Mass shootings are a grotesque deformity of our modern culture.
Every pre-modern culture had weapons. The Romans had swords, but there are no accounts of teenagers walking into the marketplace and slashing up random strangers for the hell of it.
Even in the Wild West, where people slept with loaded guns under their pillows, they didn't have this phenomenon. Sure, they shot their enemies, and they shot people when they had a reason (not necessarily a good reason, but a reason nonetheless) - but they didn't walk down Main Street firing indiscriminately at everyone in sight. That did not happen.
War and fighting have been around for thousands of years, but they were always a means to an end. Never before in history have people walked into crowded public places and killed for no discernible reason, before taking their own lives.
They had the means to do it, but they didn't.
Something is wrong with our modern society. Something is going on inside of us. Our society has made people sick in ways that no other society ever has.
And yet, all of the solutions you hear from government and media figures have one thing in common: they all focus on the how of mass-shootings, while ignoring the why.
Don't you think the why is important?
Or would you let people stew in psychotic, murderous rage, as long as we take (one of) their methods away? Will everything be fine then? Will they continue to stew, but stew harmlessly?
Do you think that's healthy for our society?
Gun control address the "how" of the problem, but does nothing for the "why." It doesn't address the root causes of this perplexing violence.
We believe that deeper solutions are in order. We have to figure out why this is happening.
If we don't do that, then it will keep happening, even if the method moves beyond guns, to something else.
Think about it. Let's say you succeed in eradicating guns from the civilian population. Let's say the only people who have guns are police and military. This will never happen - it's impossible - but let's just say, for the sake of argument, that you've achieved it.
The next mass-killer will just use a knife. A knife can kill dozens of people in a crowded throng. It happens in countries with strict gun prohibition, like China.
Or worse, he'll just build a bomb. And that would be even worse. Bombs can kill hundreds of people in an instant.
In a way, we're lucky that firearms have been the method of choice thus far, rather than bombs. Just ask anyone who lives in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria. They'll tell you how much deadlier bombs are than guns. And any standard maniac can build a bomb in his kitchen, from readily available household materials.
What will you ban?
Gun control is a shallow solution. It may reduce some instances of violence, but it won't truly fix the problem. We'll still have millions of Jack Nicholsons from The Shining walking around, stewing in rage, looking for some method of causing mischief and carnage.
And the politicians will tell you, "Yes, we can't eliminate the problem, but we can at least reduce it."
Read between the lines, folks: They're telling you, they're admitting to you, that random, indiscriminate mass-slaughter will never end. It will be a fixture of our culture forever. And they're perfectly willing to accept that!
But we're not.
We think this problem can be solved.
We just have to address the root of it.
And the root is the alienation caused by mass-consumer culture and the elimination of natural social units.
The current, idiotic design of our communities leaves many people with no social group, no satisfying relationships, no friends, and no support network. Everyone knows this. It isn't a controversial statement to make.
If you refuse to address either of those, then you're not really solving anything.
"OK, I understand what you're saying. I'll give those two pages a click. But I'm still wondering, DO you believe in gun control? Do you think we should just do nothing about the over-availability of guns? I get that it's a "shallower" solution, but wouldn't a two-pronged approach be best? Can we solve both the deeper issues and the shallower ones, at the same time?"
We certainly can.
The Earth Party does support common-sense oversight of the distribution of weapons, and we have a plan to institute a more scale-appropriate system for regulating which weapons can exist in which places. We believe this system is a sensible compromise that will leave everyone satisfied - gun control activists and gun rights activists alike
By "scale appropriate", we mean that one of the current
Village regulates any weapon
Township regulates mechanical/ballistic
City regulates electric and automatic
Regional regulates chemical, propelled
Planetary regulates nuclear, biological, aero, satellite
Only for Guardianship. Literally the purpose of weapons, according to 2a advocates. To defend liberty and uphold law. So 2a only applies to who would use it for correct purpose. Which is synonymous with guardianship.
Society needs good ppl power to dominate that of bad.
Cant allow bad to gain power over good, bc then get tyranny and corruption and collapse.
Must prevent bad from having weapons.
But also need correct definition of good and bad.
And thats understanding of LoE.
Principle of Liberty, whr comes frm
Compassion and kind, not scpth
Be in good standing with guardian branch, meaning attend training and keep weapon secure and prove understanding of law