FWIW, main point of confusion wrt “gun culture” seem to be two related definitions floating around:
(1) the subset of American culture pertaining to guns (OP’s definition; also stated in post #64)
(2) the culture (customs, social institutions, values) of the group of people (roughly) who like/own/use guns–this version also gets used in a pejorative sense (perhaps as “gun zealots” (not my words)), but not necc.
There’s certainly overlap, and could be used interchangeably in some cases.
Some of this culture (in sense of (1) at least) is good, some of it not. Notions of justice, lawmen, "Go ahead, make my day.", "Say hello to my little friend.", and so on.
Rhetorical question: what are your top 5 associations at the word "gun", or top 5 American cultural memes at the same word? (I'll bet it's not duck hunting.) And where is the morality in this? What values does it uphold?
It is not just tool + user, but tool + user + culture.
PS…
Agreed.
-VM
[/QUOTE]
Pfffft. Qv post #64 (caught you both with your hands down your pants). The problem with these "define this" bits is it throws the work on the other poster, and can be (and IS) used as a means to wear the other person down, encourages laziness, a "spoonfeed me" attitude (and worse). I've seen Bone use this "technique" repeatedly, brazenly.
Obviously you can have terrible murder sprees (Anders Behring Breivik) without a strong American-style gun culture.
In my view, it is pre-mature to blame the Charleston mass murder, even partially, on the US gun culture. In a couple years, when a true crime book is written on the tragedy, we can judge then.
Where did he get his first gun? How did he learn to shoot? Where did he get the murder weapon? How determined was he to get the gun? Would a longer waiting purchase period have made a difference in choice of weapon? Would he have killed fewer people if there were an assault-weapon-ban type of magazine size limit? All these questions would have to be answered before saying whether he would have killed nine people regardless of living in a country with a strong gun culture.
Right now, I can find news reports answering some of these questions, but the answers are not consistent.
It will be, let’s say, interesting to see if this early report pans out:
One characteristic of the US gun culture is the sharp distinction it draws between the law-abiding majority, whose gun bearing is to be celebrated as a supreme expression of freedom, and the non-law-abiding, who are to be given draconian prison sentences for any exercise of their second amendment rights. If someone was more or less forced to give Roof the gun because of their legal status, this would, to me, be a subtle influence of the gun culture. I don’t expect this to be a popular paragraph, but I’m not here to gain kudos
You seem to be suggesting that if my hands were down my pants, it would prevent me from reading. What an odd thing to say…
Do you mean this?
I’ve bolded the parts that I think you may be saying are a “definition”. For argument’s sake, I’ll accept that this is what you think the “gun culture” is, but it’s so off-handedly insulting, I’m surprised you thought anyone would take it seriously.
The problem is, no one who is likely to debate this topic with you is very likely to agree that this is an even remotely fair representation of what the “gun culture” is in the U.S., or that a relevant portion of the gun-owning population thinks this way. Which means that you’ll never make it to the next step of connecting this with the SC murders.
Sure, you can find people who think this way, but you’re a long, long way from convincing me that this is a legitimate description of gun owners in general.
I agree with you, in general. However, this is not a case of arguing over the definition of “racism” or “atheism”. This is taking a term that sounds generically descriptive (the culture of gun ownership in the U.S.) but is, in practice, used as a derogatory term for gun owners/enthusiasts (I offer your “definition” as Exhibit One). So it really needs to be discussed, unless all you really want to say is “Gun owners are assholes, and that’s why all those people in SC are dead.”
Which would be an opinion you’re definitely entitled to, but hardly fertile ground to grow anything like a Great Debate in.
I can’t find anything inflammatory or unreasonable here. Needless to say, I’m very confused.
FTR, what stands out to me most in that article is what an unapologetic, bone-deep racist he is.
It’s an interesting hypothesis…regardless, it seems WAY different from what the OP was suggesting.
To be clear, there’s not a word you’ve posted that I strongly disagree with or would feel an urge to debate, and your hypotheses are very plausible. However, in generously offering to present these hypotheses on behalf of the OP (or, at least, that’s what it SEEMS like you’re doing), I think you’re making a very different case than what was intended.
You bolded everything BUT the definition. Are you baiting?
“America’s gun culture–that is, all the information, media memes, traditions in communities, word of mouth, etc., to do with guns.”
You understand what culture is, right? (Look it up anyway. Just a regular dictionary definition.) It comes from people, but it is separate. I never said, or implied, that “gun owners are morally empty”. I’m saying the cultural information attached to guns has few, if any (beyond the “value” of self-defense) morals or other values attached with it. And I said you or anyone is welcome to rebut that. I and other readers would be happy for counterexamples, not ~meltdowns. Often the morality is supposed to come from outside <all the cultural information in America related to guns>. Where is the morality in the popular meme, for instance, “Go ahead, make my day”?
I know, totally right. Where is the morality in the Umbrella Corporation who put out the T-Virus turning everyone into zombies? Or where is the morality in Alonzo Harris when he was teaching Ethan Hawke on his first Training Day? And talk about Galactic Senates - what’s the deal with Chancellors declaring emergency powers for themselves then switching over to a Galactic Empire? I think you would join me in condemning the morally questionable, nay, bankruptcy of zombie virus producers, corrupt police, and Sith Lords.
I’m dropping out of this discussion.
Earlier this week my 26 year old nephew Christopher gave up trying to get help handling his PTSD. My brother Kerry got the phone call from the state patrol that they found Chris in his car by the side of the road, with the gun he had used to kill himself. It’s taken me this long to calm down enough to post something that wouldn’t get me a warning, and this thread deserves better than that.
Hmmm, if you got the impression I’m upset, then…if I DO get upset, I expect it to be gratifyingly terrifying.
Not intentionally; I don’t honestly see how you can claim this clarifies anything
That’s not a culture; it’s a compendium, or, I guess, a list of sources. If I tell you that “America’s attitude about abortion” consists of every sentence that’s ever been uttered that included the word ‘abortion’, you’d still have no idea what I think America’s attitude about abortion is. By the same token, that sentence gives me nothing that helps me understand what YOU mean when you say “the gun culture”.
Um, everything that’s ever been said with regard to a particular subject? Or maybe “the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group”?
I’m not sure what distinction you’re trying to make here, but I definitely don’t understand it. Speech comes from people and speech is not the same as people. But if a person says something obnoxious, that obnoxious speech is a pretty direct reflection on the person who spoke.
I’m going to rearrange your points a little, for logical flow:
I really thought that was one of my more polite posts. I’m a little taken aback to see it referred to as a “meltdown”.
Okay, I think this is probably where the debate (or meltdown–or spitting contest–if you prefer) really should be. First, you suggested that the “gun culture” was “morally empy”. Now, you’re backing off a bit to “mostly empty”. I’m reading this to say that you’re acknowledging that being able to defend oneself has some moral value, but relatively little. Obviously, people that think they really NEED to defend themselves (or think a future need may arise–Zombie Apocalypse!) are going to assign a lot more value to this one.
And of course, you’re leaving out a number of other possibilities that have already been mentioned here, like self-sufficiency (there are people who use guns to kill animals, which they subsequently eat), hobbyist/skills (a LOT of people enjoy target practice; particularly, taking pride in developing a high level of skill), sportsmanship (there are numerous ways that people compete with guns, like skeet shooting), etc. None of these may mean much to you, but they mean a great deal to lots of Americans. You’re discounting them without consideration.
You seem to be focused on gun owners who think their guns are extensions of their dicks or have them for the purpose of intimidation. I’m confident people like this exist, but I don’t think they represent the majority of gun owners, and I’m not sure why you do. However, the example you give is telling: “Go ahead, make my day” is not a meme; it’s a quote from an old Clint Eastwood movie. FYI: In that movie, Clint’s character is not a gun-toting redneck; he’s a hard-nosed cop, speaking to a criminal who is threatening him with a gun.
We can certainly debate to what extent America’s gun culture is about self-defense vs the extent to which it’s about aggressive rednecks–or the relative valence of different attitudes. However, as Bone has amusingly pointed out, you’re not going to get much traction if your perception of America’s “gun culture” is derived from movies. I just don’t think how our “culture” is portrayed in this or that movie is particularly relevant. What IS relevant is the “behaviors and beliefs” of actual people in real life. In the context of THIS discussion, what is particularly relevant is “the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group”; that is, actual gun owners.
This statement just mystifies me. Can you offer some foundation for the notion that “morality is supposed to come from outside”? It sure SEEMS like you’re saying that our culture OUGHT to be based on the culture of other countries. Ironic, given how much of our cultural excretions (including movies like Dirty Harry) are enthusiastically imported by other countries around the world.
[ul]
[li]Why aren’t mass shootings happening in other countries, but for the variable of culture?[/li][li]As PhillyGuy pointed out the Swiss, why for example can the Swiss handle their high prevalance of firearms, and endure relatively few mass shootings? (Are for example Swiss laws that different?)[/li][li]As another example, you had a strong cultural element around knives (and maybe still do) in 19th and early 20th century(?) Argentina. Traditions formed to do with knife fighting, and they were used as a way to prove honor, manliness, settle differences. The gauchos preferred them over the gun. The people built these elements into their culture, and you have far more than just a simple kitchen, farm, etc. implement; perhaps there were attempts to outlaw the types of knives used. I don’t know. But the point is how these three–the knife, the individual, and the information embedded in the culture–came together.[/li][li]It might be useful to see how other countries perceive America with respect its gun violence, and to mass shootings? (this is useful to diminish a forest-for-the-trees effect, as we in our own culture might not see it clearly)[/li][/ul]
I’m sticking to my guns here with how American culture informs gun violence. Skippy (Roof) is American gun culture in a funhouse mirror.
(of “gun culture”: not a dig at gun owners, but those elements in our culture specific to guns)
For Bone and Smartass:
Petty and shameful; those are just adolescent attack pieces. In the economics of these boards, I suppose that counts as some sort of “cost” to me. But I’ll bet you no one else is interested. Could have a useful discussion about culture here… (And FWIW Smartass, I did enjoy your post(s) upthread about a more moderate element among gun owners.)
I’ve been very careful here NOT to attack you and to try to get you to focus the discussion in a way that people can meaningfully respond. The fact that you posted this 4 days ago and no one IS responding suggests that you’re going about this the wrong way. If you want to have a debate you have to frame your arguments in a way that the other side can meaningfully respond to.
You seem to be working from an implicit assumption that we all see “gun culture” the same way. And we’ve been trying to make it clear to you that this is not a safe assumption. It’s not so much a question of definitions as it is a question of “what are you talking about?” If you’ll more clearly state what you think “gun culture” is, we’ll at least know that we’re talking about the same thing. However, so far, my impression is that you have a perception of “gun culture” that is unique to you and that I would not agree with. Which means that everything that you see resulting from “gun culture” is a missing connection. You don’t get to just declare that “gun culture” is what you think it is–without telling us what you think it is–and expect us to agree and continue from there. So far, the only thing I know for sure about your notion of “gun culture” is that you think “Go ahead, make my day” is a fair representation of it.
Specifically to this quote, it’s nothing more than name-calling. Just calling us shameful and adolescent and dismissing what we’re saying is an approach that leads to nowhere, unless you just want to have a debate with yourself. If you’re going to say I’ve posted something shameful and adolescent, I’d appreciate a reference to the specific text you’re referring to, so I can defend myself.
See, here, you say you’re sticking to your guns, but where before you were saying “gun culture”, now you seem to be referring American culture in general. Nobody will know how to play with you if you keep changing the field.
This is what’s really frustrating to me about your posts. I’ve been giving the pro-gun folks shit about being unreasonable, and you seem intent on proving that the other side can be just as unreasonable.
