A) not helpful, B) make you sound like a right wing SA nutjob, and C) demonstrate a remarkably piss-poor understanding of the Norwegian culture...I'm not so sure.
First off, I offer no criticism of Norwegian politics or culture; that's the affair of Norwegians, who appear largely happy with both. According to Wikipedia, part of that culture is a well-established sport-shooting tradition; the nation's firearms laws are pretty typical of Northern Europe (or New Jersey, though with less legal hazard for the owner). Available evidence indicates a "high-trust" culture, the kind of place where many people don't even think about locking their doors, where the neighborhood cop is someone you wave to and say hi. I don't know how Norway should be run -- I have trouble enough running my own house -- but it appears they do.
Second, I am an "up"-wing (that'd be libertarian) "SA [Second Amendment] nutjob;*" what of it? In this context, it means I know what a gun is and I have some notion of what can be done with 'em.
Third, "not helping" who, exactly? There's no helping the mad dog's victims this side of a time machine; there's no ready way for me to offer much comfort to the survivors, either. What there is with my reach that needs addressed are U.S. and international gun-loathers, dancing in the blood and using this tragedy to point at the horror...of "weak gun laws!"
And that's something that should be countered. Norway's gun laws are not weak -- and failed to stop a determined malefactor. That's not a new discovery. Crooks, crazies and addled ideologues are able to obtain weapons no matter what the law is, no matter how stringently it is enforced. --They keep on doing other things there are laws against, too.
Fourth and last, even though I am a gun nut, will someone please tell me how it is in any sense political to wish the means to stop this tragedy had been more rapidly available to his selected victim pool? --I freely admit it is wishful thinking; but Norwegians are not less brave or clever than any other people and wanting fewer of them to have been shot by a vile, deranged man isn't a political opinion, it's a human one. I wish someone had been able to shoot back; shooting a mad dog as it attacks isn't a political decision, either. It's a human one.
________________________________________________
* If it weren't for the fact that I take a dislike to some pols and vote against them for that reason, I would be a single-issue voter, but not because I'm hugely into firearms. In terms of owning and shooting, my gun-nuttery is a little above lukewarm, one hobby among many; but politically, L. Neil Smith explains it best.
One - You're actually reading Little Green Nutjob still?
ReplyDeleteTwo - Amen.
It is my considered opinion that if I am in a situation like that, the only moral choice is to consider myself to be already dead, I merely haven't stopped moving, and to stop the attacker as expeditiously and as violently as possible. Cause it isn't like he can kill me more, is it?
ReplyDeleteWV: Mictier. The pistol is mictier than a rock.
I love how it's not helpful to suggest that more guns would have been good, but it is helpful for them to suggest that less guns (via more laws and restrictions) would have been good.
ReplyDeleteThe Antis claims that Tougher Gun Laws would have stopped the Slaughter is about as practical as saying that a Tougher Law of Gravity would stop Black Hole Development. "No Wormholes for You!"
ReplyDelete"Shrimp" noticed. Om the one hand, "If only he could have been stopped" and on the other "we must not allow the means of stopping his like."
ReplyDeleteI am old enough to remember when, for about a year, there were many stories from the Phillipines and Guam about people "runnong amok," that is, going into shopping areas with a machete and starting to kill. And yes, there was [foolish] talk about banning big knives. Luckily, the madness died out fairly quickly. Points being that there is always some nut around, and sometimes hearing about one tips a few others over the edge. Has naught to do with guns, other than guns are physically easier to use.
What Cargosquid said. LGF ran off the rails so long ago I'd have forgotten it existed, except that RS McCain continues to twit him from time to time...
ReplyDeletewv: widam. Widam, that guy is still around?
Well Said 'Berta.
ReplyDeleteCould someone tell me what a "right wing SA nutjob" is? To me SA refers to Sturmabteilung, which was terminated with prejudice in 1934.
ReplyDelete@Loki1776: yeah, I had to think about it for a second, but I'm pretty sure they are referring to people who have weird beliefs like, you know, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution means what it says.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure they are referring to people who have weird beliefs like, you know, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution means what it says.
ReplyDeleteOHHHHHH.
Yeah, I'm so used to seeing that abbreviated as "2A" that the only thing "SA" expanded to for me was "Sturmabteilung" and "South Africa", neither one of which made all that much sense.
I was quoting. Lemme go clarify, s the history buffs don't freak out.
ReplyDelete