It’s not just an obvious response, it’s the same response as always, because the video makes the same argument as always. Which, if either, you find more compelling is going to depend on your starting position.
I, along with the vast majority of people around the world, find it utterly baffling that the response to increasing gun violence in the USA is, and always has been, to increase the number and killing power of guns in general circulation, and to blame the ensuing rise in gun violence on a shortage of guns.
My sister, a special needs aide, regularly has to take part in the horrible USAian school ritual of active shooter lockdown drills, getting a class of children as young as four years of age to hide, silently, in the art supplies cupboard. Some of the kids have special needs. How sad is it that she once had reason to praise a little autistic child for being the quietest child in the exercise, and received a rare grin from her charge who has selective mutism (a condition in which anxiety makes it impossible for the person to access the ability to speak in stressful situations)? I found the total lack of humanity in putting kids through this ordeal to be horrific. And why? Any deranged killer will simply be opening doors or shooting through them anyway.
“I should arm myself” only an obvious response if any talk about any problems related to gun violence is interpreted as “What can I do to protect myself and my family?”. It’s not a response to lockdown drills, or feeling the need to map out escape routes, or having to collect DNA from schoolchildren. It doesn’t address the concerns or problems people have that are themselves caused by the rampant proliferation of guns. It’s a personal, not societal, solution for a different problem.
isn’t one response kinda “obvious’?
“I don’t want those things to happen to me either, so … I must arm myself”
It may be obvious, but that doesn’t make it a good response.
It’s not just an obvious response, it’s the same response as always, because the video makes the same argument as always. Which, if either, you find more compelling is going to depend on your starting position.
I, along with the vast majority of people around the world, find it utterly baffling that the response to increasing gun violence in the USA is, and always has been, to increase the number and killing power of guns in general circulation, and to blame the ensuing rise in gun violence on a shortage of guns.
My sister, a special needs aide, regularly has to take part in the horrible USAian school ritual of active shooter lockdown drills, getting a class of children as young as four years of age to hide, silently, in the art supplies cupboard. Some of the kids have special needs. How sad is it that she once had reason to praise a little autistic child for being the quietest child in the exercise, and received a rare grin from her charge who has selective mutism (a condition in which anxiety makes it impossible for the person to access the ability to speak in stressful situations)? I found the total lack of humanity in putting kids through this ordeal to be horrific. And why? Any deranged killer will simply be opening doors or shooting through them anyway.
It’s a mass psychosis of victim-blaming.
“I should arm myself” only an obvious response if any talk about any problems related to gun violence is interpreted as “What can I do to protect myself and my family?”. It’s not a response to lockdown drills, or feeling the need to map out escape routes, or having to collect DNA from schoolchildren. It doesn’t address the concerns or problems people have that are themselves caused by the rampant proliferation of guns. It’s a personal, not societal, solution for a different problem.