The Madness Of... U.S. gun laws

On Monday 16 Sep, former US Navy reservist Aaron Alexis was suspected of going on a shooting rampage at Washington Navy Yard in the US, killing 12 people before being shot dead by police.

See more on the dreadful story and a profile on the shooter here.
What is going wrong in the US, that attacks like this can still happen, and why is no-one doing anything about it?

Well it turns out some people are trying to, but America just loves its guns!

It's easy to see why some people in the US, particularly those in southern, formerly Confederate states, still harbour a deep distrust of the Government and of authorities in general. It was only around 150 years ago that the Northern states basically invaded them in the US civil war. You'd think the fact that they had been on the wrong side (the slavers' side!), and the emancipation of their former captives, you know, little things like that, might have swayed all of them by now, but unfortunately a hardcore residue remains stoically tied to their guns and their paranoia concerning authority.

Such churlish obstinacy, in a time when clear rational thought is required, is misplaced. President Obama has sensibly tried to enact bills that would try and control the purchase and use of firearms. But groups like the NRA and their supporters, who make a lot of money from memberships and gun sales, want none of it, despite all the evidence that gun rampages simply happen more often in places where there are more guns.

Strange that, isn't it?

It should be painfully obvious to all involved the benefits of a gun armistice, leading to a lower availability of firearms. Less guns means less deaths from guns. In Europe, we don't have a fraction of the problems that the US have with gun deaths each year.

In 2010, about 30,000 people in the US were killed by guns. Sure, a lot of them would have died anyway without the presence of a gun (suicides, and some murders), but to claim the number would not be significantly reduced by having to rely on more personal methods, such as a knife, is patently ridiculous.
Guns make murder so quick, easy and impersonal.

It's quite clear to me that letting people with serious mental health issues wander round with loaded firearms is FAR more of a risk than the chances of being targeted by determined individuals (be they government agents, criminals or whatever) and not being able to defend yourself on equal terms.

The notion that hordes of soldiers will come to your house trying to detain or kill you, or that if they did you could (or would even want to?) fight them off even if you had 100 guns, is ludicrous.

But we only need to start small to help stop this madness.

What harm could there be in simple background checks for people wanting to purchase firearms, so that a short delay is involved of a few days between requesting the weapon and obtaining it - enough time for tempers to cool and calm thoughts to return?

And what harm could there be in limiting the number of rounds in a clip, so that the potential destruction that can be wrought before the delay for the necessary reload, is reined in?

Guns are killing machines, specifically designed to take life. They are not directly responsible or accountable for any deaths they cause (that "honour" goes to the person pulling the trigger) but they are so much more than just tools.

A gun becomes a tool, if and only if you use it to hammer in a nail with a pistol-whip. And nobody does that.

This short post leads directly into my next, a ranty piece about video games, by way of this rather clumsy segue.

I expect it won't be long before video games will be called into question, with a journalist irresponsibly claiming that a diet of "Call of Duty" led this poor man directly to his death, and hence "ban violent games". I can't state strongly enough how much I object to this opinion, with a couple of potentially notable caveats.