The Right to Bear Arms versus The Right to Live.

[Lynchenberg]

Do you think gun control would have a positive effect in preventing mass shootings?

[DaddlerTheDalek]

Do you think gun control would have a positive effect in preventing mass shootings?

From my point of view. Yes.

[Neon Black]

I'm not really well-informed enough to say, but my observation is thus: I think tighter regulation would probably have a very different effect in America to what it would in any other nation, which incidentally appears to be the country most prone to mass shootings in the developed world.

At the end of the day, a smart person who wants a gun will get one no matter what the laws are, unless the control is almost absolute (a la nations such as China, where gun ownership by private citizens is outright banned).

The most notable shooting spree in my country was the Port Arthur massacre of 1996 and gun laws in Australia were tightened in its wake. We have not had an incident like it before or since as far as I'm aware.

I think an outright ban of guns for private citizens would probably prevent almost all sprees in any country, but there would be very severe practical tradeoffs - for instance, people on farms often need firearms to defend their crops and livestock against predators, and they're a good deterrent against crime in remote areas where law enforcement is thin on the ground and slow to react.

The political and cultural issue in America about their right to bear arms is a very localised issue that gets more and more prickly with every generation, despite the fact that rights, like the laws of government, are constructs and thus have an element of mutability to them, unlike, say, the laws of physics, and to be honest, I generally think America's gun laws overall are already sane enough anyway. Gun crime in general in the western world is also sharply trending down, not up.

Summarily: Probably yes, but it's not the best way to prevent shootings. Guns are the instruments of murder, not the cause. And furthermore, killers are created, not born.

There are other elements that give rise to spree killers - mostly upbringing and the effect of the media. Speaking very broadly here (sweeping generalisations, even), my observation is that bad upbringing and traumas suffered by people in their developmental years is what creates the urge to act aggressively against people and the media's canonisation of past killers (Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Anders Breivik, Martin Bryant...) is what plants the idea of committing such an act as being something that's desirable and achievable.

Better parenting, better mental health support and encouraging a cultural shift away from ostracising people with mental health issues would be the better solution, I think.

I'm not much of a fan of Marilyn Manson, but I do like his thoughts on the 1999 shooting:

In 2002, Manson appeared in Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for Columbine; his appearance was filmed during the band's first show in Denver since the shooting. When Moore asked Manson what he would have said to the students at Columbine, he replied, "I wouldn't say a single word to them. I would listen to what they have to say and that's what no one did."