The below graphic has been circulating on pro-gun sites for quite awhile now, at least since 2011. I've seen it pop up in different variations many times since then. I'm sharing it here for one reason, and one reason only: to try to illustrate something known as a logical fallacy.
Numerical statistics can be both a blessing and a curse especially when they're being used as justification for illustrating one's point of view.....in this case doing nothing when talking about, and discussing possible remedies for gun violence in this country.
If this is all we are willing to look at, then woe is us. Maybe we need to start calling them illogical truths. I don't know. It's frustrating.
By looking at the graphic we can obviously infer what the message is - do nothing because the number of fatalities by assault style weapons is smaller than anything else and pretty minuscule when compared against both drunk drivers and malpractice deaths.
So many gun rights groups have used the argument regarding murders happening via hammers and knives, I wonder why the authors of this meme didn't include baseball bats in this one, too!
Would it be too much of a stretch to counter this graphic by asking whether or not more hammers, or more knives, or more alcohol, or more deaths by malpractice might be the solution to curing the death rates of each?
That, apparently, is what the NRA is calling for when they stated very publicly "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". More guns. Bigger guns. Yeah, baby! That's the answer!
Is it really too much to ask ourselves why we have such a penchant for violence? Is it video games? Is it availability of guns? Is it easy availability of guns? Is it mental health, or the lack of treatment? Or is it a lack of personal responsibility? That's a serious question, folks. It's not rhetorical.
We can argue all we want to about how the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution should be interpreted. We can argue all we want to about how any additional infringement on the right to bear arms will allow the government to impose tyranny upon all of us.
But until - not if and until - we put our heads together and work together for the highest good of all, gun violence in this country will continue to rise.
In closing, I'm sharing another graphic that I found particularly profound and thought provoking simply because so many gun rights advocates keep throwing Switzerland, Australia, Great Britain, Israel, and others out there as examples pro or con to support their positions against tighter gun regulations in the U.S.
Just think about that for a second.
My two cents.
* Comments on this blog are moderated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUmKT43j4Tc
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting this link. In trying to find a correlation between disarmament of a population and gun control I offer this from an article I found defending the right of individuals to keep and bear arms: **** The idea that protecting the right to bear arms is somehow exclusively a conservative value, unafforded to liberals, is ridiculous. Gun ownership transcends petty partisan politics. The intentional disarmament of the population has irrefutably been shown as a necessary though not sufficient condition to genocide. Ensuring that the population retains this right is the responsibility of all citizens. This is not, however, to suggest that regulations and gun control in-and-of-themselves result in acts of genocide. The benefits of gun control are also not being denied, especially in crime and drug infested urban spaces. It is only when coupled with the willful intent to exterminate members of a targeted population that the total disarmament of a population becomes problematic. ****
DeleteLink: http://www.academia.edu/486853/Gun_Control_Disarmament_and_the_Threat_of_Genocide_Second_Amendment
The video link you provided would have had a greater impact on me had it been titled "Innocents betrayed - the history of genocide" instead of "gun control", and had it been utilized to illustrate that point with the issue of "gun control" as a corollary of the genocide examples provided.
To use this video as a "scare tactic" against any kind of regulation of guns because it'll result in genocide just doesn't wash, even from a historical perspective.
ZHawke
BTW, please ignore all of the guy's subjective semantics, and his rants against different people in the article above; my only point is that the statement on the graphic is incorrect.
DeleteSecondly,
in the case of anarchy there is no gun control and yet because there is no government enforcement of the 2 basic laws "do everything you have agreed to do" and "Do not encroach on another person or their property" there is no deterrent to "might makes right".
"below" :}
DeleteGuess I'm a little confused now by your comments regarding anarchy. Not sure exactly where anarchy was even brought up in any of my posts. Also, I would ask for a clarification of your intent regarding "no deterrent to 'might makes right'".
DeleteZHawke
I only posted the video to make the point "that is not the case with Africa." Another: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2370
ReplyDeleteIt appears to me you may be confusing South Africa with Africa. There are plenty of other nations on the continent of Africa..Somalia comes to mind almost immediately as just one example..of African nations that have no gun control accompanied by widespread and pervasive gun violence. Please don't misunderstand my OP. The original intent was to illustrate logical fallacies. The meme I presented at the end of the post, while poignant from my perspective, is also used as a logical fallacy by those promoting elimination of guns altogether (which is something I adamantly do not support). The original video to which you provided a link arguably implies an interdependent correlation between disarmament of a population accompanied and/or followed by genocide of same. That simply isn't always the case. And that is what I was trying to point out in my followup with you.
DeleteZHawke