General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI see we learned a lot from the Bush era.
I would have thought that if smart people would have learned anything from 9/11 it is the senselessness and national moral danger of spastic reaction to bizarre occurrences.
But here we are... demanding alarms and security video on all exit doors, armed guards at movie theaters, bans on modes of dress.
Why stop there? Do we need metal detectors at the movies? What about the doors on bathroom stalls at movie theatres... don't they provide an ideal place for someone to assemble their weaponry?
Why are movie theatres now ground zero? Oh, right. A guy shot up a movie theatre. If he had shot up a subway car would anyone be calling for higher security at movie theatres today?
People with lots of guns who want to shoot lots of people will do so. As long as people leave the house and congregate anywhere there is no way around that.
Jesus! Why not train people at urban crosswalks to not "bunch up" when crossing, like they were landing on Omaha beach?
This man could have achieved the same death toll quite easily on a bus, a subway car, at a church service, at the checkout line at a grocery store... anywhere people are.
The only thing stupider than deforming society to cower in collective fear of foreign terrorists is doing the same thing relative to our own citizenry.
You want to ban guns, do so. That's fine. You want to not ban guns and live with the consequences? That is also fine.
But the idea that we need more security, more surveillance, more armed guards, more check-points... no, we don't.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)My point was that one can accept the problem of gun-wielding psychos as the price of a free society, or try to eliminate the problem of gun-wielding psychos.
Both are points that can be argued.
But deforming society so as to accommodate our fear of a problem misses on both levels.
If guns are enough of a problem to warrant more Orwellian surveillance state crap then they are enough of a problem to ban them.
If they are not enough of a problem to ban them then they are certainly not enough of a problem to warrant more "security state" nonsense.
Whatever side one takes on guns, we should all be able to agree that more security is not the right answer.