Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxi.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxi!russ From: russ@ihuxi.UUCP (Russell Spence) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: a gun control question - (nf) Message-ID: <993@ihuxi.UUCP> Date: Thu, 26-Jul-84 14:48:11 EDT Article-I.D.: ihuxi.993 Posted: Thu Jul 26 14:48:11 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 28-Jul-84 20:57:38 EDT Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 54 > Regarding the shooting, I ask the gun control dissenters, why it is > that RANDOM murders take place almost only in this country? If it is NOT > because of the fact that the US has far looser guns controls than > say, Western Europe, Canada etc., why is it? Do you wish to claim > that such senseless slayings would take place even if there were the > strictest of gun control? If so, then we need to start a discussion > about the differences in our society and those where such murders don't > take place. > > S. Krolikoski > u of illinois at U-C > ...!pur-ee!uiucdcs!stank > > If not the difference in gun control, why the difference in the crime > statistics in the NY Times and the London Times? The reason that more random murders takes place in this country is not because of the availability of guns. It reflects a fundamental difference in the people who live in the country. People in Britain, for example, have a different view of the law. Maybe there is someone out there who knows about British attitudes who could describe this behavior better than me, but the fact remains that gun control does not been shown to have a significant bearing on the crime rate. Look at your example of NY. It has the toughest gun control laws in the country, but it also has one of the highest crime rates. Look at Switzerland, they are required to keep guns and have one of the lowest crime rates (I believe that someone has already mentioned this on the net). I think that the reason there is random violence is due to the behavior of the media. The difference between this country and others is that it is in the U.S. that you see television shows whose dominant theme is violence (the A-Team, etc etc ad infinitum).(and people watch a LOT of TV in America) It is in the U.S. that the media glorifies random violence like the MacDonalds slaughter by making it a major media event. If you want to know what is sick about the MacDonalds massacre, it is not the the killer was able to get guns, but that his widow is going to sell her story. It is this attitude more than anything else that promotes violence. ESPECIALLY random violence. If this act was so bad, why is it that the killer's name is now a household word? Why is it that his widow is going to make millions selling the story of the massacre? Time Magazine and Newsweek wouldn't be plastering photos of the bloody bodies in MacDonald's all over its magazine unless people wanted to see them. This is what you should be questioning. This is what you should be fighting. Not someone's right to own a hunk of metal. Violence does not increase with each new gun, but rather, with each new punk who becomes famous for killing a John Lennon, a Martin Luther King, or who takes a pot-shot at the president. Hollywood and Time magazine are more to blame for random killings than any gun manufacturor, and the reason they promote violence comes back to US. We are the ones who pay to see it. -- Russell Spence ihnp4!ihuxi!russ AT&T Technologies Naperville, IL