Discussions

I would suggest that the suggested approach
in the article has no chance of being addressed any time soon,

Candol, how do you know this part? AFAIK it is already
supported by both US and Swedish goverment and I trust
that EU will support it too.

Religions due to their known ability to build social capital
are supported by money. Tax reduction and so on.

What exactly in that text are your that pessimistic about?

Candol, seen from that perspective you do there
then I fully agree with you that it sounds far fetched
any such change would take place.

US life style is materialistic in the sense of consumerism.
Individualism is very much in vogue yes. and I don't know
about how lost or confused they may be. I know that I am
very much lost and confused

But was that really what that author had in mind writing his text?
We have to ask him then. What could have been on his mind. The intention?

I wish there were a more humane way to control the deer population, but it seems that hunting will continue to be a necessary evil. Where I live, car accidents involving deer are frequent and may involve human fatalities.

This is a human-centric attitude towards deer. Ie man is the most important creature on the planet so its ok to kill other creatures because they are getting in our way. Are deer native to America. It would be better if people were forced to drive more slowly at night (if that's when the deer are on the roads)

We have a similar thing in Australia with kangaroos. Not that they cause so many fatalities but the cattle people don't like having so many eating the grass. I wish they'd reduce night time road speeds here too. If i'm driving at night, i drive no faster than 80 and if possible only about 65kph. Even at 80 you usually have time to avoid most accidents and i think roos are faster than deer.

I heard it on a tv show tonight that here in Australia 50% of homicides are the result of domestic violence. I was watching a show where in WA two women were killed by husbands and although there had been many many warnings, the police did nothing. They appear not to take any of the warnings seriously over there. We just had a family killed yesterday parents and a son and it looks like the other son did it. Of course because of our gun laws, all but one of these deaths were stabbings. The other might have been a heavy blow to the head.

I think its a better and more buddhist solution to reduce the speed limit.

Guns are not issue, nor are the laws regarding guns...its people. People in this country tend to be more violent then other democracies. It doesnt matter if you were to ban guns of any type. People would still commit murder on a mass scale. Guns do make it a little easier, but where there is a will there is way. If you don't think so your are rather in the dark on how easy it is to build bombs, and they are much easier to employ then a direct assualt with a firearm. The guy could have had a sword and using tear gas,as he did, still would have mortally wounded many people. People also tend to forget the criminal element. Weed is illegal( for the most part ) in the U.S....does that stop people from using it? No, not even close. Even if the U.S. enacted a country wide ban on guns...who would enforce it??? Our military can't be used for such actions and police units are not equipt to deal with enforcing a law on that wide of a scale. Can anyone even imagine trying to deal with just Texas, not to mention the 49 other states. If if you managed to take by force all the legaly owned guns...what about all the illegal guns and what about all the people who know how to manufacture guns, that will still do so only illegally. It's not as easy as just passing a law. Saying that guns should all just be done away with is unrealistic. I get where your coming from but it isn't the world we live in. I don't own guns btw. I live in a safe town and do not feel the need to carry a firearm or keep one in my home. If for some reason i lived in a dangerous city (insert any high crime city in U.S.)I probably would have a gun and like that I have the right to choose whats best for my families saftey. Police cannot possibly respond to every situation and cannot be relied on for protection at all times.
I disagree that the incidents would be less often if guns were illegal. I wish it were that easy but im affraid there are other issues such as low education standards and wide spread religious belief that far more contribute to violence than guns do.

The culture in America is not the same in Australia. It may have worked in your country but it's like comparing apples to oranges. The pockets of resistance in Australia, would be large, well armed and extremely motivated militias in America, and, there is no way police can handle that. Sure our Army could probably do it...but at what expence? How many people would die in such a case? The average American just will not accept their guns to be taken. I'm not saying they are 100% right on the topic, but its reality.

I looked up Australias gun laws...it doesn't appear to me that they all got taken away. My info could be wrong since its on the net but didn't they just take away certain types of guns? There actually was a massacre btw, an arson fire that killed 15 in the Childers Palace fire.
I dont support the NRA and I don't support civilains owning any type of gun. Assault weapons such as high capacity assualt rifles and full automatic guns were not the intent of the freedom to bear arms. Out of all the issues America faces gun control is not a priority to me. Educating people to make choices for themselves seems much more feasible than forceably taking guns away. If the police or army where to try to take americans guns away, i think more would die in that attempt then in all the gun related massacres america has had. I say this because ive read what the NRA publishes and I personally know people who would not give up their guns without a fight. I don't agree with such blind ingnorance but I would hate to see such a battle take place. In time I'm sure laws will be become more restrictive and I do vote to further restrict gun ownership when I can...i just dont tell my gun owner friends

I don't think the childers fire was a massacre if I recall correctly. The aim of the fire was not to kill people even though that was the outcome.

Yes the gun laws in Australia were not about confiscating all guns but i couldn't remember the details so i didn't try to clarify it.

It was listed as a massacre. What person sets fire to a building that doesnt realize people will at least have a greater chance of being killed by the smoke or flames? Even if he was targeting just one person he had to know more could be killed. My point was large amounts of people die in attacks like that without the use of firearms and that just because the guns are gone it wont stop acts like that. That said..i do see owning a gun as a privlidge more than a right. There are plenty of people in the US that should not have a gun based on their IQ alone. I am for strict laws concerning guns and A LOT of government oversight to help ensure their proper use i.e. hunting, target shooting and self-defence.