The vast majority of gun deaths are either suicides or murder by someone who knows the victim. Most Americans don’t want to commit suicide nor do they have enemies who want to kill them. Except in the case of random terror type acts like this.
Better question: Why does that Guardian Editorialist get his panties in such a bunch about what we do in our country when he doesn’t live here or even know what he’s talking about?
Or alternatively, “What do Americans think about British gun control laws?”
Answer, “We don’t.”
But we do lose our heads over their Princesses even more than they do!
I’m not sure there is a direct correlation between how “Americans” reacted and how “American media” reacted. Increasingly, mainstream media exists in a bubble. I am betting Americans in general were a lot calmer about the Boston bombing than the media. That is not saying a lot, given the media’s hyperkinetic response. I guess I would say, it was a matter of mild interest to folks living outside Boston and environs, no more.
You are right.
I should not have emphasized the comparisons. I really care more about how excessive reporting about terrorist attacks plays into the terrorist agenda. In the current case, these two brothers should not have the power to lead public discourse for weeks.
And, I think the excessive reporting also contributes to the unbalanced behavior the OP and article discuss.
To be honest I’d rather not. I deliberately steered away from giving an opinion other than saying how parts of it “rang true” for me.
I don’t want to get in the position of defending any particular views, I’m interested in reading the debate that has been going on based on people’s reaction to the article and responses to each other.
A lot of the responses have been very interesting, from both sides of the discussion.
One thing that stands out for me, again viewing from outside, is the key part of US culture that most outsiders really can’t get their heads around. That is, that guns and gun ownership is so ingrained in the culture that it takes something big and unusual (like someone going to a primary school and shooting kids) to get people stirred up for a while.
The rest of the time, gun deaths are just routine. We have guns, people will shoot people; we have cars, people will have accidents and drive drunk or speed; we have fast food so people will get fat. It seems that it’s just accepted as part of society in a way that I as an outsider can’t get my head around and I expect many others can’t either.
That’s why I raised the topic, to see what people would contribute. I’m looking forward to reading more.
Because there is no terrorist lobby.
And shame on us.
I rather doubt the OP runs his/her life with a constant flow of thoughtful and detailed risk-benefit analysis.
But we do more than just enforce it after the fact. Bartenders and other professional servers are liable. Cops are out looking for drunk drivers. especially during times of high risk. In California drivers are encouraged to call 911 if they see someone driving as if they were drunk. And of course there is an education campaign, which even sellers of alcohol are for. The situation with guns today is like alcohol in the old days, when we all laughed at Dean Martin and at the concept of drunk driving.
If gun sellers were held liable for the damage their guns did if they did not do due diligence, or if morons who leave loaded guns where children could get to them were locked up for a long time, gun sellers would be pushing for background checks.
I see no evidence he ‘doesn’t know what he’s talking about’. And, Jesus, of course other countries are interested in understanding the USA.
He also writes for The Nation btw.