Mass shootings in the U.S.: The enabled citizen

Another mass shooting in the U.S. leaves, at last count, 59 dead and more than 500 injured — and thousands if not millions more traumatized.

That one man could commit such an act boggles the mind.

But we all know these types of mass shootings will continue in the United States.

The Las Vegas mass murderer demonstrated what America enabled him to do, and what anybody else there can do, too.

It seems almost futile to talk about stricter gun control — i.e. take them out of citizens’ hands altogether — because there are just too many people opposed to that and who seem to feel that the occasional mass shooting is not reason enough to give up their perceived right to bear arms.

But, still, to many others it just doesn’t seem right to simply shrug and accept the fact that we have to live with this sort of thing.

I’m wondering what it will take for Americans, collectively speaking, to take concrete steps to voluntarily give up their guns and ammunition, and for the weapons industry to stop offering them to the public?

— Jillian

5 thoughts on “Mass shootings in the U.S.: The enabled citizen

  1. In the end of the day, it’s really all about money, not really about the Second Amendment. As someone elsewhere has pointed out, the NRA wasn’t always as aggressive and extreme as they now are. It’s about the NRA effectively being owned by the arms manufacturers and retailers and in turn the NRA owns the politicians, not just GoP politicians, but also a fair few Democrats as well. Things will never change until victims of gun crime can sue sellers and manufacturers under product liability legislation as others sue car manufacturers. Of course, that has been tried on the past and the Supreme Court has ruled against that, so unless Congress passes new laws that over-ride the Supreme Court’s judgement, which will never happen because of how politicians’ souls are owned by the arms industry. There has never been absolutely freedom under the Second Amendment and there will never be but you wouldn’t believe that given what you constantly hear. It’s nothing but grim.

    Like

  2. That would take a revolution 1917 style. But with Donald Duck as POTUS, ain’t going to happen. They haven’t recovered from Vietnam even %|

    Like

    1. Barack Obama wanted to take away the guns. He was the cause of the greatest citizen purchase of guns and ammunition in the history of the US. Surprisingly, the gun manufacturers loved Obama. He was great for sales. (Obama was also great for their sales for bullets as the government – EPA, Justice, ATF, OSHA and other agencies bought billions of bullets.) If Obama had pushed more, there might have been a 1917 style revolution against the government.

      Like

      1. So, in other words, Americans are relatively content to live with mass shootings so that law-abiding people can carry guns they will probably never use to defend themselves against criminals.

        Like

  3. In the end of the day, it really IS about the second amendment to the US Constitution. If you want to take away guns from citizens, first you have to amend the constitution to invalidate the 2nd amendment. Second, you have to take away law abiding citizen’s guns. You will never get the guns from criminals. Then the only ones that have guns are criminals and the government.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s