|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: American 'gun culture' - fact or fiction?
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I don't think many people do drink on commuter trains. Though, it's probably allowed as the law won't be different.
The main complaints were from people wanting to drink on intercity trains. Which, unlike commuter trains, would usually have catering facilities including a bar selling alcohol on the train. So, like AmTrak - and just as stupidly priced.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio:
However, what i find very difficult to understand is the view that individuals need guns to protect them from their own democratically-elected government. As far as I can tell, this view is limited to the USA (if we are exclduing countries that are not democracies). I have never knowing met a single British person who took such a view. Not even once.
I'm not a Constitutional scholar and don't have much time for posting today....
...but I do know that at the time the Constitution was drafted, the Federal Republic was much less cohesive than it is now. In fact, this nation did not start referring to itself as a unit in language until after the Civil War. Prior to the Civil War people said "The United States are" and after the Civil War, people said and continue to say "The United States is.
Up until (and through) that war, individual states had individual militias that were called up for (or voted to join) various conflicts, etc. They joined other militias from other states to form a larger fighting body--but there was a great deal of separation between states, each having come into the Union after having first been a separate political entity.
That's a partial background on that particular aspect of the ammendment to the Constitution.
Of course, state militias no longer function as they did back then--in fact, the National Guard (which is the evolution of the state militias) can be called up by the President or the Governor, but it's not likely that one Governor would aggress against another state without Big Trouble (like the President calling up the other National Guards to stop it).
p.s. Hoping to continue the conversation that doctor-frog and I started..... ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
sabine
[ 20. April 2007, 12:35: Message edited by: sabine ]
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
You all are allowed to drink ON your commuter trains*? I promise I find that at least as odd as you all may find our guns. People on the trains are quite loud enough when t hey talk without needing added substances. Good lord.
yeh. it can be really charming.
Just ask the late-night commuters who once had to witness the full-scale missionary position sexual frolics of one inebriated and (clearly) besotted young couple.*
*I kid you not; this is not a urban myth; it was in the papers.
edit - although, in fairness, in a country where commuter trains are fairly ubiquitous (unlike in America), usually the problems come from people who were drunk in the pub beforehand. I wouldn't blame the lion's share on in-train drinking, except in the instance of football turbulence when the train-ride up is the gearing-up time.
[ 20. April 2007, 12:37: Message edited by: doctor-frog ]
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I don't think many people do drink on commuter trains. Though, it's probably allowed as the law won't be different.
The main complaints were from people wanting to drink on intercity trains. Which, unlike commuter trains, would usually have catering facilities including a bar selling alcohol on the train. So, like AmTrak - and just as stupidly priced.
I'm sorry, Alan. I hadn't realised that there was a difference. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
I agree that they tend to be rather overpriced, though.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
And we also have to separate out people who collect weapons but don't use them, people who feel the need to protect themselves but use the weapon mostly as reasurrance (i.e, don't use them as weapons), people who defend the citizenry and more often than not, are able to do that without using their weapons, etc. There are people who have access to weapons who don't abuse those weapons or have violent lifestyles.
The ones who do have violent lifestyles and have abused the weapons at their disposal are another matter.
I have been trying to provide some view of our gun culture that I think repudiates exactly your attempt to Balkanize each way that people may be attached to guns. Let me try one more time.
At least many of us in the US (OK, Gwai, I'm not talking about you. But this is a MASS phenomenon in this country. Failure to acknowledge that is a serious and destructive denial of reality), we have been raised with guns entwined in our self-image. We have undergone rites of passage into male adulthood that are specifically built around guns as icons of male adulthood, we live in a society that glorifies the lone individual who takes up arms against his enemies as the paragon of male virtue, both in folklore and in movies, we have an iconic identification with firearms at the heart of our sexual identity.
I know from personal experience that guns tap into that acculturated violence in a unique way -- bombs may be violent, too, but few of us fetishize bombs. Guns are the focus of our cultural confluence of personal strength, violence, justice, and sexuality. Is there anyone who imagines that this is not a heady cocktail?
We really do create a culture of violence with guns as the phallic totem around which we worship. Guns provide the focus for our acculturation into that pathological excess, and reinforce and foster our commitment to violence as the ultimate mode of self expression.
People who say that somebody could come up with another way of killing people if they didn't have a gun are missing the point -- the gun culture has shaped us into seeing violence as the reasonable and appropriate expression of our aspirations for justice, for recognition, for legitimacy. It is not at the point of the violent expression that we should intervene, but in the process of defining how a man rightly expresses his disaffection or his aspirations that we need to intervene. It really is the gun [/i]culture[/i] that needs to be changed.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I have been trying to provide some view of our gun culture that I think repudiates exactly your attempt to Balkanize each way that people may be attached to guns. Let me try one more time.
At least many of us in the US (OK, Gwai, I'm not talking about you. But this is a MASS phenomenon in this country. Failure to acknowledge that is a serious and destructive denial of reality), we have been raised with guns entwined in our self-image. We have undergone rites of passage into male adulthood that are specifically built around guns as icons of male adulthood, we live in a society that glorifies the lone individual who takes up arms against his enemies as the paragon of male virtue, both in folklore and in movies, we have an iconic identification with firearms at the heart of our sexual identity.
I know from personal experience that guns tap into that acculturated violence in a unique way -- bombs may be violent, too, but few of us fetishize bombs. Guns are the focus of our cultural confluence of personal strength, violence, justice, and sexuality. Is there anyone who imagines that this is not a heady cocktail?
We really do create a culture of violence with guns as the phallic totem around which we worship. Guns provide the focus for our acculturation into that pathological excess, and reinforce and foster our commitment to violence as the ultimate mode of self expression.
People who say that somebody could come up with another way of killing people if they didn't have a gun are missing the point -- the gun culture has shaped us into seeing violence as the reasonable and appropriate expression of our aspirations for justice, for recognition, for legitimacy. It is not at the point of the violent expression that we should intervene, but in the process of defining how a man rightly expresses his disaffection or his aspirations that we need to intervene. It really is the gun [/i]culture[/i] that needs to be changed.
--Tom Clune
Tom, my only, and I repeat only, disagreement with what you've been saying on this thread is that your examples, while extremely valuable and to the point, do not support the idea that this is culture is at the level of national identity. It may be a large sub-culture, it most certainly has culturally defining features, and involves many people in ways that you very astutely describe, but it is not part of an "American culture" for two reasons and maybe more. There is no one American Culture, and within the mainstream cultural flow of American Society, many sub-cultural aspects exist, guns being one of many.
Other than that, you have contributed some extremely good points to this thread. I do not wish to deny that the descriptions you provide exist or are not part of your and other people's experience.
I'm sorry that my posts continue to give you the impression that I am trying to sweep things under the rug, much less the reality of how many people see, feel, respond to, have iconic memories of, or live with subconscious ideas about guns. Guns are real and are part of the consciousness of quite a few people
But, just because something is deeply ingrained in many people does not make it something that is deeply ingrained in all people.
I really respect the examples you have provided, especially those from your own life. They speak to the depths to which something can be experienced on a cultural level--but they do not support the idea that we all share your experience. Or that we all have been socialized the way you (and others with similar experiences) have been.
So, while you have contributed in some very important ways to our discussion, ways which have educated me, I continue to find it difficult to use your examples to see one overarching American gun culture.
I'm hoping that my continued assurances will allow us to have a conversation rather than a debate.
Peace!
sabine
[ 20. April 2007, 13:52: Message edited by: sabine ]
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
Just in case I haven't pissed anyone off for a while... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
I've never heard of Anthony Gregory before but I agree with most of what he says in this long rabidly libertarian editorial.
He's not as diplomatic as I prefer but whatever.
quote:
The truth is the polar opposite of what the gun control advocates will conclude. For what we have at Virginia Tech is just one more example of gun control and government protection failing miserably at their advertised goals, and in fact making such a massacre more likely to begin with.
Back in early 2006, a plan in the Virginia legislature to allow for concealed carry on the state’s college campuses failed in subcommittee. A representative of Virginia Tech said that the bill’s defeat would make “parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.”
Perhaps it did make a lot of people feel safer. But the indisputable fact, which everyone should recognize by now, is that criminals don’t follow the law. Someone who is not going to obey laws against murder is not going to flinch at a law forbidding the carrying of weapons. And the notion that a gun law can eliminate weapons is just a fantasy, as any liberal who understands the failure of the drug war should by now see.
And one more time: given that the Pandora's box of a couple hundred million guns is open, I believe attempting to do away with them is worse than the alternative.
No matter what you think about a 'gun culture' it's a helluva situation we find ourselves in.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
I might agree that the rabid libertarian rant were it not for the fact that gun crime in the USA is vastly more numerous and happens vastly more often then in countries like the UK.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio:
I might agree that the rabid libertarian rant were it not for the fact that gun crime in the USA is vastly more numerous and happens vastly more often then in countries like the UK.
Which is why I think tclune is right. The problem with the "if the students had been armed..." post-facto solution is that it continues to feed the idea that guns are the solution to your problem.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
I have to go to work, but just before I do, I had another thought.
Tom's excellent examples seem to be drawn from a male perspective, and that alone is not the sole contributor to an American Culture.
This passage alone is a case in point.
quote:
We have undergone rites of passage into male adulthood that are specifically built around guns as icons of male adulthood, we live in a society that glorifies the lone individual who takes up arms against his enemies as the paragon of male virtue, both in folklore and in movies, we have an iconic identification with firearms at the heart of our sexual identity.
This is eloquent and I'm glad for that perspective, but I'm not sure how many American women can relate to it. Yes, someone will come along and post that s/he knows women who own guns, etc. but I don't think that in general, women in the US have these kinds of experiences.
But again, the point I'm trying to make is that Tom is contributing some really insightful stuff--and we need to think about it and take it seriously--but as to the question of "American culture" we're going to need other voices as well as Tom's.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio:
I might agree that the rabid libertarian rant were it not for the fact that gun crime in the USA is vastly more numerous and happens vastly more often then in countries like the UK.
I just found a few more things on the endless list of things I don't know:
How widespread was gun ownership in the UK before the stricter ownership measures were instituted?
Were guns confiscated or were there so relatively few it was unnecessary?
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
There was actually hardly any change in ownership. Very, very few people who are not farmers own or ever owned guns. That's why Brits tend to think in terms of less gun control meaning more other people having guns - most of us have no desire to have one.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PataLeBon
Shipmate
# 5452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
I have to go to work, but just before I do, I had another thought.
Tom's excellent examples seem to be drawn from a male perspective, and that alone is not the sole contributor to an American Culture.
This passage alone is a case in point.
quote:
We have undergone rites of passage into male adulthood that are specifically built around guns as icons of male adulthood, we live in a society that glorifies the lone individual who takes up arms against his enemies as the paragon of male virtue, both in folklore and in movies, we have an iconic identification with firearms at the heart of our sexual identity.
This is eloquent and I'm glad for that perspective, but I'm not sure how many American women can relate to it. Yes, someone will come along and post that s/he knows women who own guns, etc. but I don't think that in general, women in the US have these kinds of experiences.
But again, the point I'm trying to make is that Tom is contributing some really insightful stuff--and we need to think about it and take it seriously--but as to the question of "American culture" we're going to need other voices as well as Tom's.
It is a right of passage for many women also, at least in rual areas. They are taught how to handle a gun and the basics of how to use it. It is becoming more and more common as time goes on.
--------------------
That's between you and your god. Oh, wait a minute. You are your god. That's a problem. - Jack O'Neill (Stargate SG1)
Posts: 1907 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by 206:
How widespread was gun ownership in the UK before the stricter ownership measures were instituted?
Were guns confiscated or were there so relatively few it was unnecessary?
This article may provide a partial answer to your questions.
Note from it that what are basically our only gun massacres (certainly within the last 30 years) have immediately brought about the banning of the type of guns used in those massacres. That is a culturally appropriate response to an event. By that I mean that Brits tend to immediately move into 'ban it' mode whenever anything bad happens. Yet interestingly the stats provided by the article show an increase in gun crime. This indicates to me that something is changing in our culture and perhaps such stringent laws may work against us if such a change is real and continues.
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
This article may provide a partial answer to your questions.
Handguns were outlawed in Britain in 1997 and some 160,000 were surrendered to police. Even Britain's Olympic shooters fall under this ban, meaning the pistol-shooting team must train outside the country.
Wow: you people sure are a patient lot!
I know many people who own guns here and while bloodshed might not result from such a ban there sure as heck would be a lot of, ahem, civil disobedience by way of ignoring any request to hand over their guns.
Was there any significant amount of dissent? And I wonder if there's any way of knowing what percentage of the total 160,000 is.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio:
Littlelady, I had intended to ask you whether or not you saw This Week last night and, if so, what you made of the American woman they had on talking about guns?
No, unfortunately I missed it - I fell asleep on the sofa after getting back from my evening job! What a weakling.
quote:
However, I think it is perfectly possible to favour strict gun control without taking such an attitude.
I agree, but sadly ... I've heard too many of my own people get all snooty on this subject (and it seems green issues are having the same effect: oh how green are we Brits when compared to those wasteful Americans). I find it nauseating myself, especially when we have a reputation for other things such as being the country in Europe with the greatest number of drug users or the country in Europe with the greatest number of abortions or teenage pregnancies or whatever we score tops on in any given month.
quote:
I should also point out that whilst drunks on trains may be irratating, and perhaps frightening, they don't generally lead to people being rushed into casualty...
It depends whether they are inclined to a fight or a bit of rape. I've certainly witnessed some very close calls (on both commuter and Intercity trains - the law is identical for both btw). And of course the smell of vomit or urine in a train carriage is just peachy.
If it was up to me I'd regress where alcohol is concerned. The English cannot be trusted with booze. And I am fucking sick of stepping over vomit slicks on my way to work in a morning! ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
One can drink on Amtrak here I think, but one doesn't get as many annoying drunks there because the tickets are so disgustingly expensive.
Have things changed price-wise since 9/11?
There follows a sad confession. Since being a child when I watched Casey Jones on TV (ha!) I had always wanted to travel across America on a big silver train. (I don't believe I'm admitting to this ...) I finally got my chance on 9/11 and I sat on the best train seat I've ever experienced: leatherette at worst, big and comfy, with head and foot rest and cupholder. There was a really plush (in my British experience) dining car with real cutlery and real tablecloths and a choice of breakfast. Never have I enjoyed a train journey as I did that one - three hours of pure heaven looking out at the passing fields of Illinois corn and beans as the sun rose on a beautiful September day*. And I couldn't believe how inexpensive the ticket was!
*Of course that feeling disappeared when I finally got to Chicago and heard the news about the Twin Towers.
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
It isn't that people are worried about "what the government might do" to them per se. I agree that at this point, the government could nuke us all, and that a .22 is practically useless in that respect.
The worry is that the government will strip people of any self-determination. I know that there are situations in which I'd want to be able to protect myself - and there are plenty of poorer people who need such protection, BTW, because they can't afford alarm systems, etc. - and really: who is the government to tell me I can't do it? Again: there are many more people who die on the highway than who die from gunshot wounds. So where's the "ban the automobile" contingent? Does anybody even think of this?
As a matter of fact, I just read that in one year, almost twice as many people died from self-inflicted gunshot wounds than died from being shot by somebody else. Doesn't that point to another sort problem?
The answer is not to strip everybody, everywhere, of weapons for protection; sometimes they are needed. The answer is to figure out what's behind all this, and do something to change the culture. But that seems too hard, so people don't even think about it anymore. I don't think it is too hard, though.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
isnt self-inflicted gun-wounds another argument in *favour* of restricting gun ownership?
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by 206:
Wow: you people sure are a patient lot!
Passive is more the word I'd use. Until we get pushed too far and then we can explode. Well, we used to anyway. I'm beginning to wonder if we have any umph left in us at all or whether we're all just going to end up automatons.
quote:
Was there any significant amount of dissent? And I wonder if there's any way of knowing what percentage of the total 160,000 is.
On both occasions (ie at the time of both bans) yes, there was. That is, people who legally owned guns (or those sympathetic to the legal ownership of guns) protested strongly because they didn't tend to be nutjobs out to kill lots of people but just ordinarly, law-abiding citizens, yet they were the ones being punished. However, they were good boys and girls and handed over their pieces (or hid them, if they weren't so good!).
I don't honestly know if there is any way of finding out what the figure quoted means, but this site may provide you with some information, if you are really bored and desparate for something to do today!
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
isnt self-inflicted gun-wounds another argument in *favour* of restricting gun ownership?
Perhaps. But isn't there a deeper problem that we ought to address?
Why the band-aid, IOW? Why not work on getting depressed people the help they need? Anyway, I'm pretty sure that these people could - and do - find other ways to commit suicide.
As I've said before: I'm in favor of "restrictions." I'm not in favor a blanket ban, because the problem is elsewhere.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
One can drink on Amtrak here I think, but one doesn't get as many annoying drunks there because the tickets are so disgustingly expensive.
Have things changed price-wise since 9/11?
Yes. Trains are now about as expensive as domestic flights and they tend to take longer but they certainly ARE a good deal more comfortable!
I had a similarly enjoyable experience Amtraking to my in-laws for last Thanksgiving and it was very nice. We even rmemebered to bring snacks since the high food prices are usually the only downfall. I had never gotten to see the incredible beauty of the Appalachians and this time I just sat in the viewing car and was comfortably awestruck.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
isnt self-inflicted gun-wounds another argument in *favour* of restricting gun ownership?
Personally, I'm still trying to work out how passing a law to restrict the sale of paracetamol in one location actually stops people from overdosing (either deliberately or accidentally). Are you suggesting that people should be protected from themselves?
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
[tangent]
quote:
I'm beginning to wonder if we have any umph left in us at all or whether we're all just going to end up automatons.
If you've never read it, I think you'd appreciate C.S. Lewis' essay _Is Progress Possible? Willing Slaves of the Welfare State_.
One of his comments is 'We are tamed animals'.
(I can relate to that: sometimes I wonder what it would be like if we refused to roll over when the government oversteps its bounds. We'd probably end up in jail like Thoreau, but we also just might change the world.)
The essay is in his compilation _God In The Dock_.
[/tangent]
quote:
if you are really bored and desparate for something to do today!
Obviously I am or I wouldn't be inflicting all these posts on you folks. Maybe I'm just trying to see exactly how much patience you have!
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
I can't say ive sussed how limiting sale of paracetamol has helped. Surely someone would just go to two chemists etc? I believe there *are* statistics to say that it has helped but I cant see the logic as to how/why. My only guess is that there arent large bottles of tablets at home and so prevents rash decisions? No idea.
I would prefer not to have a gun in the house, partly to avoid accidents - whether a gun being turned on me when used in self defense or someone in the house making a rash decision (killing self or other in anger) I can't see either happening but would still rather not have one around . Im not necessarially anti anyone elses right though.
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
welsh dragon
Shipmate
# 3249
|
Posted
A lot of overdoses are very impulsive. If you can stop someone from topping themselves for 15 or 20 minutes, the moment passes.
So limiting access to means of death is quite an effective way of reducing suicide numbers. For example, reducing the toxicity of gas in the kitchen cut the numbers by quite a lot.
Posts: 5352 | From: ebay | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
PataLeBon
Shipmate
# 5452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:
Originally posted by PataLeBon:
It is a right of passage for many women also, at least in rual areas. They are taught how to handle a gun and the basics of how to use it. It is becoming more and more common as time goes on.
So perhaps there is only a gun culture in rural areas .
That I would agree with. There doesn't seem to be much "gun culture" where I am now, but their is an understanding that there is one in the rual areas and people try to find ways to balance the different needs of rual areas and urban ones.
--------------------
That's between you and your god. Oh, wait a minute. You are your god. That's a problem. - Jack O'Neill (Stargate SG1)
Posts: 1907 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
doctor-frog
small and green
# 2860
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
I can't say ive sussed how limiting sale of paracetamol has helped.
it's helped the pharmaceuticals industry. I have sitting next to me at this moment a 500-count bottle of Walgreen's own-brand Ibuprofen that I had my family bring over last time there were here from the States. It cost $13 (that's £6.50 in real money ).
To buy the same amount of Ibuprofen from Boots (also own-brand) in 32-packs (AFAIK the maximum legal limit to packaging here), each little pill in its own nice, neat little blister-packed cell , it would cost me £84.
My Labour party membership card insists that Labour 'is a democratic socialist party'. It's when I look at that big $13 bottle of Ibuprofen that I'm inclined to say, 'like hell'. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posts: 981 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by welsh dragon:
A lot of overdoses are very impulsive. If you can stop someone from topping themselves for 15 or 20 minutes, the moment passes.
So limiting access to means of death is quite an effective way of reducing suicide numbers....
In which case Im completely in favour of restricitng sales to samll doses
In answer to little lady - then yes, I am in favour of protecting people from themselves in some cases (ie limit sales of drugs, seatbelt laws etc)
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PataLeBon:
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:
Originally posted by PataLeBon:
It is a right of passage for many women also, at least in rual areas. They are taught how to handle a gun and the basics of how to use it. It is becoming more and more common as time goes on.
So perhaps there is only a gun culture in rural areas .
That I would agree with. There doesn't seem to be much "gun culture" where I am now, but their is an understanding that there is one in the rual areas and people try to find ways to balance the different needs of rual areas and urban ones.
I can't agree. Let me share one of the stories about one of the many people that I know who have been shot. A dear friend was travelling through Saint Louis a number of years back. A local radio personality had been listening to the police scanner, and decided that my friend was driving the same kind of vehicle that he had just heard police being alerted to because someone wanted in a child abuse case was believed to be driving it. He forced my friend off the road and shot him with his trusty sidearm, then ran off to announce to the world on his radio show that he had shot the perp.
It took the real police about 10 seconds to determine that my friend could not possibly have been the person that they were looking for. However, the DA refused to even arrest the radio personality because he was absolutely sure that he could never get a conviction -- the man was a "hero" for having delivered "cowboy justice" to a pervert. If it's so widespread that the DA throws up his hands, it ain't a subculture. So my friend is confined to a wheelchair for life with no one held accountable. This isn't a rural manifestation of the gun culture -- it's urban. And it could have been in just about any city in the country, with proper adjustments to the details for local sensibilities.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PataLeBon
Shipmate
# 5452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
isnt self-inflicted gun-wounds another argument in *favour* of restricting gun ownership?
Yes, or to make gun owners complete gun safetly training and store guns in a safe place.
It all depends upon one's point of view.
--------------------
That's between you and your god. Oh, wait a minute. You are your god. That's a problem. - Jack O'Neill (Stargate SG1)
Posts: 1907 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Is there any cocnept of private prosecution in the States? If he could get the money, or find a lawyer willing to work and get a fee from any win, then he could have got the man charged with something - grievous bodily harm or attempted murder, at the very least sued for damages and compensation.
Having a gun for self-defense is one thing. Using that gun in a pre-meditated act (even one of 'justice') is a whole different kettle of fish.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Is there any cocnept of private prosecution in the States?
O.J. Simpson was acquitted in his 'state' trial but subsequently lost a 'civil' case and was ordered to pay a substantial amount of money to the deceased's families.
IIRC there is some concern about how much he's paid but he's legally obligated to pay the full amount.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
tclune, and you would say such stories are somethinig besides over the top insane and unusual? Sounds like the DA was corrupt to me.
I doubt that he was corrupt, just hardened to the realities of the system and unwilling to invest overstretched resources in low-probability-of-conviction cases.
I lived for many years in Detroit, so the story is not shockingly outside my experience. But yes, it was something other than a daily occurence.
But you're missing the point -- it was outside the daily experience of people in Saint Louis, too. But it fed into a widespread fantasy of cowboy justice. That's what I think is one of many manifestations of the gun culture. It isn't necesarily about knowing how to field-strip a weapon, or how to go bird hunting without shooting your host in the face.
It's about structuring your psyche around firearms, one way or another. And I don't think it is an oddity of Detroit boys to do so. Detroit just doesn't have enough people to support all the Hollywood movies that are structured around fantasies of violent revenge, or vigilante justice, or gang-banging shootouts, or...
This is ingrained in way too many of us to be a localized blip. And the fact that the very first comment that GW made about the VT incident was about protecting our "right to bear arms" in the face of people who might bizarrely see it as a reason to consider changing the gun laws speaks volumes. Compund that with the VA governor being "sickened" by the thought of people seeing gun control as a reasonable response to the slaughter, and you might begin to suspect that we're either in Wonderland or something strange is under all this, and that strange thing is wrapped up in our thoughts about guns. It's really hard for me to undstand how people can have difficulty seeing this.
BTW, Alan, my friend talked to a few lawyers in St. Louis about pursuing a civil action on continency. None of them would take the case, because they agreed with the DA that the man was widely seen as a hero, and they just didn't think they'd get anything out of it.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by welsh dragon:
A lot of overdoses are very impulsive. If you can stop someone from topping themselves for 15 or 20 minutes, the moment passes.
Yet a lot are also premeditated. When I trained as a Samaritan their approach was that if someone wants to commit suicide then that is exactly what they will do, regardless of what barriers may be placed in their way (and of course the Samaritans don't try to stop suicides from following through on their decision - or they didn't when I volunteered with them anyway).
Suicide by paracetamol poisoning is, I'm told, a particularly nasty way to go (can take a few days, bleeding from all orifices). A gun sounds preferable to me.
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
So...you're saying we have a gun culture in the same sense that the feudal Japanese had a katana culture?
I don't think we're that far gone yet.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
Still, it seems that y ou shared that story, tclune to prove there is a universal gun culture in the USA. How does that prove it? It proves that there is a sex-offender-phobia culture in Saint Louis probably, but that seems different. Are you really saying the radio host wouldn't have been seen as a hero if he knifed the guy or shot him with a bow?
No. I am saying that the culture that finds cowboy justice appropriate grows out of the totemic significance of guns. We are formed by thoughts and fantasies of gun violence, in service of justice, in service of revenge, in service of personal freedom, what-have-you. It is not the ding an sich that I find troubling -- it is the culture surrounding the object that I find pathological. Even if the man had used a knife or bow, his ideation was molded around the firearms. That is what I am calling the gun culture.
I know that you genuinely have no idea what I am talkig about. I know you genuinely believe that this is a phenomenon limited to me and a few twisted friends. But you may want to step back and ask how we have gotten the laws, entertainment, and level of domestic and street violence that we have if it's just some sickos slinking around the edges of the culture. I may be wrong, but it sure looks to me like the society is rotten to the core in this regard.
--tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
tclune:
Street violence in general has been in decline the last decade or so, unless I'm mistaken.
Violence has been endemic in society since the very beginning. It's even in the Old Testament. I don't think what you're describing is anything new under the sun.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by 206:
If you've never read it, I think you'd appreciate C.S. Lewis' essay _Is Progress Possible? Willing Slaves of the Welfare State_.
One of his comments is 'We are tamed animals'.
Well if the quote you provided is an indicator to the overall theme of the essay then I'd say yes, I would probably appreciate it!
I have a pet theory about our passivity: we still 'doff the cap'. Previously it was to the monarch and now it is to the government. We're still subjects; we've not quite made it to citizens. Not sure we ever will at this rate ...
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
Violence has been endemic in society since the very beginning. It's even in the Old Testament. I don't think what you're describing is anything new under the sun.
However, I'm sure that even in Old Testament times, there were places that were more or less violent than others, for whatever reason. All I know is that Americans seem quite accepting of the level of violence in their society. According to the Globe and Mail, an average of 32 Americans - equal to the death toll at Virginia Tech - die every day from gunshots. And it seems like Americans are totally cool with that, as long as they don't all die in the same place at the same time, or as long as they're nasty gang-bangers or drug dealers or whatever. And when Nice People Like Us get shot, it's because they didn't have guns to defend themselves. OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I know that you genuinely have no idea what I am talkig about. I know you genuinely believe that this is a phenomenon limited to me and a few twisted friends. But you may want to step back and ask how we have gotten the laws, entertainment, and level of domestic and street violence that we have if it's just some sickos slinking around the edges of the culture. I may be wrong, but it sure looks to me like the society is rotten to the core in this regard.
Au contraire! I know exactly what you're talking about. I have definitely lived in a gun culture. Texas plains far from the town. Definitely a gun culture by your definition. However, I also know that where I am living now is different. I can't imagine living anywhere where that sort of taking the law into one's own hands would be okay. Sure as hell would get you arrested and in jail here. (The way to avoid the law here is to be a politician or rich, but that has nothing to do with guns.)
Still, you didn't answer my other question. Do you think the radio moron wouuld have been prosecuted if he had used a different weapon? For instance if your friend had stepped out of his car to find out what was happening and then been knocked out etc. by a martial arts type kick, wouldn't the radio host still gone to boast of how he was a hero who took out an evil sex offender?
[ 20. April 2007, 20:19: Message edited by: Gwai ]
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
All I know is that Americans seem quite accepting of the level of violence in their society. ...snip...And it seems like Americans are totally cool with that,
Can you back this up with evidence?
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
I had a moment of irony tonight, bearing in mind I've been posting on this thread.
I strolled down to my local Noodle King Thai takeout only to find myself following two guys across the road who both were carrying shotguns. They were in cases, of course, but even so it was a unique experience.
My guess is that the police might have had something to say to them if they'd been around. Me, I just had to keep fighting the urge to ask if I could have a look at their weapons please. Figured they might have gotten the wrong idea.
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
All I know is that Americans seem quite accepting of the level of violence in their society. ...snip...And it seems like Americans are totally cool with that,
Can you back this up with evidence?
sabine
enough are cool with it that it isnt changed or seriously challenged (or at least it appears that way at incidents like the tech shootings with people instatntly defending gun ownership). So although there are lots of people who are anti - taken as a country as a whole, to the outside it appears like a gun culture I guess.
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
Still, you didn't answer my other question. Do you think the radio moron wouuld have been prosecuted if he had used a different weapon? For instance if your friend had stepped out of his car to find out what was happening and then been knocked out etc. by a martial arts type kick, wouldn't the radio host still gone to boast of how he was a hero who took out an evil sex offender?
I thought that I answered it when I said: "I am saying that the culture that finds cowboy justice appropriate grows out of the totemic significance of guns. We are formed by thoughts and fantasies of gun violence, in service of justice, in service of revenge, in service of personal freedom, what-have-you. It is not the ding an sich that I find troubling -- it is the culture surrounding the object that I find pathological. Even if the man had used a knife or bow, his ideation was molded around the firearms. That is what I am calling the gun culture."
You may not agree with what I am saying, but it is intended to address directly the question that you asked. My point was that I am not talking about the violence itself, but the molding of our character in such a way that finds such responses appropriate. In my experience, the culture* surrounding firearms is central to that shaping.
--Tom Clune
*Substitute a less troubling word if you like -- I mean the matrix of behaviors and attitudes that are instilled in people as part of forming their character to be "one of us".
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
All I know is that Americans seem quite accepting of the level of violence in their society. ...snip...And it seems like Americans are totally cool with that,
Can you back this up with evidence?
sabine
enough are cool with it that it isnt changed or seriously challenged (or at least it appears that way at incidents like the tech shootings with people instatntly defending gun ownership). So although there are lots of people who are anti - taken as a country as a whole, to the outside it appears like a gun culture I guess.
Good grief, how ridiculous. This is one of the most controversial issues in American politics. We are not all "cool" with the level of violence in our society, or else we wouldn't be arguing about it all the time.
[ 20. April 2007, 20:53: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
enough are cool with it that it isnt changed or seriously challenged
I think appearances can be deceptive. There is an ongoing debate in the States about the role of guns. Many people want to see tough gun control, some want a measure of control, others want no control at all. And then there is the gun lobby, which is extremely powerful, and lobby groups play a much more significant part in American politics than they do in British politics. On top of that there is the small matter of the Constitution, which was written up when America was still forming itself and fighting off the spectre of colonial rule.
The assumption by many over here is that the only way people 'over there' will solve gun crime is to do exactly what we over here have done: make almost all guns illegal. But what that doesn't allow for is difference in culture, history, political landscape, etc. It's like Bliar banging on about turning us into a cafe culture like the French. But we aint the French. So 24 hour licensing laws won't turn us into a cafe culture. It just means that people can get totally pissed around the clock.
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
