Comments on: Violence & Firearms

By: Prohibitive Arguments | Reflections From a Murky Pond

Prohibitive Arguments | Reflections From a Murky Pond — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 01:09:18 +0000

[...] It’s predictable to the point of being passé, with the same sorts ranting or whining the same baseless arguments. [...]

By: jonolan

jonolan — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:56:23 +0000

I can get behind the idea that, as a whole, Americans are more impulsive than the more stolid populations of other nations. Our continued innovation is evidence of that.

But neither intelligence or education are precursors, prerequisites or results of the other. There are many factors that lead to a poor education and many less than intelligent people with good educations.

A lack of education though, is a common precursor to a lack of hope of betterment, which often leads to a despair and desperation that facilitates the ease of making violent and poor / evil choices.

By: Paradigm

Paradigm — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:23:09 +0000

All surveys indicate that Americans are higher on impulsivity than other countries. And other studies show that the prison population is highly impulsive, regardless of ethnicity.

Furthermore, lack of intelligence leads to lack of education not vice versa. IQ is 80 percent hereditary and is very resistant to environmental factors. Those ganglords are just a tiny tip of the iceberg.

By: jonolan

jonolan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:11:28 +0000

Not always, Josh. Many of them do take into account that the person behind the gun had the will to kill. They just rather mistakenly and rather stupidly believe that, if they take away his gun, they can prevent him from killing.

By: Josh Brandt

Josh Brandt — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:28:14 +0000

People seem to have the idea in their head that guns kill people, but they fail to take into account that the person behind the gun had the will to kill not the gun. Its like saying spoons make people fat.

By: jonolan

jonolan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:10:26 +0000

I can’t really agree with that assertion, Paradigm. I don’t think that IQ and impulse control are accurate measurements of predilection towards violent crime.

Desperation and despair seem to be better measurements for such criminal behavior. Such desperation and despair is more likely caused by a lack of education as opposed to a lack of intelligence.

Indeed, one only has to look at the misused intelligence and tactical planning shown by many drug gangs in their ongoing wars with both the law and each other to see that these very violent men are not lacking in cognitive ability or impulse control.

As for immigrants – that theory doesn’t hold much water as far as I can see.

In the US violent crime is highest amongst the Black population. While they’re the descendants of “immigrants,” the vast majority of those “immigrants” were brought here by force, not by their own wanderlust.

By: Paradigm

Paradigm — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:58:41 +0000

I read something similar to this in Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate. He listed several countries with strict guncontrol that were high in violent crime and vice versa. Almost all violent criminals are men with low IQ and lacking in impulse control. It’s in their nature. I suspect one reason America is so violent is because it’s a country of immigrants. The impulsive and restless move there while the others stay put.

By: jonolan

jonolan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:56:16 +0000

Frankly, zhann, I’m torn on the issue you raise.

I’m quite concerned about the mentally deranged and felons possessing firearms, and am so for the obvious reasons of persona land public safety. Yet I’m loath to suggest removing someone’s Constitutionally enumerated rights.

I keep coming back to Thomas Jefferson’s words to Archibald Stuart,

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

Who’s mentally unstable and who makes that decision and by what criteria? It’s those questions, and the historical answers to them, that make me twitch.

By: zhann

zhann — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:02:27 +0000

Thanks for the clarification. But, honestly, I am sure you have had issues with particular people keeping arms. Do you honestly believe that every American should be able to keep arms, regardless of, say, their mental capabilities? There needs to be limits to who can house firearms in their home, especially assualt rifles and automatic weapons. Particular people are unstable mentally, just read about the Virginia Tech killer … his type should not be allowed to own firearms. I specifically remember high school (grew up in upstate NY) where everyone owned firearms. While it was fun growing up with weapons at arms reach, it is scary to think what went on in those days. Many of those people should never have been allowed to have rifles … especially the ones that got a kick out of going into the forest to take out random wildlife.

I am just saying, there should be some logical limit …

By: jonolan

jonolan — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:17:19 +0000

Thank you, zhann. I enjoy and am gratified by your appreciation of this post. It took a fair bit of effort to put it together.

We differ in our opinions on firearm ownership to some extent, but not to the level that would cause rancor.

One thing though – in Constitutional terms it’s the right to keep arms, not bear them. The right to Bear arms means the right to take active and armed part in the common defense – i.e. join the military.

That particular point will be key a post I’m putting up fairly soon.