Notice: In February of 2019, according to the Webalizer stats program for this site, traffic to this site was all but cut in half, with Google.com and all its subsidiaries disappearing from the referrer list except for a few stray entries per month. After two years, Google returned as Google.com/search. That lasted a short while until the first of February, 2021, when both Google.com/search and Bing disappeared entirely, with Google.com then taking up some of the slack. I have no way of knowing with absolute certainty what is behind all the schizophrenic nonsense, of course: a faulty stats program or corporatocracy censorship (test searches appear to support the latter), but if there is any accuracy issue with Webalizer, I am considering it between Webalizer and the various search engines. In the meantime, if you agree with any ideas presented on this webpage, or consider it to be worthwhile information, I recommend posting or sharing a link to the page where you can. Otherwise, it may not reach very many people - DC. added 2/23/20, rev 1/21/21, 2/16/21
A plan for gun
control in the land of guns
The long-term plan: I recently came across a web page with an article titled “A cure for mass shootings doesn't exist.” What a cop-out, I have to say. So I finally dug up some thoughts on the issue that have crossed my mind for years and put them in writing.
True, there are people dying on a daily basis from many other things besides mass shootings—car crashes, drugs, etc.—one of these days southern California is going to get hit by a major earthquake, and one of these days another hurricane is going to cause death and destruction somewhere along the southern coast. But what, of course, makes gun violence (like terrorism) especially detrimental to society is the fact it is no accident.
I see two aspects to the present state of gun violence, one is human nature, and the other must be cultural—something about present society that spurs certain vulnerable people to commit such acts.
My own grandfather used to carry a shotgun to school and store it in his locker to go rabbit hunting after school. No one thought a thing of it. So how did we get from there to absolute insanity, with schools slowly being turned into maximum security facilities?
As for the cultural connection, it must have something to do with all of the ways we have to communicate with one another these days. Anyone with homicidal thoughts can now find and/or learn about others with like thoughts, not to mention witnessing their actions, with only a few mouse clicks or thumb taps (So I’m not such a freak, after all. I guess I will just become like so and so, and commit my own mass shooting). Add that to an endless amount of violence-depicting fictional media that has otherwise accumulated, and . . . And there really isn’t anything that can be done about this aspect without throwing free speech and free press out the window—very bad. Of course, there are a couple more obvious differences between that time (circa 1918) and the present, and that is a much greater population with ever larger schools.
As for the human nature aspect, humanity now has—for the first time—the ability to take control of its evolution, and do so without implementing any sort of Draconian liberty-crushing measures. No amount of chanting to the gods, draconian laws, or piling more guns on top of guns is ever going to stop gun violence, terrorism, or war. But if the genetic factors that bring out the worst of our nature can be found and eradicated from the entire human population, it most certainly could not hurt the situation.
So the long-term plan is, cure the cause of the illness instead of trying to treat all of the symptoms with snake oil and Peptobismo.
End note: Some advice for the young: I have heard talk of raising the age to buy guns. I would strongly advise not letting any such laws go into effect under any circumstance. If there is anything I have learned, it is that most any institution, such as a government, school, or corporation will squash your freedom and privacy--one item after another--simply because they can and you (the people or students) let them get away with it. I would point out that many mass shootings, such as the recent Los Vegas shooting, were not carried out by teenagers; and most so called “adults” that I have known in my lifetime have no more actual maturity than the average ten-year old. Just look at Congress, for example.
The short term plan: As for the short term, I do have a suggestion, but it’s an expensive one. But first, a look at the present arguments from both sides of the gun debate:
The pro-gun people argue that many an unarmed group has been oppressed, and some literally exterminated, for lack of the ability to fight back. And the thing is, they’re right. They also argue that any ban on assault rifles would infringe on 2nd amendment rights. They argue that if someone wants to kill a lot of people, they will likely find another method. And they also argue that rapid fire weapons are a necessity because the government has so much fire power, these days. But I’m not so sure the arguments make so much sense when the group is busy exterminating each other.
The anti-gun people argue that the Constitution was written when 3 musket balls a minute was considered rapid fire, as opposed to about 90 RPM for a modern-day semi-automatic AR-15 (if the person’s trigger finger holds out), or hundreds of RPM with a bumpstock, therefore some common sense laws are a no-brainer regarding weapons that create a one-man army. And just because there might be other methods of mass murder does not mean we should simply throw up our hands and give up.
Step1: Construct a series of fortified bunkers in which to store many thousands of guns. The guns would be transferred via a fully automated conveyor system to private booths, where the owner of a particular gun could fire the weapon.
Step2: If there is one thing that the worst of all of these mass shootings have in common, it is the detachable magazine. So congress decides to outlaw so-called high-capacity magazines. Big deal, I have to say. So a shooter can only shoot 15 bullets instead of 30 (or whatever) before they can pop in another magazine in mere seconds and resume: Is that really supposed to make a dent in gun deaths in the USA? So the next step is to outlaw the transportation or ownership of any gun that utilizes a detachable magazine—outside of one of the secure facilities. For any new purchases of such firearms, the gun would be transported directly from the manufacturer to the facility under tight security and in disassembled form.
Step 3: A different panel of ten non-military, non-government individuals will be elected by the gun owners to operate each facility, and to each hold a unique code, which would release all of the weapons from the facility to their respective owners, but only in combination with at least seven of the other codes. In other words, only by the authorization of eight individuals could the guns be released.
The general idea is to secure the guns, yet create a means of making them available should the elected panel deem it necessary. Hence, the government would still have reason to “fear” the public, while the gun owners could shoot their weapons all they wanted, just not take them home unless released by the mutual cooperation of the elected panel.
So who would pay for the construction of the bunkers/shooting ranges? I think the NRA would make an excellant candidate. The gun owners would then sustain the facilities’ operation with membership fees.
A couple web pages I sourced for this article:
how long does it take to reload a 17th century musket? | Yahoo Answers
How many rounds does a semi-automatic rifle fire per minute? - Quora
9/09/18: I have been taking a closer look at the historical data regarding mass shootings, and it only confirms my initial observation regarding automatic weapons: No question about it, the vast majority of the mass shootings in the US were, indeed, carried out using semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines and/or pistols with detachable magazines.
Another observation: While neither mass shootings or school shootings are a phenomena that did not exist before 1965, 1965 seems to mark the beginning of the purely sociopathic mass shooting, with victims chosen at random.
Searching for an environmental cause, one item keeps popping up again and again, and that is the growing use of anti-depressants—and Valium. Not only has the use of antidepressants increased greatly since they were first introduced in the middle of the last century, the antidepressants themselves have become more powerful. But the picture is incomplete: If you search for an in-depth study regarding anti-depressants, you won’t find much, and what you will find is conflicting. And some pertain to other gene pools, (i.e., outside the US). I somehow doubt that I am the only one who finds it more than a little ironic, not to mention repugnant, that the US government, which has played the communist super-nanny for nearly a century against the common pot smoker, has largely decided to sit on its hands regarding a class of substances that likely really do cause extreme violence and mayhem.
So if you would like to see a chart comparing the use of antidepressants with the incidence of mass shootings, don’t bother looking; you probably won’t find anything. But here is something to consider: The US had one mass shooting in 1965. The US population was 194.3 million. The US population in 2017 was 325.7 million, an increase by a factor of about 1.7, yet the US had 18 more mass shootings than 1965.
So while many may benefit from antidepressants and
modern sedatives, they are clearly part of the equation in regards to
many mass shootings. Well, I am as powerless as the next guy; all I can
do is offer suggestions: Either discontinue the medications (like
Congress is going to stamp out an 80 billion/year industry even if the
people wanted them to), or what I have already suggested—lock up the
most dangerous weapons and invest in the science of finding possible
genetic causes for such behavioral abnormalities as chronic depression
and homicidal thoughts, and eliminating the sequences from the human
Well, for what it's worth, I sent the following letter to Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown on the 7th of August 2019. For anyone agreeing with anything in the following, I would recommend making your voice be heard (loud and clear). Call me a pessimist if you like, but I can to tell you what affect the proposals that are currently on the table are probably going to have on gun violence in the United States: very little, with profound incursions on other constitutional rights.
While it is hard to pin down the main reason (if one exists) as to why the incidence of mass shootings has increased over the last 50 years or so, I do believe there is a main reason why they happen. While all of us no doubt have a dark side that may be brought about by mental illness, bullying, drugs, or uncontrollable tempers etc., I think it is obvious that some members of the human race are simply bad people with violent tendencies. With that in mind . . .
As I am writing this, Ohio Governor Dewine is giving a speech introducing proposals designed to tackle the problem of gun violence. While some of his proposals might have some effect, I have little doubt that his plans to ensnare possible shooters will also ensnare many innocent individuals, perhaps only guilty of a bad joke or a school-yard scuffle, inflicting a scar on their integrity that will follow them for the rest of their lives.
Back in February of 2018, I posted a web page containing a couple ideas regarding gun violence and mass shootings (https://www.daveconklin.net/gun_control.html). Essentially, idea one deals with correcting possible genetic factors responsible for chronic violent behavior. That, of course, is not going to solve anything in the short term. Idea two is the primary reason for this letter, and constitutes a proposal for locking up all guns that employ detachable magazines into highly secure repositories/shooting ranges. An act of Congress would be needed to implement the creation of the repositories, after which, control of the repositories/any release of the firearms to their respective owners would be turned over to a locally elected panel (then hope for the best).
While the creation of such repositories might, indeed, keep the most dangerous firearms out of the hands of the next mass shooter, there is an aspect of the plan that goes beyond merely locking up the guns: To the violent individual who lacks empathy for others (or certain others) and dreams of carrying out violent acts, could our society provide a better place to validate his thoughts, I have to ask; a place that has elevated and glorified weapons designed purely for killing many people to a nearly toy-like status? Is that the backwards, extreme, misanthropic, troglodyte society that the United States aspires to be?
By locking up these most dangerous weapons, it would say to these individuals, your point of view is not valid; Society, as a whole, while believing in being prepared to battle tyranny, does not glorify gun violence and weapons designed for mass killings. In that respect, it may reduce overall gun violence and mass shootings from two angles. The only way to know for sure is to try it.
Now, I am not naïve: I am aware that Congress is a giant spineless jellyfish that caves to the gun lobby like a . . . well, spineless jellyfish. But such a plan has no hope unless someone in a position of authority has the fortitude to bring it into the discussion. So I ask you to copy this letter and present to each and every member of Congress (easier for you than it is for me).
I think such a plan offers good compromise between gun ownership and gun control, and hopefully will eliminate the erosion of other equally important constitutional rights such as freedom of speech, to name just one.
11/14/19: I addressed my letter to Sherrod Brown “personal” and asked for confirmation of some sort that he had, indeed, read it personally. At present, I have not received a thing from Sherrod Brown, so I don’t know for sure what became of my letter. In the mean time, the only thing I have heard from him (in the media) is a call for stronger background checks. And this comes after a recent shooting in Ohio where the shooter simply purchased the assault rifle from an acquaintance. Well, that seems to be the general pattern, doesn’t it (just say we’re going to do something and let things blow over until the next incident.)
7/27/20: I just want to clarify that I did not send the letter to Sharrod Brown with the idea that Congress should simply pass a law requiring all semi-automatic weapons be locked up. The idea was that the US people's elected representatives might actually, in some manner, bring the secure-repository idea to their constituent's attention, so the people can decide if it is a good idea, or not. rev 7/30/20