Why They’re All Wrong
The firearms fanboys have been more creative than usual, scrambling to
defend their precious weapons in the wake of the massacre in Santa
Barbara. It’s only made their excuses lamer.
It has been nearly four days since the shooting rampage in Santa
Barbara, and in that time the firearms fetishists have been up to
their usual tricks trying to excuse away yet another gun massacre in
America.
They have their talking points at the ready for these, and they
immediately got started: If we ban guns, they warned, then we have to
ban knives and cars, because he used those to kill and injure people,
too. California has liberal gun laws, and this proves they don’t work,
they insisted. There is nothing we can do to stop gun violence, they
recited; guns don't kill people, people do.
As usual, the gun nuts are wrong, and not one of these stands up to
the slightest scrutiny.
Let’s start with the Right’s newest post-massacre trope: the banning
of knives and cars, because the murderer in Santa Barbara used a knife
to kill three people and a car to injure four.
Of course, compared to guns, cars are robustly regulated. There’s a
strong registration regimen. More and more safety features have been
added—including airbags and seat belts. There’s a long-standing war
against drunk driving that’s included checkpoints, long sentences for
offenders, and holding bartenders accountable who serve someone who’s
clearly wasted. And, of course, there’s registration, licensing and
tests required to prove you know how to drive an automobile. All of it
has led deaths on our roads to plummet. This is why 2015 is projected
to be the first year where gun deaths surpass traffic fatalities.
Cars also have a purpose other than killing. As do knives. And
although, tragically, three young men were killed after being stabbed
by the killer in Santa Barbara, perhaps the clearest comparison
between gun violence and knife violence is provided by looking at the
attack that occurred at a Chinese school in Henen Province the very
same day as the Newtown Massacre. Twenty-three students were attacked
in Henen and none died—as opposed to 20 murdered at Sandy Hook
Elementary. Or how about the 22 injured in a knife attack at a school
in Pittsburgh this past April? Nobody died there, either.
Of course, to the family of a victim, one stabbing death is too many.
But clearly knives can’t kill as impersonally, as many, as fast or as
at far a distance. Which might be why there haven’t been presidents
knifed from book depositories (or grassy knolls, whatever your
preference), there aren't drive-by knifings, and we didn’t storm Omaha
Beach throwing knives.
Knives also don’t have a powerful lobby to buy legislators, governors,
judges, etc., with campaign contributions so they can enrich
themselves with blood-stained arms dealer money. So please, put that
pathetic talking point to rest.
Another favorite conservative retort to calls for stricter gun
regulation has been to point to California's “liberal” gun laws, which
supposedly didn’t help Santa Barbara at all. However, the fact that
the shooter possessed only 10-bullet magazines and no assault
weapon—or what he could legally buy—clearly did help. As terrible as
this was, it could have been much worse if the gun fetishists had
their way, and any manner of weapon or magazine was for sale.
Additionally, and I know this is a tough concept to understand, but we
have these territories separated only by an imaginary boundary known
as states. They border one another. People can drive across them at
will, as they often do from Arizona—where gun laws are among the most
lenient in the U.S.—to California. It is also quite easy to drive from
California to Nevada, which also has lax gun laws.
This might be why when John Patrick Bedell, another angry and troubled
man with a hatred for his own government, decided to try to
assassinate public servants at the Pentagon, he went next door to
Nevada to get his guns no questions asked, once he couldn’t pass a
background check in California. Wow, that was hard!
Clearly knives can't kill as impersonally, as many, as fast or at as
far a distance. Which might be why there haven't been presidents
knifed from book depositories (or grassy knolls, whatever your
preference), there aren't drive-by knifings, and we didn't storm Omaha
Beach throwing knives.
More:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/
--
No comments:
Post a Comment