Monday, February 19, 2007

Is the "Gun culture" responsible for these victims?

I just read this story from the Telegraph on several shootings in London. The story is somewhat typical in the reporting on the violent deaths, tragic though they may be, but the headline is what drew me to post on it. It reads, "London's gun culture claims new victim," as if the "gun culture" sought out the victims, aimed, then shot them down.

What I'm getting at is that:

  1. The victims were killed by murderers, not by an amorphous "gun culture." I have never seen a "culture" of any type perform any specific act, much less be convicted of, or serve time for such acts.

  2. The emphasis on the "culture" seems to put the blame on society as a whole, rather than the murderers. It goes back to the old phrase, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." There have been arguments on both sides of this issue, ad nauseum, but in an effort to clear it up, car insurance companies rate drivers, not the cars they drive. In other words, because I (at age 39) have a perfect driving record in the last 10 years, I will get a lower rate than an 18 year-old male driver of the same vehicle in the same area who has 5 tickets and two accidents. The car isn't the difference, is it?

  3. There is a fad in the UK to also blame the "knife culture" for the massive surge in stabbings there. The UK has gone the way of most Western European countries and make private ownership of handguns (or rifles, for that matter), all but illegal. Since that change, there have been noticeable effects - major increases in home invasions, stabbings, and violent crime as a whole. Why? Well, we know that there won't be law-abiding citizens who can defend themselves with firearms, that knives are still legal, or at least penalized less than the gun would be, and criminals now have free rein over those who obey the law.
These points are just made to emphasize that this, and many, many other news stories slant toward an agenda of demonizing guns and those who wield them, rather than the act itself. This story could have been titled, "Several young victims shot, perpetrators on the loose!" It didn't.

Logic only dictates that if you disarm the law-abiding, those who don't abide will have a free hand in terrorizing the rest of the populace.

The recent shootings in Utah highlighted what one armed man with courage can do to stop a serial killer. The fact that he was a police officer was incidental, it could be anyone who's carrying and wanted to stop the mass-murderer. Whether you carry or not, support the rights of those who choose to legally defend themselves and their families.

Disagree? Something to add? Comments are welcomed!

No comments: