Discuss

[Sue U]

School shootings are still a rather extreme rarity; other multiple shootings and run-of-the-mill gun homicides much less so.

The fact is that the population of the United States is about 2.5 times greater than it was in 1950, while there are now more than 7 times as many guns in circulation as there were then. In 1950, there was approximately one gun for every three people in the U.S.; now there are more guns than people. The sheer number of guns makes them more available both for crime (whether by "legitimate" owners or through loss or theft) and for accidental (and less-than-accidental) injuries/deaths.

Automobile deaths have been steadily declining over the last few decades mostly due to advances in motor vehicle safety technology, a significant amount of which was mandated by the government. Gun manufacturers have strongly resisted safety technology for their products and have successfully fought off "smart gun" legislation, to say nothing of the kind of mandatory education, licensing and registration common imposed with respect to motor vehicles and their operation.

[Bicycle Bill]

The stupidity of the proposition implicit in the OP is obvious

There are a lot more cars on the road now but they aren't showing up in massacres in the classroom....

Any workman knows you use the proper tool for the job.
Now then, if you wanted to take out a large number of people in a congested but relatively open area then a car is probably the best way to go.  And most people will accept a claim that "the car malfunctioned" or "I hit the gas instead of the brake".
Another example below ▼▼


-"BB"-

[rubato]

The op is


Argumentum quisquiliae



Yrs,
Rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

The op is

Argumentum quisquiliae

Yrs,
Rubato

Heavens, you are quick

naturally it makes the false assumption of "not this...therefore that". However, two symptoms are not equal to cause

[Sue U]

The elimination of prayer, Bible-reading and other religious exercises from public schools has been all to the better for both religious and state institutions, as well as American society as a whole. If we expect our government to treat us all as equals with rights to full participation in civic life, then government agencies -- including schools -- cannot favor one religion over another, or prefer religion over non-religion.

The Pledge of Allegiance is insipid and does absolutely nothing to promote understanding of, respect for, or engagement in American civic institutions, or to otherwise instill positive social behaviors. It is beyond obvious that for a "pledge" to be meaningful, it has to be undertaken voluntarily, not learned by rote before the age of understanding and repeated mindlessly for some number of years of schooling. In fact, it is that kind of pointless drudgery, mandated day-in and day-out year after year, that induces people to act out in anti-social ways.

[Big RR]

Sue, I don't think recitation of the Pledge induces anti-social behavior, but then I don't think it does very much positive either. it kind of reminds me of a time when we used to recite poetry in school, eventually memorizing the poems without having an inkling of what they meant (or in my case, even wanting to find out). I recall we used to have competitions among the classes for such recitations (and there were both solo and group recitations in these competitions), but I can honestly say I learned nothing of poetry or poems from this exercise, and even developed a dislike of poetry that lasted into college. The pledge is kind of like that--from "to the republic for Richard Sands", to one nation, "invisible" "with liberty and just juice for all".

I recall seeing a short film on TV a number of years ago that was set in a post WW3 America where "they" won and took over. The kids had a new teacher, and when she asked how they started the day one kid told her they said the pledge; as they started, she pointed out how silly it was to pledge anything to a piece of cloth and asked the kids why they did it. It went on for a while (and other parts of the pledge were discussed and it was clear the kids really didn't know much of what they were saying) and the kids eventually threw the flag out the window. It made a good point about knee jerk patriotism and rote memorization, and showed how easy they are to undermine.

ETA: here's a link to a wiki on the movie and the short story it is based on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children%27s_Story

[liberty]

A lively bunch, ain't ya?

CP makes the obvious error of assuming that a meme containing statements created by and applicable to person X is in some fashion being applied to himself by person Y merely by the act of posting the meme and inviting discussion. (Note: this would be a reasonable supposition if wesw posted a meme saying "I'm a dick")

Back to the meme itself... naturally it makes the false assumption of "not this...therefore that". However, two symptoms are not equal to cause. Is there even a correlation though, as assumed by Person X?

Yea, I got it and I think he did too. I think he missed it because he wanted to see it differently.

[Bicycle Bill]

Sue, I don't think recitation of the Pledge induces anti-social behavior, but then I don't think it does very much positive either. it kind of reminds me of a time when we used to recite poetry in school, eventually memorizing the poems without having an inkling of what they meant (or in my case, even wanting to find out). I recall we used to have competitions among the classes for such recitations (and there were both solo and group recitations in these competitions), but I can honestly say I learned nothing of poetry or poems from this exercise, and even developed a dislike of poetry that lasted into college. The pledge is kind of like that--from "to the republic for Richard Sands", to one nation, "invisible" "with liberty and just juice for all".

I recall seeing a short film on TV a number of years ago that was set in a post WW3 America where "they" won and took over. The kids had a new teacher, and when she asked how they started the day one kid told her they said the pledge; as they started, she pointed out how silly it was to pledge anything to a piece of cloth and asked the kids why they did it. It went on for a while (and other parts of the pledge were discussed and it was clear the kids really didn't know much of what they were saying) and the kids eventually threw the flag out the window. It made a good point about knee jerk patriotism and rote memorization, and showed how easy they are to undermine.

ETA: here's a link to a wiki on the movie and the short story it is based on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children%27s_Story

Man, that wakens a long-dormant memory in my mind.  I went to your link and read that it had originally appeared in "Reader's Digest" in 1964; my folks were long-time subscribers so I might have seen it there, even though I'd have only been ten years old at the time.  But I think it was later in my adolescence, when it might have been part of an anthology I would have stumbled across while in junior high or high school (I don't think I ever saw it on TV).

And as long as it's been brought it up — here's a clip from one of the funniest men who ever lived in America that, in a little less than four minutes time, spells out the TRUE meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance.  Forget the Super Bowl; forget the latest installment of "Star Wars" or the Marvel superhero pantheon; forget so-called "Must-see TV".  This is something that every American — especially our elected officials, on either side of the aisle — should see regularly.

-"BB"-

[RayThom]

I remember that show quite vividly. The Pledge, when delivered like that, has true meaning. Unfortunately, when it is required to be a rote recitation on a daily basis that feeling is easily lost. Like happiness, patriotism does not come from without, it comes from within.

"Good Night and May God Bless."

[rubato]

The stupidity of the proposition implicit in the OP is obvious; the fact that so many are ready to believe there is some sort of link between school shootings and reciting the pledge of allegiance/prayer in schools -- or that people spread such horseshit as "food for thought" -- is a testament to the idiocy of people generally.

Here's something that's at least probative of the issue: the dramatic increase in the sheer number of guns in circulation and readily available.

...

When I was a kid, there weren't nearly so many guns around, either in sheer numbers or on a per capita basis.

You know what results in more shootings, whether "school" or otherwise?

More guns.

Fewer guns = fewer shootings and fewer gun crimes.

It really is that simple.

It can't be that simple. Although the argument is very appealing in some ways.

First of all the largest and fastest rise in the murder rate happened in the 1960s (when the POA and school prayer were still the norm) before most of the increase in gun availability. And then it fluctuated and then decreased (for reasons under discussion) after ca 1993 back to about where it was in 1967 while the numbers of guns continued to increase rapidly up to the present.




yrs,
rubato

[Joe Guy]

Statistics regarding the number of guns owned vs homicides doesn't really mean much. On the other hand the chart from an FBI report showing the percentage of murders by weapons used shows that percentage of gun-related murders remains fairly consistent throughout the years while the total amount of murders fluctuates.

The number of murders in any particular year is caused by the amount of people who want to commit murder.

[rubato]

Statistics regarding the number of guns owned vs homicides doesn't really mean much. On the other hand the chart from an FBI report showing the percentage of murders by weapons used shows that percentage of gun-related murders remains fairly consistent throughout the years while the total amount of murders fluctuates.

The number of murders in any particular year is caused by the amount of people who want to commit murder.

Unless there is some 'saturation point' where nearly everyone who is apt to commit murder already has a gun nearby. Below that point increasing the gun supply would lead to more murders, past it there would be no effect.


A point which, sadly, we could have passed many decades ago.


yrs,
rubato