Arizonalainen kommentti aihetta liipaten

[Trilisser]

Olen tässä keskustellut aiheeseen liittyen erään arizonalaisen puolitutun kanssa. Hän on päälle 50-vuotias, entinen jenkkiarmeijan sotilas, selkeästi pro-gun, samoin selvästi laajakatseisempi kuin keskivertojenkki, ja monissa yleisissä näkymyksissä vaikkapa hg:n vasemmalla puolella, reilustikin.

Näin:"[kommenttina miksi etelän osavaltioissa on noin kolminkertainen henkirikostiheys Kanadan rajaa vasten oleviin osavaltioihin verrattuna] I see vast differences in cultural sensibilities. Things like the unconscious use of safety measures (Seat belts, compliance with Worker Safety Laws, Child protection, etc.) are glaringly absent with many Latin American immigrants. However the same situation is prevalent with the White and Black poor in the South, Appalachia, and Urban Slums. Whatever the ethnic background, low economic status equals more danger from violence and hazards. Urban areas certainly have higher violent crime rates. I cannot help but think the more you crowd people together the more violent they become. It may be illuminating to look at the ways people entertain themselves and their potential for committing or experiencing violence and homicide. Subcultures that entertain themselves with violence are probably more prone to violence, especial when the persons enjoying the violence are not experiencing it upon their own bodies.
The more available guns are the more they are used for suicide, murder, etc., because they make these acts easier. Do they really increase violent behavior or only make its consequences more spectacular? Should the many who are not violent give up the best means of personal protection to limit the ease of the violent few to commit violence they will just perpetrate with other means? Before firearms people were very familiar with and used cutting and bludgeoning weapons to commit violent acts, and these weapons favor those with physical strength and greater numbers. In the event of the very rare situation that me and those I love have the need to use the most efficient instruments of deadly force for protection I want firearms available. If consequently it means more people of violent subcultures and suffering mental illness are killed with firearms, I am perfectly comfortable accepting this. Firearms are the only defensive tool of equalization for the weak and outnumbered. The vast majority of people killed with guns have lifestyles and make choices that greatly increased their danger, and this is regardless of economic status. Alcohol use definitely increases this danger and not just with firearms. This weekend “The Arizona Republic” newspaper ran an opinion piece that surprised me. I was under the impression that arrests for DUI were declining due to stronger enforcement and punishment, but only the removal of repeat offenders through incarceration has improved. In Scottsdale DUI arrests rose every year since 2002 except for 2005 and 2006. What is being realized is that despite all the campaigns to educate people on the dangers and penalties of DUI, many people become less convinced they are drunk the drunker they become and forget everything they have been taught. We already found out 90 years ago that prohibition does not work, and now we know education on dangers and penalties do not stop new offenders. The article ends with “When all other efforts haven’t dented the numbers, it’s time to search for other means”. I think the “other means” for both violence with or without firearms and DUI is changing the cultures that makes both a problem. Economically comfortable people are apparently less prone to violence. Making alcohol use less a rite of passage to adulthood and abuse of alcohol as socially unacceptable as smoking is becoming is probably the only way to reduce DUI. The one type of crime we have in Arizona far above average is auto theft. Popular makes and models are in big demand in Mexico, both complete and in parts. We also have higher than average kidnappings, but this if mostly part of the illegal alien smuggling turf wars. The number of kidnappings is typically much lower than what has been published.
Your domestic situation with police help so far away has me hoping you have a firearm available should a situation arise that a firearm is the best tool to wield. Even here I think of the police as more of a criminal apprehension service rather than a rapidly available protection service. I live in a relatively safe place and I still want a firearm available."

ja

"I suspect your governmental leaders who want restrict private access to firearms are after the Norway massacre taking measures to increase their protection with armed security. I find that people like your anti-gun forum member are often more interested in feeling smug in an ego enhancing cloak of imagined moral superiority then they are in reducing violence. Any reasoned argument that that makes them exam their beliefs is too threatening to their egos to be tolerated. If their belief that more guns cause more violence, Scottsdale would have murders everyday. This is an affluent city with many gun owners. Private ownership of fully automatic weapons is legal and we have several gun dealers who sell them. The number of murders in Scottsdale decreased from 10 in 2009 to 4 in 2010.

Korostukset Trilisser.[/b]

[Bokmal]

Hyvä analyysi ja argumentointi ja kiitettävästi vapaa paatoksesta! Ilo lukea.

Kun olin vielä aktiiviopettaja (IB-Lukiossa) minulla oli tapana väittää Economicstunneilla axioomaksi että; "Either you pay for social security OR you pay for physical security" (maksat joko sosiaaliturvasta tai turvapalveluista). "But you always pay".

Meillä on hallitus joka haluaa SEKÄ vähentää poliisin ja koulun määrärahoja, aseiden omistusta ETTÄ tulonsiirtoja alemmille tuloluokille. Väitän että tällaisella tominnalla on huono ennuste...
_________________
Kertalaakiyhdistys ei r.y.