News and comments of current elections and political topics.
Why do you think women would be different gun nuts than men? Women would change.
He was a Nazi. Video games, mental illness, school prayer, all this dances around the issue. Nazis are radicalizing young white people the way Islamic clerics radicalize young people in their countries.
I think Cruz was Nazi-curious, but never actually joined up. He was just nuts. Will he claim innocent because of it? He was just sick. No, it wasn't a spur of the moment thing. It was planned well ahead of time. He knew right from wrong.
He did not choose only black, Mexicans or Jews to shoot at. That would be Nazi.
In imagining my hypothetical situation, the number of women gun nuts, while not zero, I suspect would be fewer [both proportionally and numerically] than the present number of men gun nuts.
Similar mental illness : How many women want monster trucks ?
Fewer? But the more that wanted guns, monster trucks and political office ... the more would be violent. :-)
Just more women with practical shoes. I have met a few in life. Little different from men.
Better come on down to Arkansas and much of the Bible Belt Old South, girls are just as crazy as boys.
HWPeeler (HPeeler) said...
Is it a systemic problem. Do we raise people not to think critically? Do we teach them to read, believe and react ... not question what they read?
"Gun nuts are the problem." Yep.
One must first describe what a "gun nut" is. Is it someone who has a concealed carry permit? Is it someone who collects firearms and likes to shoot them at the range? Is it someone who likes to shoot at school kids or into crowds or churches?
I submit that only for the last is the term "gun nut" even close to being accurate. Just plain "nut" would actually be better, because if they didn't have a gun, they'd find some other way to kill people.
Just plain "nut" would actually be better, because if they didn't have a gun, they'd find some other way to kill people.
We know that a really determined crazy dude will kill. The objective is to put up hoops and make it harder. It is harder to kill people en masse with a knife than a gun where all you have to do is walk into the nearest crowded area, spray and pray.
We call this "mitigation." And mitigation is a proven strategy.
After a bombing, we made getting certain kinds of fertilizer harder. You have to notify the Feds if you want an extra large amount of that fertilizer, or for many other explosive materials for that matter. There are fewer bombings. If getting explosives was as easy getting a gun, that mess in Austin would have been much worse.
After 9/11 we made skyjacking harder. There has been less of that.
After the bank-robbing gangs of the 30's got rounded up (Bonnie & Clyde) we made robbing banks harder. There'has been less of that.
Used to be that drunk driving was socially acceptable. We cracked down on it. There's less of it.
Maybe, just maybe, making high capacity rapid fire weapons harder for crazy people to get will mean fewer mass shootings.