Part of the problem is that the US Constitution has been elevated to the status of a sacred document, so lawyers - as well as decent people - argue over every word and punctuation mark as if it was handed down directly from God and therefore will be valid for all eternity.
Another big factor is fear. As has been highlighted in previous answers here, lots of people justify owning a gun because they are afraid of what might happen if they don't. Psychological studies have found that those with more threat-orientated personalities tend to gravitate to the political right, so many people are heavily emotionally invested in having the right to own a gun.
There's no chance that the situation in the US is going to change any time soon, and so we will continue to regularly hear about massacres. Even people who don't own a gun and don't want to own a gun will continue to vote for politicians who support gun ownership because that's part of a conservative package and, when it comes down to it, most people are fundamentally conservative in that we tend to be most comfortable if we can believe the status quo we've adjusted to will continue.
Restriction on gun ownership in the USA is unlikely not because it's impossible to alter the Holy Constitution, but mainly because firearms deaths directly touch relatively few people. Yes, everyone regularly hears about some asshole slaughtering people somewhere. Some part of the population knows that around 40,000 people died in the USA due to firearms last year, and a couple of times that many were injured. A few might even accept that this is one true example of American exceptionalism, in that the USA is unique among all developed countries in having so many firearm deaths. But most of those deaths occur in the socioeconomic underclass, a lot of people fundamentally don't give a shit about those people, and so they just don't see it as their problem to solve.
Actually, the constitution is not really sacred but has always been elevated to the level of Royalty. Here is the pertinent quote from one of the founding fathers, Thomas Paine.
"Let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarcy, that in America the law is King. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”
For perspective, the American colonials also had great respect for the Magna Carta. This respect lives on whenever "We the people" is employed as a concept in a national issue like tyranny in governance, States rights, fair market compensation for Treasury bail-outs, and blatant disrespect of both public good and individual rights at no trade off to each other.
Just to add an additional point here for our European IINers, is that gun culture can become a bittersweet part of a National Identity. Many families have 200 year old antique flintlock rifles handed down from previous generations mounted over their fireplaces. They look kind of cool actually, and can be a conversation piece on how a certain branch of your family is connected to American history.
That plus beautiful forests in Canada and parts of the U.S. need to be hunted when the deer population gets too high, lest the next drought cause the starving deer to peel back the bark of trees to desperately stay alive causing the trees to die. Anyway, I'm no zealot, but bolt action hunting rifles available to the public plus a civilian militia like Switzerland has got is my best personal interpretation of the second amendment.
How can you still be pro-gun
← View full post
Part of the problem is that the US Constitution has been elevated to the status of a sacred document, so lawyers - as well as decent people - argue over every word and punctuation mark as if it was handed down directly from God and therefore will be valid for all eternity.
Another big factor is fear. As has been highlighted in previous answers here, lots of people justify owning a gun because they are afraid of what might happen if they don't. Psychological studies have found that those with more threat-orientated personalities tend to gravitate to the political right, so many people are heavily emotionally invested in having the right to own a gun.
There's no chance that the situation in the US is going to change any time soon, and so we will continue to regularly hear about massacres. Even people who don't own a gun and don't want to own a gun will continue to vote for politicians who support gun ownership because that's part of a conservative package and, when it comes down to it, most people are fundamentally conservative in that we tend to be most comfortable if we can believe the status quo we've adjusted to will continue.
Restriction on gun ownership in the USA is unlikely not because it's impossible to alter the Holy Constitution, but mainly because firearms deaths directly touch relatively few people. Yes, everyone regularly hears about some asshole slaughtering people somewhere. Some part of the population knows that around 40,000 people died in the USA due to firearms last year, and a couple of times that many were injured. A few might even accept that this is one true example of American exceptionalism, in that the USA is unique among all developed countries in having so many firearm deaths. But most of those deaths occur in the socioeconomic underclass, a lot of people fundamentally don't give a shit about those people, and so they just don't see it as their problem to solve.
--
Bazinga
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
McBean
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Actually, the constitution is not really sacred but has always been elevated to the level of Royalty. Here is the pertinent quote from one of the founding fathers, Thomas Paine.
"Let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarcy, that in America the law is King. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”
For perspective, the American colonials also had great respect for the Magna Carta. This respect lives on whenever "We the people" is employed as a concept in a national issue like tyranny in governance, States rights, fair market compensation for Treasury bail-outs, and blatant disrespect of both public good and individual rights at no trade off to each other.
Just to add an additional point here for our European IINers, is that gun culture can become a bittersweet part of a National Identity. Many families have 200 year old antique flintlock rifles handed down from previous generations mounted over their fireplaces. They look kind of cool actually, and can be a conversation piece on how a certain branch of your family is connected to American history.
That plus beautiful forests in Canada and parts of the U.S. need to be hunted when the deer population gets too high, lest the next drought cause the starving deer to peel back the bark of trees to desperately stay alive causing the trees to die. Anyway, I'm no zealot, but bolt action hunting rifles available to the public plus a civilian militia like Switzerland has got is my best personal interpretation of the second amendment.