what bothers me about almost every bit of artillery, is it’s so dang phallic. psychologies being played. but i don’t have an answer for that…yet.
though i think it important for humans to look at their inventions, and look at what part of nature they emulate. almost nothing is original, and instead copies function that is already there. so then we have the juxtaposition, of instead of creating life with seed, destroy life. what’s interesting is not that this whole thing exists, but the draw to owning a weapon. and of course, how that’s played on and …. grown? needing a weapon indicates a lack of faith in ability WITHOUT a weapon or external tool. the mind is the greatest weapon of all. we tend to forget that…..
there is a legitimate fear of fascism, and balances of power. fact is that there are already measures in place limiting gun ownership, and rights to carry. my stand is that the psychologies need to be addressed. i’ve interacted with those in utah that build up their store of weapons and have all that going on, and they have mental issues more than anything — the male pecking order. since i have not had to face that myself, i cannot marginalize their fear. but i do think it is over-inflated, and of course played upon by news sources like fox news, etc. the answer to a scared person with a gun, is to make them not afraid. removing weapons is only part of a solution, and doesn’t address underlying issues. so it’s about power, and how a very small man with a gun has an advantage. therefore, removing all gun ownership, creates a social state where larger men, even with more social power — are put in complete control. that might not be the best thing for everyone. i myself, am not afraid. why? because number one, when i go out to the store, i’m not seeing everyone walking around with a firearm. i’m not seeing people gripping knives. for the most part, is a VERY controlled and peaceful society. don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
disparity is a different issue, and the ones creating disparity are not the ones putting a death grip on their guns. that reasoning is not matching up – though i imagine it has to do with the recent push against weapons and argument being against all the money being made by the gun industry. which — it’s not like they are on fortune 500 — well below everything from tech companies, to our overlords the petroleum industry. so there are much bigger battles out there — and winning the “battle” against the nra and gun ownership — might backfire socially into something worse than current situations. i would not advise it.
it’s the power struggle that i don’t think is ever going to go away — best thing to limit that is to put more funding into higher education and to open up more opportunities for youth and especially those in lower classes. thing we’ve got, is those on right working to LOWER opportunities in education, while pushing gun ownership. and it’s a bad mix. (not exactly friends to the united states of america) however, i do believe that a ‘natural’ reduction in fear is possible, with greater education and greater opportunities. create a nation of thinkers, and they won’t be so easily tricked into becoming victims of their own fear.
as far as terrorism goes – we have our own terror cells. they are called “gangs.” same animal, different name. the extent of our own home-grown terrorism is pretty bad, especially in larger cities and neighborhoods. and those balances of power are very tenuous. only thing that keeps home-grown local terrorism at bay, are local police forces. and then those are seen as “government” and we again have cuts in funding to police that is supported by those wishing to arm themselves more. but the ones that will end up “rising up” are the gangs, the terrorist cells that the US already has — already established. i’ve seen the damage they can do. it’s not small. the deaths are put in the back of the paper– not splashed on national news.
so a shooter has islamic ideology or warped ideology as their stated motivation. and then we look at the middle east, and how we have inserted ourselves into this area, due to conflicts with other nations in the asian continent. strategical placement. can be argued if that was necessity. but we ARE still here, not blown to bits.
the matter stands, on strategic levels, that an armed populous is not one that will be easily “conquered” by occupation. in other words, if another nation wants to ‘stop us’ they will have get us all at once or not at all. so we work to reduce the threat of nuclear war world-wide, and expand as much as we can economically. but if, at any time — we create a populace more open to invasion, then that goes back on the board.
and while the united states has very good strategical protection built in from the last century, with our placement of military bases and highways and bridges — they are not infallible. and of course well documented at this point. so deciding to completely ban guns and firearms within the populace, might not be the best strategy. and in fact is mainly one hoped-for by our enemies. the UK was able to, in a somewhat successful manner. and they have who for an ally? US. so if we go and create that kind of vulnerability, who do we have playing the heavy? no one….
therefore i believe it is better to keep the issue of guns as it stands, and work to limit our own home-grown terrorism WHILE increasing trade and dependencies world wide. have it come together, where always playing the heavy doesn’t get the response of hate that we are seeing so badly from middle-eastern nations. they not only were raised differently, they have different vulnerabilities. different fears.
how can a person, knowing nothing of going hungry and starvation — understand those subjected to malnutrition on a daily basis? they can’t. it’s a different world. so the biggest factor in establishing world peace, is the reduction of world hunger. bread basket of the world… comes down to agriculture. maybe we should be bombing Isil with sandwiches rather than mortar rounds. if you look on the map– our methods of agriculture are most copied in israel. rest tend to follow russian or india agricultural prototypes. india is a mess, btw. not a drop of loam left, all deadpan. while at same time vast phosphorus mining.
talk about inequality — and then US business moving in to take advantage of lower wages — the degree of crime against humanity makes me ill. but increasing united states vulnerability is not an answer. it’s a cop-out. it’s taking a dive. and we have to see this thing through. we need to be responsible, and look to educating our people a little more, so they aren’t left not understanding the bigger picture.
and beyond that, the greatest enemy of the united states is not terrorist cells from the other side of the world. it is ourselves. our romantic notions of despair – and ideologies that do not clarify where lines need to be drawn. there are bigger matters than gun control. you idiots waste the president’s time, with having to make an address to “calm the masses.” and i want to shoot you all myself.
the united states is a good place to live. but there are lots of good places to live in the world. ask switzerland. but each nation is only as good as its worst person. and what defines a good person? someone who loves peace enough to protect it.
so being a pacifist is only part of the answer. being military is only part of the answer. there is a fine line between protecting yourself, or attacking another. i had a game i would play with my cat — anticipation of attack. how often would she strike me first, and how does that play into fear? now it was a game, and she knew it was a game – and we had fun. in real life, her first instinct is to run. but in protecting herself, as an animal — she will strike out when her observation tells her that an attack from me is imminent. so of course, i fake her out, let her drop her guard — and then nab her….lol. she would get so mad! and then hit faster the next time …. but i had an advantage. and it wasn’t strength — it was sight. i could see every movement better, from higher angle and therefore anticipate and calculate. but that’s not what fascinates me. what fascinates me is that point, where the cat will decide to attack you even though they themselves were not first attacked. what fascinates me, is the definition of “threat.” what fascinates me is calling a person guilty, before they’ve done anything. what is our animal nature, and how far do we need to fight that nature?
someday – maybe men will lay down their arms in droves. but it will be because they have no use for them — no need. main thing i don’t cotton to, is the idiots that are too unhappy about less opportunity or need for a gun, and so they work to embroil things or create the havoc which would justify their preparedness. so let’s not do that.
bottom line for human psychology–what makes humans a different kind of animal–is that every man and woman needs purpose. every soul needs a purpose. but if your purpose is to strike before you are struck, then your fear is the only thing that you value. and you will protect that fear, even though there is no reason on god’s green earth to maintain it.
so i am FOR gun control. but i believe every man has the ability to control his own penis.