Gun violence in Chicago is a problem for Obama, says Bloomberg, and gun control backers are “left cold”. (via memeorandum). Newsdesk tells us that The Authorities™ are going to Chicago to discuss “youth violence”. The Jawa Report sneers, and is fully justified in doing so.
As I am personally prepared to attest, a heart attack hurts. There are many items in the modern pharmacopeia that will relieve pain, but giving a heart attack victim Oxycodin is unlikely to do much for the unfortunate sufferer of something much deeper. It’s simple to treat the pain, but treating the pain doesn’t address the underlying cause — and even if the victim survives the heart attack, giving him sufficient pain medication to make him feel better is likely to have side effects that make the problem worse, not better.
Gun violence isn’t the problem, it’s a symptom of the problem. Treating symptoms without addressing the underlying problem is more likely to make it worse, not better.
The problem is breakdown of orderly society. When we submit to Government, one of the things we receive in exchange is transfer of the necessity for violent action to “the Public”, as expressed by Government. This is one of the principal features that distinguishes Western societies from many others: less ordered societies still permit, or even require, personal retribution for injury — revenge. By assigning responsibility for revenge to Government, and abjuring it on a personal basis, we create a situation that is more orderly, and therefore more conducive to trade, commerce, and the creation of wealth.
Inner-city residents have been excepted from that reassurance, and in many cases have been specifically taught not to accept the bargain, on the ground that — well, you know all the excuses: the cops are racist and all the rest. The result is that they revert to the earlier and less efficient forms of Government, choosing leaders according to strength and depending upon private revenge to redress wrongs. Guns are a handy way to facilitate that, but (as revealed by the video Bloomberg references) they are by no means necessary. Almost any object can be used as a weapon. You could choke somebody to death with marshmallows, if you wanted to work hard enough at it.
Controlling guns — treating the symptom — will do nothing to address the real problem. Not only is “weapon” a state of mind, guns themselves are simple technology. Sam Colt built the first practical revolvers using tools that are, by modern standards, little better than hand-files and hammers, and in any major city you can find dozens, perhaps hundreds, of machine shops that could turn out practical firearms in job lots. It isn’t really necessary, though. For many reasons, there are millions of guns out and about in our society and most others. A person who wants a firearm can have one if he wants to take the trouble, and legal barriers are minor to nonexistent — the basis of the problem is that legalities are irrelevant, because those who are charged with implementing the Law have abdicated their responsibilities.
UPDATE: The Huffington Post huffs and puffs about the “gun show loophole”. Even the Mayor admits that gun shows are, at max, 30% of the problem, if it is a problem.
News for you, Mr. Mayor: to a street gangbanger, gun shows are as irrelevant as firearms laws. Down on the corner and out in the street, there are plenty of “private sales” available.
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
7 October 2009 at 12:29 pm
cranky-d
One thing that frustrates me is that I do not see a way to turn things around. The only solution to eliminating street gangs I can think of would be horrendous and un-American, and would most likely lead to tyranny at almost all levels of society.
Most of the “outreach” stuff currently going on is a waste of time.
Maybe I should never watch that show on the history channel about street gangs ever again. It’s depressing.
7 October 2009 at 9:42 pm
B Moe
Decriminalize drugs and prostitution, you will eliminate most of their income; arm, educate and motivate the populace to protect themselves lethally if threatened; and punish severely violent predators when they are caught and convicted.
8 October 2009 at 12:27 pm
cranky-d
You may not realize that we have here a sub-class of people who expect that they will spend a significant portion of their lives in jail. Until you do something about that mind-set, you cannot solve the problem.
I don’t think decriminalizing drugs will help either, because they will simply find some other source of illegal income. I’m willing to give it a try, though, because I would hope I’m wrong.
8 October 2009 at 6:59 pm
B Moe
Make jail a bit more unpleasant.
8 October 2009 at 11:38 pm
Synova
I think that like most things it helps to understand that the behavior (violence, gangs, lawlessness, etc) is not irrational. There may be some short-term vs. long-term decision problems but what strikes me about the youth/gang thing is that it’s hyper-masculine. Maybe a young and stupid version of hyper-masculine, but still. Trying to pacify that probably isn’t going to work.
11 October 2009 at 12:12 pm
geoffb
“Trying to pacify that probably isn’t going to work.”
The taming of young men is one thing traditional marriage and women do for a society. The destruction of that institution by the welfare system started that culture down the path that has led to what is there now. It can be turned around but those that have already grown up in it will be hard to save so an entire new generation has to grow up to replace the dysfunctional one we have allowed to be created.
That said we are not the only society that will face this in some fashion. There are others that have this dysfunction to a greater degree with less ability to cope.