While that is far from the entirety of the problem, I do think you are more correct than not on that point. Brings to mind the phenomenon of the snarling grill design of some cars and many trucks: that certainly doesn’t cause people to operate them with the R-complex rather than the neocortex, but it does seem entirely too synergistic in ways that are neither cause nor effect.
While it may seem to defy logic, most of us have experienced the phenomenon of carrying ourselves differently based on nothing more than our attire that day. To presume that nothing about that psychological phenomenon can carry over to the attire of our killing machines seems a bit naïve to me.
As discussed above, for cultural reason right-wing communities don’t promote mental health therapy as most educated people understand the term.
From what I’ve seen, that does happen in regard to weapons. Unfortunately, it’s accompanied by commercial marketing campaigns and far-right rhetoric that tend to overwhelm and drown out the other aspects. The way the AR-15 is marketed is particularly disgusting and exploitative in that regard, constantly offering obsessive collectors a way to scratch their itch for more toys and accessories and variants and "special limited editions whether they’re into “Punisher” style paramilitary style or being the “cool girl” with the kicky Hello Kitty rifle.
Right-wingers are letting out a collective sigh of relief upon learning that the shooter’s name is Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, instead of Jim-Bob or something similar. “Whew, he ain’t one of us.” They should know, however, that if they support AR-15 ownership he is one of them.
id be surprised if there wasn’t at least one person in the store with a gun on their person already. and one of the people who was killed was a cop with a gun.
guns kill people far too quickly for a “good guy with a gun” to matter
No. Any semiautomatic rifle with a removable magazine has the same functionality. Some are significantly more deadly than the AR-15 due to the more powerful ammunition.
Presence is probably due to how common it is.
Yes. If the specific model(s) were banned, they would make new models (like in Canada). If certain features are banned, you create something that works around the letter of the law, neutering it some, like in California.
If all semiautomatic magazine fed rifles were banned, you would have lever action and pump action rifles, pump action shotguns, or handguns used instead.
Shortly after a ban, you have new AR style rifles with no gas system, and side charging bolts one has to work with each shot - like in the UK. If non-removable magazine fed semiautomatic rifles are still allowed, you would see the development of clip fed rifles like the venerable M1 Garand, or other stripper clip fed rifles.
I don’t. It just happened to shake out to be the most popular semi-automatic magazine fed rifle. If it wasn’t the AR-15, it would have ended up being something else of similar functionality. The AR-15 has been available to by since 1964. For the first 4 years you could buy one by mail and have it shipped to your door. Before 1994 Brady Bill you could walk in and out of a gun shop with one with no background check. The technology for a reliable removable magazine fed semi-automatic rifle is over 100 years old. The ability for people to carry out such acts has been there for a long time and they were even more easier to acquire. The number of people wanting and willing to commit mass atrocities is what is different now.
This arbitrary idea of the look of a rifle being “bad” or “good” is both silly and illogical. It is why the 1994 Assault Weapons ban didn’t actually ban anything - it just reduced the features a rifle could have on it.
As you pointed out, there is little to no functional difference between your Tikka, or any “deer rifle”, and a deadly sniper rifle. Why do you think the Canadian Rangers selected it? But I highly doubt you owning one has changed your mindset to the point you have ever thought about hurting someone with it, nor has its less tactical laminate wood stock made it some how less of a weapon.
…we would probably not see the same incidence of killing sprees here. We’d see them, for sure, but maybe not to the same degree, given that the US culture is uniquely imbued with the factors you note.
I’m happy to leave it as a thought experiment and agree that US culture needs to change.
Also, re
Another thought experiment wonders whether, if huge amounts of mental health services were aggressively and successfully targeted at conservatives in general and en masse, then the mental health of the rest of the nation wouldn’t - as a by-product - improve dramatically (and its needs for mental health services decline). But that’s probably a bit political.
All it can be is a thought experiment, because after all these decades of cultural conditioning American conservatives are going to automatically (at least in front of others) reject services offered by the government – especially mental health therapy, which has been opposed by conservative leaders since the days of Freud.
And yes, those mentalities (as opposed to “mental states” – different concept) are political, just as the barrel-stroker’s mentality is.
Given that mass shooting have an economic cost of $200B a year, it seems like there should at very least be a requirement that per firearm, owners must maintain a $10M insurance policy against misuse. Stiff fines and confiscation for failure to insure, all money goes into state coffers.
Agreed, but someone here will always show up to shed crocodile tears about firearms insurance being unfair to the poor and PoC. It’s a BS argument that can be reduced in seconds to a semi-religious “But this is different because Second Amendment!” fallback, but that train is never late.
It was nice going almost a year between mass shootings.
I’m sure anti-regulation folk will claim that since covid did so much better than our embarassing excuse for gun control legislation, we should get rid of all laws.
I have every bit of confidence that our fine government will do exactly as good a job controlling and directing domestic terrorists as they did directing and controlling fundamentalist terrorism in the mid east too!
I know I’m a Canadian, and you’re not, but do you know what is going on with the assault rifle ban in Canada? I have not seen a lot of talk about it here. I’m sure there is, just not where I hang out I thought it was not specifically AR 15 but anything that had that militaristic presentation? You seem to suggest there is some kind of workaround. The only Canadian I ever knew that had an AR 15 (or at least admitted to it ) wasn’t a hunter, can’t imagine someone hunting with one.
A while back I came up with the idea of a bong in the shape of a dildo, such that the only way to hit it would be quite a mouthful before you ever tasted smoke. #ammosexual4realz
For those pointing out that Boulder recently undid their assault weapon ban, it should be known that the shooter was from Arvada, CO - a town primarily in Jefferson County (with a tiny corner sitting in Adams County), not in Boulder County.
I don’t think this paints Boulder in much better light, but it is good to know in case someone challenges you on the truth.
Authorities said Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa was from the Denver suburb of Arvada and that he engaged in a shootout with police Monday afternoon inside the store. The suspect was being treated at a hospital and was expected to be booked into the county jail later in the day on murder charges.
I thought it was not specifically AR 15 but anything that had that militaristic presentation? You seem to suggest there is some kind of workaround. The only Canadian I ever knew that had an AR 15 (or at least admitted to it ) wasn’t a hunter, can’t imagine someone hunting with one.