TV News LIES

Friday, May 10th

Last update07:20:58 AM GMT

You are here News Editorials How can a gun crazed nation lead the world?

How can a gun crazed nation lead the world?

E-mail Print PDF

*        BET ON IT        The Absolute Certainties of 2011     *        WISH LIST 2010        What Santa Is Giving Out This Year     *        OH COME ON        Five Inches of Snow Shuts Down Europe  What's This?Translate  What's This?Return  How can a gun-crazed society lead the world?According to a 2007 survey, the United States leads the world in gun ownership: 90 guns per 100 people. We are a country with five percent of the world's people and between 35 and 50 percent of its civilian-owned guns. That's something like 270 million weapons.  

Repeated studies have shown that the United States is far and away the leader among the world's developed countries in gun violence and gun deaths. There is no other developed country that is even close. Over 30,000 Americans die every year from gun violence. Most of these are suicides but in excess of 12,000 a year are homicides. Another 200,000 Americans are estimated to be injured each year due to guns.

In 2009, Bob Herbert of the New York Times wrote a compelling column noting that since 9/11 over 120,000 people have died in the United States as a result of gun violence. By now, the number is in excess of 140,000.

For those in the world who are mystified by this, the legal explanation associated with it by gun rights defenders is that the right to own guns is protected by the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."  

This statement has taken on quasi-theological importance for many in the United States even though it is clearly being misinterpreted by those who believe it provides every individual the right to own such guns -- including advanced, highly-destructive automatic weapons. The misinterpretation begins with the deliberate ignoring of the first half of the sentence associating the right with the need for a "well-regulated militia."

This is a clear qualifier associated with the so-called right to bear arms and had it not been important to the sentence, one can only conclude it would not have been included in the famously sparely written document. If militias don't exist, one can therefore conclude this "right" should be reconsidered if not eliminated.

More...


Most Recent Related Stories...


Paul Rogers: The US could stop the horror in Rafah today. Why won’t it?

US could stop the horror in Gaza Despite the pressure coming from the Biden administration, there is little sign of the Netanyahu government...

The Bombs of August : In Remembrance of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Atomic bombing of HiroshimaOn Monday, August 6, 1945, after six months of intense firebombing of 67 other Japanese cities,...

The Bombs of August : In Remembrance of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Enola Gay crewOn Monday, August 6, 1945, after six months of intense firebombing of 67 other Japanese cities,...

The USA Today Editorial Board, independent from newsroom, endorsed Joe Biden. Here's why.

Members of US Editorial BoardIn its 38 years of existence, the USA TODAY Editorial Board has never endorsed a candidate for president....
 
America's # 1 Enemy
Tee Shirt
& Help Support TvNewsLIES.org!
TVNL Tee Shirt
 
TVNL TOTE BAG
Conserve our Planet
& Help Support TvNewsLIES.org!
 
Get your 9/11 & Media
Deception Dollars
& Help Support TvNewsLIES.org!
 
The Loaded Deck
The First & the Best!
The Media & Bush Admin Exposed!