Are we a menaced society? Yes. Are we are a violent society? No. [View all]
Last edited Sun Jun 5, 2022, 09:20 AM - Edit history (2)
We do have a well regulated militia in the National Guard.
We don't have well regulated gun ownership, and so we don't have a well regulated armed population.
Whenever the problems of the few hurt the many, we might feel collective menace, but we really know who causes that menace because we see the clear ownership of the problem. It's only when we don't know the few who menace the many, that we tend to assume collective guilt over our collective suffering while we're told to tolerate "lone wolves."
When some of us say we're violent, they imply that we're overly responsible in criminalizing ourselves along with others -- that's diagnosed as neurosis in an individual, and collective neurosis in our society. Those who create gun problems tend to "spread guilt" among the rest of us for a problem we didn't make -- are diagnosed as behaviorally disordered as individuals, and pathologically disordered for collective entities like corporations.
Corporate (and industrial) psychology is a university major because corporations have studied this neurotic tendency in humans. It's the basis of their profits in dividing and buying 50 united states. When you hear them use "we," in connection to violence and menace, they want us humans to believe "we" are talking about all of us.
We need to keep clear on who are most of the problem of gun violence -- it's not all of us. Not even a sizable minority of us.
One overlooked fact means that most of 'we' are not even potentially violent. "We" are almost 335 million.
As of five years ago:
3% of American adults own a collective 133m firearms – half of America’s total gun stock. These owners have collections that range from eight to 140 guns, the 2015 study found. Their average collection: 17 guns each.
One guy's shooting up a classroom does not make the class violent. Same for a society.
We the many still feel the menace in the very presence of guns and unnamed people who carry them. Gun makers and their bag men love to create the confusion that their menace makes us a violent society. But the numbers disprove and clear up such confusion.
Per capita gun ownership by state.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-ownership-by-state
Per capita gun deaths by state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_United_States_by_state
Gun laws in 50 states, FWIW.
Are we literally a menaced society that wants well regulated gun owners, but are structurally blocked from establishing such laws? Yes. We are now in danger, but that doesn't make us dangerous or violent.
Those who constitute the menace to civilians are the 3% who own guns, and gun corporations who "invest in" no regulation of their gun making & mass distribution of military assault weapons under protection of the commerce clause.
Gun ownership laws well regulate individuals by preventing high gun suicide numbers and high accident numbers by the " 'good guys ". As we know, corporate bag men say that because gun owner regulation laws don't perfectly prevent human problems, we humans shouldn't even try to infringe on other humans' 2A rights to accidents and suicide. Because they want us to believe that 2A trumps 1A.
Do the many believe 2A trumps 1A? No.
Do the many want to regulate 2A to support 1A? Yes.
(apologies for the graphic sizing)
Living victims have finally established legal precedent against unregulated corporate gun makers. Sandy Hook parents have set the legal precedent against gun makers. Uvalde parents will follow the Sandy Hook legal model.
Regulating gun makers will take time. But in the meantime, let's not call ourselves violent.
We are not what we are called. We are only what we answer to.
= new reply since forum marked as read