Odds and Ends

Pit’s complete waste of bandwidth

the right to …

… not only bear arms but to change tv channels at gunpoint, cf. “SAM AMAYA was six years old when he first pulled a gun on another person—his father, who was beating his mother. At eight he would produce the gun when he wanted his sister to change the channel from a soap opera to a cartoon.” [The Economist]

for more on gun control click here

March 24, 2008 - Posted by Pit | USA, notes and musings from a big country | , , , | 4 Comments

4 Comments »

  1. Funny how differently people can see things. I would see his second act of senseless aggression as a result of his evident childhood abuse…not a result of his ability to access firearms.

    Gun control to me is the ultimate act of political misdirection. It is a continuation of the pattern of modern government to skirt around the real issues.

    Comment by Seb | March 25, 2008 | Reply

  2. Yep, different people certainly see things differently:
    1st: Nowhere it is said he was abused as a child.
    2nd: Even if, would that justify his pointing a gun at his sister to make her change channels on TV?
    3rd: Without access to a gun he certainly wouldn’t have been able to point it at his sister.

    Comment by Pit | March 25, 2008 | Reply

  3. Hmmm specious reasoning at best. You don’t see watching his father beat his mother would constitute abuse?

    I never said his obvious abuse would absolve him of responsibility, it may merely explain his actions far better than his simple ability to get a gun explains why he pointed it at his sister.

    It is true that without a gun he would not have been able to point it at his sister, but of what relevance is that to why he pointed at this sister? You don’t stop sexual abuse by banning dildos do you?

    Comment by Seb | March 25, 2008 | Reply

  4. Re his father beating his wife constituting abuse of the son: I admit you have a certain point there. But I still can see quite a few different ways of solving that problem without recurring to guns.
    Do you really think it makes a difference for the person killed if the killer was abused as a child?
    And re dildos: I think that argument isn’t exactly logical. Since when are people sexually abused with dildos? I’d have thought sexual abuse needs quite a different kind of “tool”. Or did I get something wrong there?

    Comment by Pit | March 27, 2008 | Reply


Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »