How to end mass murders

THE HEADLINE was to draw you in. I learned that back during my newspaper “career.”

New ImageThere is no solution to mass shootings in the United States. None, zip, zilch, nada. It is an American cultural cancer without a cure. No radiation. No chemo.

Gun control certainly will not do it. Gun sales could be brought to an immediate, complete halt, and it would not solve the problem because America is floating in firearms already. It would be shutting the barn door after the horse has skedaddled.

Blaming Trump won’t do it either. Ain’t his fault anyway.

No one is to blame. It’s just something Americans do now and then. Mexicans don’t do it even though we have plenty of guns floating around down here too, which proves, by the way, the futility of gun control. We’re highly gun-controlled.

Bullet-riddled, bloody, gun-controlled Chicago proves the same point.

And the shooters span the political spectrum. The El Paso gunman was a right-wing nut. The Dayton killer was a lefty, a fan of Fauxcahontas and Antifa, which the media have tried to keep quiet. But not that of the El Paso gunman, of course. White supremacist!

And it was a Bernie bro’ who shot Rep. Steve Scalise in 2017.

Why were there no mass shootings above the border, say, a century ago? To a large degree, because there was no rapid communication, no internet. High tech has made it very easy for maniacs to get wild ideas about manifesting their fantasies and communicating them all over the place, which makes them feel so very good. And important.

Rapid communication, internet, social media exist in Mexico too, of course, so why don’t we do mass shootings? The culture is different.

I cannot imagine it would ever enter a Mexican’s mind in his wildest drunken dreams to go into a mall and start killing random strangers. It would be unfathomable.

Wipe out a rival narco gang? Well, sure, but that’s just business.

As for senseless, mass murder, better get used to it.

Above the border, that is.

* * * *

(Note: Here’s an interesting piece by a writer who thinks America has an “angry, young man” crisis. He’s correct and, again, it’s the culture.)

30 thoughts on “How to end mass murders

  1. There’s an elephant in the room, and it is assault weapons. Here’s my solution: make the importation, manufacture, and sale of assault weapons illegal. (You can sell guns that require manual loading between shots, four-shot magazines max. That’s all anyone needs for target shooting, hunting, or home defense. If you want more than that, join the police or the army, if they’ll have you.) Then the Government offers to buy existing assault weapons at prices that strongly discourage private transactions, say ten to twenty thousand or maybe more, whatever it takes.


      1. “It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.” (Franklin Roosevelt)


          1. FDR was a great leader because he had a great spirit. He was partially paralyzed from polio, but he was never paralyzed by the problems our nation faced in those dark days.


              1. Maybe this is the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives: one is the party of “try something” and the other is the party of “oh, that’ll never work.”


  2. I agree, there is no reason for any individual to own an assault or automatic weapon. Don’t buy them back, just make it illegal to possess one, subject to mandatory five-year prison sentence. Give them 90 days to surrender them. I doubt very many would take the chance of hiding one vs. five years in prison. We were successful in banning machine guns. We can do it again. I say you took your chance when you bought one.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Phxxer: As the link I left below in reply to “Pablo,” shows, the definition of an assault weapon depends upon whom you ask. I embrace the definition that it’s a military gun unavailable to the public. As for automatic weapons, it’s simply another way of saying machine gun, and they are already illegal and have been for almost a century. You have to obtain a special permit to own one, a permit that’s difficult to obtain. People get confused about these terms, as left-wing, ignoramus, talking head Don Lemon laughably demonstrated in front of the whole nation about a year ago. What is easy to get are semi-autos, which have been around for a long, long time, long before maniacs starting shooting up schools and malls. The hubbub got worse. and leftists more hysterical, when gun manufacturers started gussying them up to look like military weapons, which they are not. They just look bad-ass, nothing more.

      But anyway, no level of gun-control laws will have any effect whatsoever on the phenomenon of American mass shootings. That horse is out of the barn and running free in the meadow.


    2. You do know that it’s already illegal to shoot people, right? How is another layer of law going to deter those already willing to break them?

      This is not a single-variable problem. And if it were as easy to solve as you suggest, it would already have been solved.

      Felipe, alas, speaks the uncomfortable truth.

      Kim G
      El Paso, TX
      For now, at least.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. As long as there is a machine shop in the U.S., there will be all sorts of weapons available for those who want them and are willing to pay the price.
    As for foreign terrorists, considering all of the billions in petro bucks that the intellectual authors of terrorism have at their disposal, they can arm their agents of hate with all sorts of killing power.

    The diplomatic pouch allows then to ship them everywhere. See how easily they sent a murder-and-butcher team to Turkey to do their dirty work.

    The average Joe will probably surrender his deer rifle, but Pookie and RayRay will never give up their Saturday night specials and their beloved AK-47s.


  4. Thank you, Felipe, for making my point. My question (and I should have asked, “Please”) was meant for Creigh, but you answered it completely. “Assault weapons” is a totally bogus and made-up term to confuse the public and scare them into lumping machine guns with regular, albeit lookalike, regular arms. And, like Robert said, I once had a late friend who used to make real pistols in the hobby area of his senior citizen housing!

    Yes, it’s me. I’ve been away from the Unseen Moon for a while. I just got back from a grand tour of Mexico that was an adventure in itself! Unfortunately, I didn’t make it to your neck of the woods, though. Sorry.


    1. Pablo: I confused you for someone else at the get-go. Do forgive. However, after a bit of further investigation, I have come to this conclusion, and it appears to be the most accurate definition: Assault weapons are military rifles that can be switched from semi-auto to full-auto as needed. It is specifically that, so I do not think it is bogus at all. However, the word has come to mean lots of things to many people. Basically, it just conveys “scary weapon” to most folks.


    2. Pablo, P.S.: An AR-15 is not an assault weapon because it is not fully automatic like an AR-16, which is an assault weapon. Alas, it appears that converting AR-15s to fully automatic is not that difficult. A problem.


  5. The AR-16 or the M-16 was a piece of junk that jammed just when it was needed. Why the U.S. government bought it is beyond me.


  6. The AR-15, not the AR-16, morphed into the M-16. The AR-16 was never massed produced. The main difference today between the AR-15 and M-16 is select fire, the capability to choose semi vs full auto firing. Since there exists a semantics argument over what to call civilian semi-automatics such as the AR-15 or AK-47 I only post this info for the sake of accuracy here on the unseenmoon.

    I put several hundred magazines through an M-16 in 1969. Mine was the newer version from early Vietnam war M-16s that were notorious for jamming. It was still real important to keep very clean, which was a very big pain in the ass, but mine never jammed.

    As far as converting a rifle from semi to full auto, even though it is easily done, the penalty is quite severe and not many are willing to take the risk.


    1. I’m guessing those insane enough to do a mass shooting wouldn’t worry much about getting caught having or having had their gun converted to fully automatic. They want to get the job done as quickly and easily as possible. If the only weapon available was a knife, they would in the same way want to get their hands on the best knife available.


  7. Laws do not stop criminals. That is why they are criminals. Firearms are the tools of their trade. If some loco is going to kill a lot of people, he/she/it will not be worried about a firearms conviction. That is small potatoes.


    1. Laws don’t stop criminals. But they stop a whole lot of people from becoming one. If a machinist only risked a slap on the wrist for converting weapons to full auto, there would be a million of them out there. And, thankfully, there aren’t.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. We need crazy control rather than gun control. I see some loony-tune went ape in Los Angeles with a knife. Four are dead and two are wounded. Also, the other day, a crazy pushed a fellow into the pit of the subway in New York City. The crowd turned on him. He was lucky to survive.

    We need to take a close look at how some drugs affect some people. Kids that have been given Ritalin all through their school years suddenly come off it when they get out of school. Then all hell breaks loose. Psychotropic drugs are used to keep inmates under control, but what happens when they are released from the institution? I was given Accutane to heal a diabetic ulcer. It messed me up so badly that I couldn’t even count. And I was doing payroll then. I can only wonder what mistakes I made then.


    1. Señor Gill: Crazy control instead of gun control. I like that, and it’s true. There are a number of causes of the nuttiness currently running amok in the United States, but gun control won’t address any of them.


Comments are closed.