Why do they always blame the gun ?


PDA






Jim, West PA
January 17, 2013, 10:13 AM
And never speak of the real cause ?

http://ssristories.com/index.php?sort=where&p=school

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do they always blame the gun ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Birch Knoll
January 17, 2013, 10:23 AM
This is as good an explanation as any:

http://www.althouse.blogspot.com/2013/01/why-are-gun-death-statistics-inflated.html
It occurred to me, after the Sandy Hook murders, that blaming guns is a secular substitute for blaming the devil. People find it too challenging to figure out why a human being would do this terrible thing and they latch on to the idea that the gun made it happen. Suicide presents a similar challenge, and one way to fathom it is to say: It was the gun. Isn't it like saying the devil made him do it? The gun/the devil is a great go-to answer, freeing you from wracking your brain about the workings of the human mind.

OpelBlitz
January 17, 2013, 10:34 AM
Yeah, seems legit. People like to have something to blame; to hold something or someone accountable. The Republican party and the NRA, for example, are very high-profile recipients of blame at the moment. Oops! My car broke down! Those lousy republicans. Ban them!

MedWheeler
January 17, 2013, 10:43 AM
People, please. Gun control is not about guns. It's about control.

People are taught to blame the gun by people who don't believe guns are the problem any more than you and I do.

OpelBlitz
January 17, 2013, 10:48 AM
^ This.

alsaqr
January 17, 2013, 10:59 AM
Its not about guns: Its about control. Its also about minimizing the violent acts of criminals by blaming inanimate objects.

Rezin
January 17, 2013, 10:59 AM
Fear causes people to be irrational. They are scared of an armed populace.

ivankerley
January 17, 2013, 11:01 AM
People, please. Gun control is not about guns. It's about control.

People are taught to blame the gun by people who don't believe guns are the problem any more than you and I do.
agreed, and the very thought that somebody would enjoy an activity they dont approve of, irritates them to no end, it offends their sensibilities. It has become increasingly hostile as of late, some antis are ramping up their rhetoric to dizzying heights of hysteria.
its getting weird
gene

JustinJ
January 17, 2013, 11:17 AM
So are efforts to limit nuclear proliferation just people blaming nukes? Rather than stop countries from having nukes should we only try and look at the reasons why they want them?

Gun control measures have nothing to do with blaming the gun. People see guns as a variable in an equation of gun violence. Right or wrong, they believe removing said variable will prevent people from being able to commit heinous acts such as Sandy Hook. It is simply trying to remove an means to an end. They don't believe that removing guns will make people no longer want to commit horrible acts of violence but rather prevent some from doing so or at least limiting the damage when they do. We can disagree with the potential effectiveness or argue that infringing on the second amendment is not worth the cost but the "don't blame the gun mantra" is a rebuttal to an argument that does not exist. It makes us look foolish and unable to comprehend a simple point.

M-Cameron
January 17, 2013, 11:50 AM
They blame the gun because they are cowards...

A gun can't speak, it can't defend it's self.... They can cast stones and make accusations without fear or reprisal.

Anyone can cast blame on an object.... It takes courage to cast blame on a person.

JustinJ
January 17, 2013, 11:52 AM
They blame the gun because they are cowards...

A gun can't speak, it can't defend it's self.... They can cast stones and make accusations without fear or reprisal.

Anyone van cast blame on an object.... It takes courage to cast blame on a person.

Then they must be awfully courageous because i've been hearing a lot of blame directed towards the NRA from gun control advocates.

Midnight Oil
January 17, 2013, 11:55 AM
laziness breeds laziness. when someone doesn't like critical thinking and analysis to begin with, how can you expect them to change over major issues such as social/cultural problems?

M-Cameron
January 17, 2013, 11:56 AM
Then they must be awfully courageous because i've been hearing a lot of blame directed towards the NRA from gun control advocates.

Nope, same logic applies.... The NRA isn't a person, it's an organization...the NRA doesn't have a face, the NRA can't go to jail.

Ive yet to hear anyone personally blaming Wayne lapiere....

Certaindeaf
January 17, 2013, 12:02 PM
Dan White blamed a Twinkie (the Twinkie Defense) after assassinating two office holders in CA. He got away with murder because he ate a twinkie.. makes perfect sense.

JustinJ
January 17, 2013, 12:03 PM
Nope, same logic applies.... The NRA isn't a person, it's an organization...the NRA doesn't have a face, the NRA can't go to jail.

Ive yet to hear anyone personally blaming Wayne lapiere....

The NRA isn't a person, its a whole bunch of people. You're argument was that a gun can't defend itself but the NRA certainly gun.

You also said that attacking a gun would not bring the potential for reprisal. I'm not sure what type of reprisal you are referring to but this thread alone shows that there are plenty who will counter against what you believe is attacking guns.

I believe i've heard Piers Morgan blame quite a few pro-gun individuals for gun violence as well.

The point it this whole argument is really nothing more than ad hominem attack. "Gun control advocates don't agree with us so lets demonize them in any way possible, regardless of merit." Its not necessary or constructive.

M-Cameron
January 17, 2013, 12:12 PM
The point it this whole argument is really nothing more than ad hominem attack. "Gun control advocates don't agree with us so lets demonize them in any way possible, regardless of merit." Its not necessary or constructive

I can assure you this is no attempt to intentionally demonized.... I'm calling it like I see it.

I'de say the same thing about people who blam the drugs, or who blame video games, ect.

People do bad things...
Let me put it like this... If you can't look it in the eye, don't have the gaul to accuse it.

thegolfguy
January 17, 2013, 12:14 PM
For the same reason yhey blame McDonalds and Coke for all the fat folks. It's now unamerican to take personal responsibility for anything. Let the govt do it.

Godsgunman
January 17, 2013, 12:26 PM
We live in a society that does not want to take responsibility for anything they do. Want to have premarital sex, don't worry you can just kill that baby without any consequences if you get pregnant. Want to kill your neighbor, its ok we'll blame violent movies and shows for your actions. Want to shoot up a bunch of people at a mall, we'll just say you're mentally insane and the guns made you do it. Don't get me wrong here, yes, there are people who are truly insane but they are few and far between. The ultimate goal with the gun issue is to truly have control over the populace. Why do you think there was ever a need for the 2nd Amendment if this isn't true? It wasn't written to protect ones right to hunt or even personal protection but to ensure the citizens right to defend against any tyrranical government. As far as crime and violence, look at England. They "blamed" guns and took them away and now they have one of the highest stabbing and mugging rates in the world. Makes even South Africa look tame.

Adam the Gnome
January 17, 2013, 12:34 PM
Some people think its a 50/50 blame between the gun and a person.
Not sure how a gun would channel evil.
As bad as it sounds I'm waiting on someone to go on a killing spree with a slag hammer. Then who would they blame

2ifbyC
January 17, 2013, 12:40 PM
As I become more experienced in listening to and evaluating the arguments of the antis, the answer as to why they blame the gun becomes more complicated. To recap, I have listed, what I believe to be, a few of their reasons:

1) They are truly fearful of guns.
2) If guns were eliminated, there would be less violence.
3) They want to confiscate guns so only the elite/powerful will have them.
4) They do not understand the pleasures of gun ownership nor do they care.
5) They do not believe in the concept of an evil man.
6) Something must be done immediately and the gun is the lazy manís solution.

I am sure there are other reasons as well. The 2A however is not on the list. By us throwing that right into the debate, it does not compute with the antis. It will most likely enrage vis-ŗ-vis engender them. Therefore, if we are to have a truly meaningful dialogue, we must take their concerns into consideration. We may not change the minds of the antis but we should gain support of the fence sitters.

Cosmoline
January 17, 2013, 12:48 PM
As is often noted, gun control isn't about the guns. There are a few true pacifists among the antis who genuinely want TOTAL disarmament from nukes to handguns and an end to all violence and warfare. They have my respect, if not my support. But the vast majority of them are just statists who want a very well armed warrior caste to protect the wealthy and powerful. The rest of the society, as they see it, needs no firearms and ought to have no firearms. Gun control is about controlling *US*. Always has been. Blaming the gun is a stand-in for attacking us. Which is why if they banned AR's they come after all semis next, then all rifles and handguns, then knives etc. Selective disarmament of everyone who isn't one of their friends or paid guards, pretty much.

AlexanderA
January 17, 2013, 12:49 PM
Gun control is not about guns, and it's not even about "control." Deep down, it's because certain groups of people in this country (East and West Coast elitists, Hollywood glitterati, the media, university academics, professional activists, etc.) hate and resent Middle America, that is, what to them are "rednecks" and "yokels." This is irrational cultural prejudice. This country has divided into "tribes," and it's one tribe against another.

Certaindeaf
January 17, 2013, 01:08 PM
If you want the whole fleece, make sure the flock...

it's about TOTAL control

JustinJ
January 17, 2013, 01:10 PM
I can assure you this is no attempt to intentionally demonized.... I'm calling it like I see it.

I'de say the same thing about people who blam the drugs, or who blame video games, ect.

There is a big difference. The argument being made against those is that they do affect behavior. That argument is not being made against guns.

Just so you know, i don't favor laws to ban those either.

razorback2003
January 17, 2013, 01:12 PM
They blame the gun because they are to weak to execute the criminal.

Generally, people with that viewpoint do not hold individuals responsible for their actions. Instead, they have a 'we are all in this together' mentality so they punish the 99% for what the 1% does.

Pointshoot
January 17, 2013, 02:27 PM
They blame the gun because people arent taught logic, history, or the about the foundations of our nation - a Constitutional Republic. Those who push this anti 2A agenda from the top know that too many people are carried along by emotions. Theyre not taught to think in the 'schools' today.

Using DEDUCTIVE LOGIC (going from the details to the bigger picture), after such a crime people would ask the who, what, where, when, and why of this ? How did the shooter get in the building ? How did the barriers to entry fail ? Could they be improved ? How long did it take for police to arrive (external response) ? What might have happened if an armed defender had been on the scene (internal response) ? What kind of person was the shooter ? Did his taking of psychiatric medications play a role ? The shooter killed his own mother and took her rifle. Would any of these proposals made any difference ? How has the external cosmetic features of some rifles had any impact on violent crimes ? (No impact). And finally, though this was a tragic event - how likely is this to happen ? (Less probable than being struck by lightening.) Does it make sense to take actions that are ineffective to 'prevent' events that are highly unlikely ?

Instead, the antis use false INDUCTIVE LOGIC. They observe a few things and make a broad conclusion based on no evidence. "Children were killed. The gun used was of a certain type and has certain features. So we must ban them in order to protect the children." There is no evidence that their 'solution' will have any impact at all - again, this is less likely than being struck by lightening. They won't listen to evidence or counter arguments. theyre not really interested in hearing other proposals. Afterall, theyve already made their mind up as to 'the answer'.

IMO those at the top pushiing the anti 2A agenda know exactly what they are doing. And, they know these methods and the media propaganda are very effective with many people. So we need to point this out to others.

"If you expect a nation to be ignorant and free, you expect what never was and can never be." - Thomas Jefferson

[ I recently heard about the use of false inductive logic versus deductive logic to go after the 2A. It was in an interview of Ralph Winterrowd done on Jan 16, with John Stadtmiller on republicbroadcasting.org ]

MedWheeler
January 17, 2013, 03:00 PM
Rezin writes:

Fear causes people to be irrational. They are scared of an armed populace.

I disagree with the first line. There is nothing irrational in the strategy of mobilizing the common public to rally for one's cause. Those who want the power the common people currently hold are doing just this, and it's working. This is a well-orchestrated attack on that security the population holds. The ammunition the enemy is using against us is very powerful and effective.
If we were up against nothing more than irrationality, our fight would be over very quickly.

Now, because the common people do hold significant power, both politically and logistically, the second line in your post is true.

CraigC
January 17, 2013, 03:16 PM
Because it is easy.

It is far easier to pass a law banning an inanimate object than it is to look within and realize that there are fundamental problems in our society that cannot be legislated away, much less to actually correct them. Violence is merely a symptom. A symptom of very little personal responsibility, complacency and flexible morality. The problem is that "We the people..." are doomed to repeat the history of every other free, civilized culture.

racenutz
January 17, 2013, 03:21 PM
1) They are truly fearful of guns.
2) If guns were eliminated, there would be less violence.
3) They want to confiscate guns so only the elite/powerful will have them.
4) They do not understand the pleasures of gun ownership nor do they care.
5) They do not believe in the concept of an evil man.
6) Something must be done immediately and the gun is the lazy manís solution

Another one that occurs to me is they consider killing to be wrong no matter the situation.

gym
January 17, 2013, 03:44 PM
Because they have been told the gun is the problem for 50 years. People on the whole are not too smart, they have atendancy to follow each other like sheep.
If you tell them something enough they just take it as being true

mnrivrat
January 17, 2013, 07:12 PM
First of all I think it is important to know who "they" are.
It's not just the politicians and media . It is our fellow citizens who keep voting for these politicians, and keep supporting the networks without complaint.


When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.
Thomas Jefferson

If you look at the voting public you will see that large cities have taken over the ability to elect candidates to office. The majority of these large city dwellers have never been around guns except for the violence that surrounds them in the city. Their mind set is totaly different than ours as they have no dog in the fight other than what they see around them and hear on TV.

JustinJ wrote :Gun control measures have nothing to do with blaming the gun. People see guns as a variable in an equation of gun violence. Right or wrong, they believe removing said variable will prevent people from being able to commit heinous acts such as Sandy Hook. It is simply trying to remove an means to an end. They don't believe that removing guns will make people no longer want to commit horrible acts of violence but rather prevent some from doing so or at least limiting the damage when they do. We can disagree with the potential effectiveness or argue that infringing on the second amendment is not worth the cost but the "don't blame the gun mantra" is a rebuttal to an argument that does not exist. It makes us look foolish and unable to comprehend a simple point.

More true than what most people realize.

jbrown50
January 17, 2013, 08:08 PM
So are efforts to limit nuclear proliferation just people blaming nukes? Rather than stop countries from having nukes should we only try and look at the reasons why they want them?

Gun control measures have nothing to do with blaming the gun. People see guns as a variable in an equation of gun violence. Right or wrong, they believe removing said variable will prevent people from being able to commit heinous acts such as Sandy Hook. It is simply trying to remove an means to an end. They don't believe that removing guns will make people no longer want to commit horrible acts of violence but rather prevent some from doing so or at least limiting the damage when they do. We can disagree with the potential effectiveness or argue that infringing on the second amendment is not worth the cost but the "don't blame the gun mantra" is a rebuttal to an argument that does not exist. It makes us look foolish and unable to comprehend a simple point.
I agree with that.

We need to understand the general anti mindset.

We should also not discount the ones who truly believe for one reason or another that the 2A is obsolete/outdated and civilians shouldn't be allowed to possess firearms period.

UnitMaster
January 17, 2013, 08:22 PM
It's very simple. What is a politician's job?
Their job is not to manage the country.

Their job is to get elected / re-elected.
To get elected or re-elected they must accumulate votes.

There are only three ways to accumulate votes.
1. Either buy them by promising to give them someone else's money.
2. Pray on their ignorant fears, to ensure irrational support.
3. Speak the truth, and pray the proletariat is wise.

xwray
January 18, 2013, 11:32 AM
Nobody, not even socialists, are so stupid/ignorant to believe such complete and utter nonsense that this government and their willing accomplices the "press" is putting out regarding how what they are proposing will stop crime and enhance public safety. So, why are they doing it? One reason: to disarm the American populace. Period! I will leave it to your imagination as to why they are so desperate to do so. Study history.

Adam the Gnome
January 18, 2013, 12:33 PM
Isn't this the whole reason for the 2A? They will always blame something instead of someone because the crazy people vote too.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do they always blame the gun ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!