What's new

Get Over It: Mass Shootings are the New Normal in America

fatman17

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
32,563
Reaction score
98
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
JUNE 21, 2016

Get Over It: Mass Shootings are the New Normal in America

by TED RALL

What is wrong with Americans?

Okay, that’s a very open-ended question with many potential answers.

What I’d like to talk about this time is: why is it that Americans only begin to get serious about a problem after it’s too late to solve it?

Currently, I’m thinking about the latest, depressingly predictable response to the Orlando massacre.

As usual, right-wingers like Donald Trump want to restrict immigration. But even setting aside the obvious moral and practical economic objections to nativism, how would that prevent future mass shootings (in part) in the name of the Islamic State? Orlando shooter Omar mateen wasn’t an immigrant. He was born in Queens, New York; his parents were from Afghanistan. If the Republicans’ goal is to get rid of potentially self radicalized Muslims, it’s too late. There are 3.3 million Muslims in the United States. Many are full-fledged citizens.

Any group of people that numbers in the millions includes some who are mentally ill, some who are politically radical, some who are religious fundamentalists, and some who are some combination of all three. Since it’s illegal to deport U.S. citizens, millions of whom are Muslim, a few of whom are crazy – and the United States insists on pursuing an endless “war on terror” against Muslim countries – there’s no way that a policy of reduced immigration can prevent future attacks by homegrown Islamists.

On what passes for a Left, Democrats like Hillary Clinton are pushing for tighter restrictions on guns. As usual.

Indeed, it’s hard to argue that civilians require military grade weapons like the semi-automatic AR-15 assault rifle used to kill 49 people at the Pulse nightclub. Hunters don’t use them. If the AR-15 is legal, why not hand grenades? Had Mateen been forced to use a pistol or long gun instead, his bullets would have been smaller, the death toll lower. Some of his victims might have been able to overpower him as he tried to reload.

Here again, however, it’s too late to fix the problem. The cat is out of the bag. Two years ago, the national sport shooting foundation estimated that there were between 5 million and 8.2 million assault-style rifles in American homes. Sales of these weapons always spike after mass shootings, so it’s a safe bet that that number has risen by at least 1 million or two since then.

Even if Hillary Clinton were to succeed beyond her wildest dreams, assault weapons were banned permanently, what about those millions of AR-15’s already in circulation? Would she be willing to send jackbooted federal thugs door to door to search every home until every last one of them, or at least the lion’s share, were rounded up and melted down? Of course not.

The truth is, this ship sailed back in 2004 when Congress allowed thefederal ban on assault weapons to expire without being renewed. Congress’s failure to act over the last 12 years has transformed the United States into a nation awash in military hardware.

Mass shootings are the new normal. Get over it.

“It’s too late to do anything about it, now let’s act” mania appears to have become as much of a part of our national character as the myth thateveryone is a member of the middle class.

Progressives and liberals who form the base of the Democratic Party, most of whom supported Bernie Sanders during the primaries, are engaged in a robust debate over whether to switch over to Hillary Clinton this fall, support a third-party candidate like Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, or stay home on election day. It’s the same old question: Do you vote for the lesser of two evils? Isn’t that voting for evil?

Democrats for Clinton are trying to convince Bernie Sanders voters that November represents an existential threat, that if Donald Trump is elected everything we know and love about America will be destroyed. They don’t get it.

What the Clintonites don’t understand is that it’s already too late. Yes, if Donald Trump gets in, there’s a strong danger that what’s left of American democracy will yield to something radically new and terrifying, full-fledged authoritarianism. But Hillary Clinton also represents something horrible: a continuation of the neoconservatism that led to the invasion of Iraq, has made the United States a target of Islamist terrorism, complete capitulation to the banking class whose power structure relies upon the vast majority of American workers toiling for longer hours and shrinking wages – in effect, the last nail in the coffin of the idea that ordinary people have the right to imagine themselves and their children living better than they have in the past.

The existential battle isn’t in November. It was a couple of weeks ago, when Hillary Clinton appeared to nail down the Democratic presidential nomination. Whatever happens now, whether authoritarian Trumpism or steady-as-she-goes downwardly mobile Clintonism, we are screwed.

Perhaps no issue better illustrates my point than climate change.

I remember watching Jacques Cousteau on television in the 1970s, when he repeatedly warned that the oceans (along with the rest of the planet) were warming, and that it would soon – might already be – too late to stop it. The politicians and corporate executives, of course, ignored him and the other scientists who said the same thing. Now, finally, the political class is giving lip serviceto the crisis, though action remains in short supply.

The fact is, Cousteau was probably right. It was probably too late to save the planet back then. It’s certainly too late now. The climate science is clear. The polar ice cap is never coming back; Antarctica is melting away. The process can’t be reversed. Even if every internal combustion engine in the world stopped running tomorrow morning, human beings have pumped too much energy into the closed system that is our atmosphere to reverse global warming.

My intention isn’t to bum you out. All I’m saying is, let’s stop focusing on problems we can’t do anything about and work on those we still can.

Join the debate on Facebook

Ted Rall, syndicated writer and the cartoonist for ANewDomain.net, is the author of the book “Snowden,” the biography of the NSA whistleblower.
 
.
“It always comes down to two choices; Get busy living, or get busy dying.”

I choose to be in the first category, not so much for me after all I am probably on my third chance at life and those that know me probably think the old bastard didn't deserve the first two, yes I have to get better friends.
I choose to get busy living for the future, I wont be there and that's fine but I have three lovley grandchildren and three more on the way they will be and I want and hope it will be a better place.

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now

Yes gun control and climate control should have started 20 years ago, yes it is harder now than it was and will be even harder next year. So there are 10 million AR-15's in circulation in the US and god knows how many other weapons as deadly. You wont get everyone to turn them in tomorrow but you can stop it being 12million, you can stop people picking up 3 automatic weapons and 2000 rounds on their way home from their psychiatrist. You can stop people you wouldn't sit next to on a plane buying military weapons. You can make a start.

No one thought it would happen, no one thought it would work, there were too many guns, it is too late to try, it was too expensive but Australia did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-actually-did-something-to-stop-gun-violence/

Reducing carbon emissions difficult, reducing gun deaths a nightmare, my granddaughters smile ..priceless.
 
.
The problem is not of Gun control but how to keep the general public away from mental duress. Though we all know the history of why gun was made available to the US citizen. The realisation of this law was never there because it was a decision that was formed in haste to find a quick solution.

Today most of the people that have been arrested or killed in attacks like the one in Orlando is more to do with a person who is believed to have homosexual genes. Most probably he was suffering from should he accept it or deny it and in that he went bananas.

Then there are ex-service personnel who have come out from militarily service and are hallucinating because they have not gone through the proper rest or perhaps situations that are beyond them to control. The policy of bring all the equipment back to the US and then giving it to the police who keep it stationed very visible would also add to the mental approach that the person in in a war zone.

We can not just consider "What is wrong with Americans?" without accepting that there are other systems too that need to be addressed. No doubt these systems are also made by Americans and the responsibilities also rests with them but they can not be blamed for not trying to find appropriate solutions. Solutions remain within their systems however finding it is a problem because the system is such that it would take years for identification and then years for it to be accepted by all STATES. Then the system would require time for its implementation. Till then how many more lives would it take no one can say.
 
.
The issue is more of mental health. As the vast majority of mass shooters suffer from not only mental health but basic problem solving issues. Columbine High School, 2 teens unable to handle being bullied or being outsiders or Sandy Hook mentally unbalanced.

Some people see the oppression of homosexual, with their own sexual desires combined with their religious backgrounds. Now rather than getting into conspiracy theories involved with Orlando, looking purely at the stated facts of the shooter being abusive, controlling, mentally disturbed it comes into question why and how it was easy for him to obtain a firearm at all.

Does the 2nd amendment promote gun ownership? Far from. The NRA, National Rifle Association was never a gun lobbying organization. It was a firearm safety and training until a coup in the 70's where ultra-conservatives staked the odds against the "Old Guard" at a convention. Effectively overnight becoming a Champion of Gun Ownership, with a ready made membership and funds. Helped by paranoia of the "Overlords" in control of the American Government. The Manifest Dynasty

Australia is not a good example of gun control, just better regulations of firearms. The government bought back semi-automatics and any weapon classified as being able to bring own a massive number of civilians in a short amount of time after 1996. Introducing new rules to the process of gun ownership;
longer wait times (28 days or more depending on any issues),
background checks (police interviewing spouses/ neighbors/ doctor/ children/ coworkers),
"acceptable" reason to own a gun.

And that too in a country where on every turn there's mother nature attempting to murder a human. But since then gun ownership has risen with more Australians now having firearms than before 96.

Even now, the weapon used in Orlando would have not made a difference in the aftermath if it was a 9mm. A trained shooter can and will easily be able to release and reload clips or magazines. Reloading barely requires an engineering degree or a walk-through course like a police officer does just to remove his side arm from the hostler.
 
.
Australia is not a good example of gun control, just better regulations of firearms. The government bought back semi-automatics and any weapon classified as being able to bring own a massive number of civilians in a short amount of time after 1996. Introducing new rules to the process of gun ownership;
longer wait times (28 days or more depending on any issues),
background checks (police interviewing spouses/ neighbors/ doctor/ children/ coworkers),
"acceptable" reason to own a gun.
But since then gun ownership has risen with more Australians now having firearms than before 96.

.

I do wonder at the difference between gun control and firearm regulation one leads to the other. Yes we have guns at pre 96 levels again but our rate of gun-related deaths is decreasing. Latest figures show guns account for just 1.06 deaths per 100,000 compared to 10.3 per 100,000 in the United States so we are still doing some thing right.

"And that too in a country where on every turn there's mother nature attempting to murder a human"

Not every thing in Australia is trying to kill you, the sheep are safe , well most of them.
 
.
I do wonder at the difference between gun control and firearm regulation one leads to the other.

I always come to an understanding that Gun Control is controlling the number of guns available or just blanket ban.

With firearm regulation more of rules to owning a firearm in general.

Specific words can change the meaning of a sentence entirely.

As far as comparing Australian gun-related deaths to American, I can't speak for you guys but as far as America is concerned there's a break down in family and cognitive abilities. We've come to accept violence as a potential answer to common everyday bullying. Parents getting arrest for just raising their hands to discipline their child. People in general dont/ haven't faced the consequences for their everyday faults.

We got politicians running for President of the US with hurt feelings because the other candidate called them a "crooked", "heartless", or "crazy".
 
.
Reality check...

us_mass_shootings_zps65aili9l.png


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html?_r=0
...as a matter of public health, gun suicides are a huge problem in the United States.
Where is Mr. Rall all this time about this ?
 
.
There is an old saying.

You are probably have a higher chance to be killed in a traffic accident going to the airport than die in a plane crash. Yet, people aren't taking much concern in traffic accident, but I am pretty sure everyone of the plane crash was headlined in any newspaper headline on any country.

Problem is that, this is about the perspective, every time a plane crash, by definition it would be a Mass Casualty Event, and thus, it hit more of a major headline than Traffic Accident.

People blown up the proportion, not going to say those incident is not important, but it is not as bad as you think it will be, yet because of its nature, people usually remember that than any other crime.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom