember, I have magic powers) and guns kept at target ranges where access was under foolproof control (magic powers).

So I'm no gun nut. But I'd be willing to bet that not one of the people who committed these crimes had a concealed-carry permit. I don't like the idea of people going armed against their fellow citizens, but I will be very surprised if the concealed-carry law causes a rise in the crime rate.

[misia.livejournal.com]

As a Baltimorean -- and we have one of the highest rates of gun violence in the country -- I feel your pain.

I also agree with you that the average citizen has no reason to own any article whose sole purpose is to blow holes through the flesh of other living creatures. It's neither ethical nor necessary, nor do guns serve a single purpose aside from a) inciting the fear of the injury and/or death they are b) exclusively designed to create.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

I actually believed a lot of the US arguments pro-guns until the 2000 election. If the people having the guns makes the politicians honest for fear of a popular uprising, then the occasional regrettable murder or accident would be a price that could be paid. It isn't my country, but I could buy that as an argument, and out it came as an argument every time.

Well.

[aynjel.livejournal.com]

The problem with using the 2000 elections as the "make or break" point of those arguments is that the republicans are, primarily, the ones with the guns. The republicans are, primarily, the people who are making certain that the right to own a gun is there. And it was the democrats who lost. For the most part, democrats have been tighter and stricter with gun control issues than the republicans, so there's no real question of popular uprising from that quarter.

There was something under contest in a NJ election (I believe) following the fallout from the 2000 election, where a democrat 'winner' might've been overturned by the courts and my comment was along the lines of needing a revolution if that happened, except that the democrats aren't the ones who are armed.

Unfortunately, for the most part, we've got an apathetic and uncertain society which has mostly forgotten that the reason behind the right to bear arms was not deer season or duck season.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

"Unfortunately, for the most part, we've got an apathetic and uncertain society which has mostly forgotten that the reason behind the right to bear arms was not deer season or duck season."

Wow. You're actually serious.

B

[daedala.livejournal.com]

Back in the day, hunting rifles made us equal to the redcoat army, more or less. The guns they had for the most part weren't even that good, I don't think. Rifled bores were top-of-the-line technology then.

What about the citizen's right to bear WMDs?

[kalikanzara.livejournal.com]

If we count poison gas as a WMD, all it takes is a trip to Cub. No ID check, no registration, no waiting period.

[daedala.livejournal.com]

Sure. And remember, we can build incendiary devices at the Skymall!

[snippy]

It's ethical to me as a Jew, whose religion obligates me to prevent another person from taking my life, using the least means necessary but granting that it might include killing the other person. The Talmud says, When a man comes to kill you, kill him first. As a physically weak woman, smaller than the average man and without the upper body strength, I find a gun to be an equalizer that might allow me to perform the morally-obligatory task of defending myself against an attacker.

Guns are fun. Target shooting is fun. I even enjoy cleaning the guns. Going to gun shows and seeing interesting hardware is exciting.

The average citizen needs guns because criminals will always have guns. Some crimes are stopped by law-abiding, legally carrying citizens; at least one school shooting was stopped when a staff member went to his car, retrieved his legal gun, and threatened the teen shooter, who gave up.

[magentamn.livejournal.com]

My personal opinion is that it is the attitude more than the guns. Not that I am in favor of concealed carry or guns in general, but, as someone else commented, people kill each other in many ways. What worries me most is that there is the attitude that violence is an acceptable way to settle problems, that this is a normal part of society.

Don't worry too much about what your kids may have seen. Your distress can be communicated to your kids, and they will magnify it, because it's MOM who is worried. There were events in my life that were traumatic not because of the event, but because my mother was so upset by it.

One response you could have is to write about this more than in LJ. I've always loved the song "Imagine" because I think we will never have a truly peaceful society until we imagine it first.
Of course, plots need conflict. How can you write fiction in and about a peaceful society?

Just a few thoughts

[sraun]

I agree with you - the primary problem is not the weapons, it is the idea that violence is an acceptable way to settle problems. This somehow - and I'm not certain how - ties in to the 'no one is responsible' aspect of current American society - it's always someone else's fault. I don't know what to do about either of these - any suggestions?

Someone else commented about guns being distance weapons - I will not dispute that they are. However, how many hand-gun killings take place at such close range that a knife would have been nearly as useful? I'd be willing to bet that, for a lot of killings like the ones this morning, a knife would have been as useful.

Thinking about Carol's post - I hold by the old NRA line, "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Yes, we could ban guns. That would mean that a law-abiding citizen would have no remotely reasonable alternative to a criminal with a gun other than capitulation. And given the typical criminal mentality, the chances of getting injured or killed anyway are too high for my comfort.

Unless you want to make it an automatic death penalty for any crime committed with a gun? Regardless of whether the gun was fired, or even displayed? I don't think we want to go down that road, either.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

Knives have numerous other uses beyond hurting people, though. I agree that with the appropriate mindset almost anything can be used to hurt someone; I do however see a difference between objects that can be used to do so and tools designed specifically for the purpose.

speaking of the second amendment

[(Anonymous)]

Perhaps your gun-carrying readers would like to tell us all a little bit about those well-regulated militias they are signed up with.

[cedarlibrarian.livejournal.com]

Color me unpopular, but I have to say I disagree with you. I was raised in an NRA family. Guns and gun safety have always been a huge part of my life, and on the few nights when the police have been out hunting for the criminal du jour in my parents' neighborhood, I have been very glad that my father owns a gun, knows how to properly use it, and would not hesitate to use it on an intruder.

Unfortunately, it's not going to be the criminals who adhere to the concealed-weapon laws. They're going to go on as they always have, but personally, I'd feel safer knowing I could carry a gun in Minnesota and defend myself if the need arose. I'm generally not physically capable of taking out any kind of attacker, and a gun would make me feel better about being able to defend myself. Crimes where guns are used, like school shootings, go deeper than the guns themselves.

[pegkerr.livejournal.com]

Color me unpopular, but I have to say I disagree with you.

Well, the whole point of my entry (I thought), which I tried to make absolutely crystal-clear by re-editing, was simply "I am absolutely sick of gun violence."

Do you find that you disagree with that?

I would hope that this would be a point where the pro-gun and anti-gun forces can respectfully agree, despite their differences, and work to find common ground from there. There is too much gun-related violence in American society.

So what do we do about it? "More education" say the pro-gun forces. "Less guns" say the gun control side.

Is there any compromise? And most importantly, what is the way to lower the body count the most reliably, while still protecting essential rights?

What really bugs me about the pro-gun side is that it seems (to me) to be saying, "Well, yeah, there are a lot of deaths from guns, but hey, that's the price we have to pay for a free society. We can't change that because our second amendment rights are too important to mess with." More important than what? I wonder. More important than a lot of grieving men, women and children? More important than the astronomical costs that gun deaths cause this country?

That seems to me to be a failure of imagination.

[cedarlibrarian.livejournal.com]

My bad for not being more specific. I meant that I disagreed with you on the concealed carry laws. Believe me, my NRA-flag-waving self is the last person who wants to see gun violence. I don't know of anyone who's really a violence advocate.

In some ways, the gun argument makes me think of the PATRIOT Act argument. Both pose a question of what we're willing to give up in order to, in theory, save lives. I feel the same way on both, but this is just MHO: I'd rather die in a terrorist attack or a shooting than have people's library records invaded or their legally registered and used guns taken away. I'm just one life, but civil liberties and the Second Amendment extend to all. Of course, I can't speak for anyone else.

One thing Dad always went on about is the specific wording of the Second Amendment, that it doesn't say that the right of the people to keep and bear arms should not be infringed, it shall not be infringed. As a law-abiding citizen, I know that I could save my own life with a gun. Criminals will do what they want regardless of the laws, and as a law-abiding citizen, I am the one who pays for the consequences of their actions. I am living proof that gun education and a little common sense really do work, but I'm also not violent. I'm also frustrated by the lack of answers. Sigh.

[cakmpls.livejournal.com]

More important than what? I wonder. More important than a lot of grieving men, women and children? More important than the astronomical costs that gun deaths cause this country?

Your question "More important than what?" should be asked regarding all rights. Rights will always be in conflict. "What are the tradeoffs?" the brilliant minnehahaB. asks in analyzing security. It's an important question with regard to rights, too. What rights is one willing to give up in order to have fewer deaths from terrorism, or what risk of deaths from terrorism will one accept in order to keep the right to privacy? What rights is one willing to give up in order to be safer from crime, or what risk of crime will one accept in order to keep the right to be free from unreasonable search? What rights is one willing to give up so that children won't be exposed to pornography, or what risks of children seeing pornography is one willing to accept in order to keep the right to free speech? In this case, what is one willing to give up in order to have fewer gun deaths?

why private guns matter

[(Anonymous)]

"More important than a lot of grieving men, women and children? More important than the astronomical costs that gun deaths cause this country?"

Yes. In the 20th century, the average individual was 513 times more likely to be murdered by their own government than by an individual criminal, and 20.53 times more likely to die that way than be killed in a war or civil war. This includes the famous mass murders in Germany, the Soviet Union, China and Cambodia, but also those in other, less well-known mass killings by the governments of Mexico, Spain, France, Poland, Turkey, and Bangladesh. 41 of the 191 UN member states have massacred more than 1% of their population at some point in the last 100 years.

Why didn't this happen in the USA? Because of the people's "liberty teeth", their guns. Imagination works two ways, you know.

Also, banning guns solves nothing. China has had total gun control and a totalitarian government for fifty years. In one month, a massive gun sweep netted more than 120,000 private guns. The NRA slogan may sound trite, but it is demonstrably true.

culture of violence

[adrian-turtle.livejournal.com]

I'm sick of it, too. It's hard to see so much violence and
death, in one context or another, without eventually being
affected by it. Whether it makes you sick, or numb, or angry,
or frightened.

I see the gun controversy as a sort of a lightning rod for
much more important, much more complicated issues, that can
be harder to talk about. It's easier to talk about carrying
guns than it is to talk about how people can make themselves
safer. It's easier to talk about restricting gun access than
to talk seriously about where law enforcement efforts tend
to break down. (Different communities have different
problems. But relatively few places are seriously troubled
by inadequately draconian laws to enforce.)

I think the underlying problem is that we have a culture that
glorifies violence. Especially here in the US. It's not just
that guns are available...it's the way all the heroes use them.
The Minutemen with their hunting rifles. All the soldiers who
died on both sides of our Civil War. The frontiersmen who
settled the Wild West - brave loners with handguns! Glamorous
mobsters, fighting dim or clever FBI men, depending on the
story...

It's not just the guns. It's the incredibly pervasive ideas
that violence can solve any kind of problem, and that violence
is admirable and glorious. "Bring it on." The local toddler
goes to a (rather unusual) preschool that encourages non-violent
play. As well as trying to teach things like conflict resolution
and anger management for (absolute) beginners. This seems deeply
weird to me. Will it help? I dunno. The group may be too small
to judge anything by it. On a gut level...I welcome it like the
distant sight of water in the desert.

[uminomamori.livejournal.com]

My mom teaches at Rocori High School. In general we know a lot more about it than what's on the news, but as for why, what you've heard is pretty much all that's out there. They interviewed some of the kid's friends on MPR last week. All anyone can come up with is that he was being picked on a lot and was specifically going after two kids (one of which wasn't there that day), and the other was an accident (if you can call it that, but Aaron was in the wrong place and the wrong time) It's been a depressing week and I don't even know any of these people.

Simple solution

[(Anonymous)]

Work to repeal the 2nd Amendment, and replace it with an amendment prohibiting the civilian possession of firearms. If guns are the problem, go to the source of the problem.

Simpler solution

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

Pass a Federal law which requires anyone who legally carries a gun -- owned by them, or owned by an employer -- to be a militia member. And to show up at least once a month for militia practice.

Feelings

[(Anonymous)]

If it's about feelings, maybe what you need to do is fix your feelings.

Re: Feelings

[(Anonymous)]

No. Unfair. Her feelings are the responsibility of everybody else.

Re: Feelings

[pegkerr.livejournal.com]

Um . . . fix my feelings so that murder by gunfire doesn't bother me anymore?

I think not. I want to remain a civilized person.

Re: Feelings

[(Anonymous)]

http://www.startribune.com/stories/468/4127170.html
Charges filed against man accused of double homicide
The Associated Press

Published October 4, 2003

MNDoubleHomicide



MINNEAPOLIS - A 29-year-old man faces murder charges in connection with a double homicide that occurred during a late night house party earlier this week.

Samuel Anderson remains in the Hennepin County jail in lieu of $1 million bail on two counts of second-degree murder in the deaths of Francis Martin and Derrick Strong, both 24.

The criminal complaint described the homicides this way:

A man was having an after-hours party Tuesday with about 10 people when Martin and Strong came by uninvited. After a confrontation, the two men were asked to leave. Meanwhile, the man who lives in the house took a gun from an upstairs safe, loaded it and put it in the living room.

The men returned later. Police were told that when a woman opened the door for them, she was assaulted with a hammer.

According to the charges against Anderson, he took the gun from the living room and left the house through a side door.

Martin was shot on a sidewalk in front of the house. Strong, also known as Derrick Whitefeather, was shot in the street next to Martin's car, which was still running. A witness told police the men were unarmed.

Information from: Star Tribune