![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Virginia Tech
Apr. 18th, 2007 10:54 amLay Lake and I have been having a discussion on gun control as it relates to the Virginia Tech shooting. We disagree on a lot of things, but I've decided to post about our areas of agreement. From what I'm hearing in the news, the Virginia Tech shooter was clearly mentally disturbed. Go read his plays, turned in as college-level writing projects, for an example. We need to take a hard look at our mental health system. Included in that look is what to do for somebody who needs but doesn't want help.
Since mass shootings are (fortunately) rare, I think we also need to look at other things. Some countries (Switzerland) have lots of guns and little violence. Others (Brazil, Philippines) have few legal guns and more per-capita violence then the US.
My theory is this is related to income inequality. The third-world countries mentioned all have huge suburbs of people living literally in cardboard boxes, frequently in sight of very wealthy areas. This creates a sense of nothing to loose desperation. In an industrial society, some of those desperate folk will find a gun and use it.
Although the poor in the USA are better off in absolute terms (TVs, electricity and running water are available to even the poorest) the "perceived" inequality is still high. In America, after all, any child can grow up to be President. So, if you are poor in America, the sense that "something's wrong" is great, and some people will respond to that by violence. This is not a new phenomenon. I don't think it's an accident that Bonnie and Clyde were famous in the Great Depression, or Jesse James in the Reconstruction South, both times where lots of folks were getting a raw deal.
So, working to reduce this inequality is not only the right course morally, but beneficial. After all, the typical leafy suburb isn't safe because there's a cop on every corner. Rather, the folks that live there have much to loose from crime and violence, and little to gain.
This doesn't mean we'll never need police - people have an amazing ability to do stupid and self-destructive things - but suggests a way out of our violence problem. It's cheaper and better to give people a stake in society then to pay for guards and fences.
Since this is my blog, I'll suggest that if you are interested in helping solve poverty and reduce this disparity, you could do worse then contact your local Rotary Club.
Since mass shootings are (fortunately) rare, I think we also need to look at other things. Some countries (Switzerland) have lots of guns and little violence. Others (Brazil, Philippines) have few legal guns and more per-capita violence then the US.
My theory is this is related to income inequality. The third-world countries mentioned all have huge suburbs of people living literally in cardboard boxes, frequently in sight of very wealthy areas. This creates a sense of nothing to loose desperation. In an industrial society, some of those desperate folk will find a gun and use it.
Although the poor in the USA are better off in absolute terms (TVs, electricity and running water are available to even the poorest) the "perceived" inequality is still high. In America, after all, any child can grow up to be President. So, if you are poor in America, the sense that "something's wrong" is great, and some people will respond to that by violence. This is not a new phenomenon. I don't think it's an accident that Bonnie and Clyde were famous in the Great Depression, or Jesse James in the Reconstruction South, both times where lots of folks were getting a raw deal.
So, working to reduce this inequality is not only the right course morally, but beneficial. After all, the typical leafy suburb isn't safe because there's a cop on every corner. Rather, the folks that live there have much to loose from crime and violence, and little to gain.
This doesn't mean we'll never need police - people have an amazing ability to do stupid and self-destructive things - but suggests a way out of our violence problem. It's cheaper and better to give people a stake in society then to pay for guards and fences.
Since this is my blog, I'll suggest that if you are interested in helping solve poverty and reduce this disparity, you could do worse then contact your local Rotary Club.
