Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
arguments about direct causation are dicey, but at some point there has to be a level of incidents--on the order of shoot-em-ups in schools accomplished and foiled--such that even folk who are interested in refuting causal claims (access to guns=increased likelhood of gun violence doesnt seem terribly risky, the predictable counters from the anti-gun control folk notwithstanding) have to acknowledge that (a) there is a relation and that (b) that relation is a problem.
but as there's no agreement on what that level of information be, we get to watch shit like this happen and try out all kinds of hypotheses other than the availability of guns might make gun related violence more likely.
|
The ONLY reason this type of hypothesis (more guns=more violence) doesn't get a large amount of discussion in most circles is because of the direct relation of having to declare, in one loud voice, that all people are crazy, immature, uncontrollabe, impulsive, murdering maniacs the minute they get hold of a gun. Imagine the anger and resentment that occurs when you're called a potential homicidal mass murderer because you own a gun and aren't licensed after an anal probing background check.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
there's always the canard of "media biais" that can be tossed into play...this only gets coverage because there is some secret biais against grenades in the hands of teenagers and assault weapons and so on.
|
media bias? as in calling a semi auto military style rifle an 'assault weapon' in the hands of a citizen, but put that SAME EXACT RIFLE in the hands of a cop and all of a sudden it's called a 'patrol rifle'? no media bias there I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
or maybe the kid was learning to hunt deer with a grenade.
|
highly doubtful that the grenade was live, but since the story seems to have missed pointing that out (because a kid with a grenade, presumed live, sounds so much more horrifyingly dramatic) for some reason.