(10-15-2021, 10:02 AM)F2d5thCav Wrote: @"DuckforcoveR"
Yeeaahh ... but there is a big ethical difference between armed combat between soldiers and hammering a crowd of civilians.
No doubt Norway is a country that has fairly strict laws regarding gun control. Yet, things like this happen, as well as the gun-related massacre by that dude who is a far right weirdo.
I think the fixation on weapons is misplaced. The question, for me, is how does society identify and control psychopaths without crushing all individual freedoms.
Cheers
I've been saying similar things for some time now. They are attempting to address the tools, rather than the causes. As soon as someone complains of "gun violence", they are off on the wrong track - "violence" is the problem, not the tools used to promote it. If every weapon on the planet were to vanish this instant, we would still have the problem of violence to contend with, and new weapons would just be created from common household items to make violence happen.
In no instance does a concentration on "gun violence", "knife violence", "archery violence", "claw hammer violence" or "ink pen violence" (yeah, that's a real thing - I had to dislocate a guy's shoulder once for trying to stab me with an ink pen) address the actual proper target. Violence, and violent people, are the problems, not the inanimate tools they use to wreak violence. As long as they insist on targeting the tools, they will never, ever address the problem. Splitting violence into categories based on tools immediately minimizes the root problem of violence by taking focus away from that and placing it on an inanimate object instead.
Violent people are the problem, and they will always find a tool to make violence happen until that root problem is addressed.
Note: observe that in the ink pen incident, I dislocated the attacker's shoulder, not the ink pen's shoulder - I correctly identified the attacker as the problem, not the ink pen. With the attacker's shoulder out of commission, the ink pen was useless, just another ink pen.
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’