Skip to main content

View Diary: This Is What I Cannot Understand (280 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Granny, Your first section is right on-- it would (0+ / 0-)

    seem, wouldn't it, that in these cases of horrific gun violence, after so many mass shootings we'd be seeing crackdowns and checkpoint increases analogous to those that were imposed for air travel.  

    I agree with you there.

    But remember:  liquids weren't banned wholesale in travel; the sale of shampoo and other liquids wasn't banned; the sale of lighters and matches wasn't banned; shoes weren't banned; etc.  If we're going to make an analogy between what happened after 9/11 regarding new regulations, inspections, searches and crackdowns in airports, and what it seems should be happening in the wake of such an escalation of mass gun violence, we have to acknowledge that forbidding the sale and distribution of guns is not going to solve the problem.  

    I totally agree with you that it should be as hard to get a gun as it is to get an abortion in some states, and feel strongly that people should not be permitted to assemble their own private armories, or purchase semiautomatics and automatic weapons.  But ultimately, as you point out, all those airport checks and seizures don't make you feel any safer.  I can tell you that they don't make me feel any safer because they do nothing to stop a larger network of cultures of anti-American, anti-government terrorism.  And making it difficult to get guns would do nothing to stop a larger network of cultural trends that feed into the rise in mass gun violence.

    In any event, even if we made it super hard for people to get guns, there are some complications involved in translating that prevention aspect, into the prevention of mass shootings in public spaces.  To name just three:  
    1.  Air carriers are private enterprises and they worked hand in hand with government (federal, state, municipal) entitities to work out the legality of imposing the new searches and seizures at airports and on airplanes in the wake of 9/11.  It will be a lot harder to figure out who are all the public-private interests involved in imposing gun regulations to stop mass violence.

    2.  Air carriers tend to set up operations and work through two very specific sites, namely, airports and the air itself.  Unlike gun use, which can be anywhere.  

    3.  Structurally, there was a ready-made "bottleneck" so to speak at airports, where passengers had to check bags, move from the larger airport space toward a discrete departure gate, and finally board a particular flying machine.  In other words, the framework for creation of a larger winnowing-down and inspection and seizure system was already there in the structure of heading toward an airplane itself.  There doesn't seem to be an equivalent "bottleneck" in the many kinds of workplaces, government offices, stores, shopping malls, schools, campuses, etc. where mass shootings have taken place in the past couple of years.

    That's one more thing to add to my long list of small problems. --my son, age 10

    by concernedamerican on Sun Dec 16, 2012 at 06:41:01 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (150)
  • Community (71)
  • Baltimore (68)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Elections (27)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Labor (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Economy (19)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Science (16)
  • Politics (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Barack Obama (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site