Home | About | Donate

The Fingers on the Trigger



While gun control is a necessary step in preventing these slaughters, guns are not the cause of the problem. They are only the implements used to produce the problem.

It seems obvious to me that these slaughters - almost weekly - in the US are a result mainly of the violence portrayed in the mainstream media.

But in discussions I've seen in the media regarding these slaughters, this media violence is never mentioned as a cause. Never.

The media are promoting violence.
Why else would they be showing so much of it? For ratings?
That's what they would have us believe, but I don't believe it.

There are more civilized and less brutal ways of boosting ratings.

It is the intention of the PTB to induce violence and chaos into society, for the purpose of furthering their divide, conquer, monitor, scare and confuse strategy, in order to better subjugate and control the population.

And the slaughters are a consequence of this strategy.


Anyone who respects the opinions of the SCOTUS has not been paying attention for a long time. With mean-minded mental midgets like Scalia telling us what the Constitution means, we don't need foreign enemies. The military is protecting us from the barbarians at the gates? Who is protecting us from the barbarians inside the gates?


Imagine if after 9/11 and the Patriot Act, after all the data mining invasions of privacy, after all the privatizations of everyday life by corporate rule, after the militarization of police departments and drones and RFID chips and StingRay surveillance and all the rest that is bringing fascism closer to fruition that someone would propose having the 2nd amendment for the first time? It would never happen would it? We would never be able to be a citizenry that had guns.

Many people say that is a good thing of course... but maybe it isn't. Maybe we need to change the culture that depicts violence in such hollywoodized familiarity and pass the popcorn excitement? Maybe that is the causation of these big finale suicide/mass murders? Americans want a big finale to everything including their own lives. We want to be noticed and make a big splash.

Why do we feel so powerless and desperate? Our corporatized civilization is not as much a 'culture' as we assumed it was. We fail to create a shared culture and instead rely on sensation and isolated pleasures. People fall through the cracks because we value spending a fortune on the military (corruption is tolerated and everyone knows it), we have hundreds of military bases around the world for no real reason except we believe that the military should be increased every year without fail and now it is so big that it is too expensive to keep. We privatize to the corporate bottom line. Mental health? If you can afford it. Mental health in schools? Well sure but we need that military base in Australia (that one really amazes me) and all the others like in Britain. Why do we have bases in Britain? Do we actually have any reasons offered to us?

What we do have is a deficient culture that quantifies everything to the corporate bottom line. Maximize profits but not culture nor society. Well then disturbed individuals will slip through the cracks. The end result is that one of our basic rights gets threatened - that the populace of this country has the right to own guns. It is so bizarre that as we lose our freedoms like never before that people blithely advocate taking guns away from people.

They actually should take away some money from the military and end subsidies to super rich corporations (like in the fossil fuel industry) and use that money to PRODUCE CULTURE! Use the money to teach and educate, to make people feel less like unimportant cogs in the wheel - a wheel that grinds them down and makes them feel hopeless. It isn't the guns it is the defeated, dehumanized and despairing personalities that pull the triggers.

Tens of millions of Americans own guns and do not shoot anyone. If we keep making movies and TV shows that ignore people's rights and in fact ignore the humanity of people (we show law enforcement's disdain for laws, using torture and brutality and so forth) and then use drones to assassinate people without trial etc... who teaches the weak minded to pull the trigger?

Take away some of the 'guns' from an overblown military budget and use the money to make culture and to provide services like free mental health etc... and we'd all feel safer.

We have the right to own guns and it is best that we keep that right in the future. If you want to stop these 'big finale' suicides then fix the circumstances that produce them. Americans have always owned guns... we didn't used to have these horrific big finale suicide/mass murders. We have them now though... we best ask ourselves why?


Guns may not be 'the cause" of the problem, but without them there would be much less of a problem. They are designed specifically to kill--they have no other purpose. The psychology of owning a gun includes the will to kill either an animal or another human--even if there is no explicit "desire.' The history of gunpowder and its expanded use is strictly aligned with exploitation, domination, and death. As a society today, we don't glorify killing with cars, or toasters, or even knives--we glorify guns. So, yes, there is a societal aspect, but you can't divorce it from its primary mechanism, the handgun (or assault rifle, or mortar, or bomb).


Guns are the tools of violence but there are many "triggers" for violence in our society, not least of which is the great increase in big-pharma and their shill doctors pushing psychotropic drugs on children - to increase their profits. http://truth-out.org/archive/component/k2/item/87177:us-kids-represent-psychiatric-drug-goldmine

Rising prescription of psychotropic drugs on kids is called a
“concoction to justify the giving out of medication at unprecedented and unjustifiable levels,” that has resulted in “a national disaster of dangerous proportions.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/dalearcher/2013/12/26/the-dark-side-of-big-pharma-2/

Government has shielded big-pharma from scrutiny of this deadly trend and tragic consequences and instead emphasises the gun aspect, not the causes of violence in society. Many claim most of the school shootings had a prescribed-drug link. Many drugs prescribed for kids and adults are known to induce violent behavior and thoughts. Imagine the legal liability for big-pharma drug manufacturers & pushers if a definitive link to mass killings was established - big-pharma and their tools in government would do anything to prevent that, including pressuring politicians, smearing "quacks" who try to call attention to the problem, silencing media and researchers, and funding false "studies"!

Whether it's legal drugs, endless war violence, movie violence, video game violence, music violence, gang violence or other causes we have become numbed and desensitized, and violence assumed a status that should not be tolerated.

As Wereflea accurately writes "Tens of millions of Americans own guns and do not shoot anyone". Guns are the instrument (one of potentially many, albiet very effective) but the causes of violence must be understood and stopped as soon as possible.



Perhaps people should take responsibility for what they claim is taught by our 'TV society'. When the good guys disdain the law and act like judge, jury and oft times executioner, when torture is a means to an end ignoring the question of the tortured being an innocent man, when the protagonist of an action flick casually wipes out the witnesses to a crime as if this is standard practice, when the mob is depicted as if a soap opera (executions and extortion mixed in with arguments about taking out the garbage and helping the kids do their homework, when Don Corleone replaced John Wayne as America's favorite 'hero'... whose finger is actually on those triggers?

Lockable guns would save accidental deaths (particularly those of young children in the home) but a maniac is a maniac. I truly believe that there is an impatient immaturity that has become a part of our culture. Barbara Tuchman wrote in 'A Distant Mirror' of the young ages of famous mediaeval monarchs. They were young and reckless and impatient. They were immature and wanted what they wanted and when they didn't get it they were horrible and vindictive. I see that same impatient aggressiveness and violent spite in our society. Most of these maniacs are young and emotional outliers who feel estranged from the society around them. They see the cinematic victory of gunplay and feel 'equalized' in power to their real or imagined persecutors. Call it a sense of super power that comes with a gun.

It is that which we do not face openly. That weakness of the spirit that so many of these nuts have within them that consumes their common sense and hope for their future. They give up on their future and become violent mostly out of spite. They'll show everybody that everybody should have paid more attention to them. That they should have been loved more or whatever they feel they missed out on. Guns make them feel powerful.

But it is society that makes them feel like they are losers. That is the place where we are at fault. A man with a knife or axe is just as deadly which people are ignoring. It isn't the existence of guns but that immature vengeful personality that we should worry about. We taunt the non successful and reap the whirlwind when one of them snaps.

I don't blame the guns although a lockable gun makes sense even if none of this kind of thing had ever happened.


"Can we really blame him? No.He is no more guilty than a blind man who’s been given a driver’s license."

Umm, no... he's as guilty as blind man who actually starts driving knowing full well he's gonna kill someone on the road. But i guess one of the main tenets of modern "civilization" is that there's no personal responsibility.

BTW, yes, we can and should blame him, He is solely and totally responsible for his acts and it looks like, in this case at least, he got what he deserved.


Got some news for you. Everyone agrees with SCOTUS as long as it matches their personal opinion.


"People fall through the cracks because we value spending a fortune on the military (corruption is tolerated and everyone knows it), we have hundreds of military bases around the world for no real reason except we believe that the military should be increased every year without fail and now it is so big that it is too expensive to keep. We privatize to the corporate bottom line."

Who is this WE that believes in the military?

When citizens are subjects of a covert fascist regime, their input has NOTHING to do with the priorities furthered by the dominant powers.

People like you disingenuously conflate what these powers do with the supposed consent of the governed. That is how disinformation works.

Did citizens want the big banks bailed out?

Did Blacks want slavery?

Did women want to be the chattel of fathers and husbands?

Do Hispanics want to be rounded up and sent back over the border?

Do citizens want treaties signed in behind-closed-doors halls that tell them what they will eat?

What Big Guns do--which is to say, what the consortium of armed agencies answerable often only to covert powers do--is NOT the product of citizens' "free will."


I gave your comment a "like" up until the part where you say that WE glorify guns. Again, who is this we? How fair, honest, or accurate is it to use that particular all-inclusive pronoun when it glosses over the millions of persons who don't own guns, identify with guns, feel a need for penis enlargement through a phallic weapon, or agree that it's wise to have what, a billion guns on the street in this angry, armed and loaded land of too many people who are full of hatred and clueless as to what is true versus what's an official MSM story?

Your WE does not speak for me. It is an inaccurate frame.


You want to pretend that there is no rhetorical we. It is as simple as that. You want everyone to speak in a strictly literal almost autistic sense where everything is clearly definitive. In such a world metaphor is impossible btw. The rhetorical we should be obvious when speaking about the nation. America has no one voice that can be quoted. When someone says we and is referring to the nation, it is understood that it doesn't refer to personal points of view but to generalities of political intent by the government or some other generality. If you live in America (a citizen) it is correct to refer to its military as our military even if a person objects to what is being done in their name. If you live, work, play in this country and participate in our economic system, vote in our political system and all the rest then yes it is correct to use the collective we. It is implied that this use of the word does not denote personal beliefs. We (America) is not I (Sioux Rose).

If you are autistic or a young child or perhaps new to the english language then your persistent silliness about this is understandable but if you are none of the above (which you are not) then you are just being a silly pest about it.


Gun violence in the United States is omnipotent. The victims of gun violence are almost always unarmed - even when the police are doing the killing. Virtually every American political establishment and its jurisdiction is protected by a police department and in spite of training, background checks and psychological evaluations the nation is still awash with unjustifiable, if not wanton, killing of innocents - and still the perpetrators of these unwarranted deaths get away with...murder. Just a short note on posse comitatus: the United States government has given itself the right to order the military to turn its guns, et al, on the citizens of this fast disappearing republic. Obama, in particular, has a disturbing love for war and dismissive attitude towards the Law as proscribed in the Constitution.

America's glorification of guns and war is the bane of societies around the world. The terror leveled against citizens the world over are being killed routinely for their peaceful demonstrations by heavily armed police and soldiers who are almost always supported by the government of the United States. Our government revels in dissemination of weapons of war - it's the stuff America is now made of.

Our country is in the grip of the most ignorant, self serving, anti-American politicians since the Declaration of Independence. Our nation is drenched in violence and it is supported by political establishments from Washington to the smallest townships. Violence will not stop until governments throughout the country are returned to the dependence of a voter's ballot. The sickness vexing the lives of citizens of the United States today cannot be healed by complying with a system designed to deny rights guaranteed in the Constitution for the United States of America.


This statement is erroneous, Sioux Rose: " we have hundreds of military bases around the world for no real reason except we believe that the military should be increased every year without fail and now it is so big that it is too expensive to keep". Most of those bases were made during previous wars. We still have 21 in Germany that we did not close after World War II; ditto Okinawa, Japan, the Philippines, Greece and France. They are welcomed to stay there, because the hosts have become addicted to the $$$. No telling how many will remain in the Middle East for the same reason.


316,545 gun deaths in the last decade in the USA? That is approximately 31 000, or one small town, per year.

55,000 USAian soldiers died in Vietnam during the decade between 1965 and 1975.That is approximately 5,500 per year.

Therefore it was 6 times safer being a USAian soldier in Vietnam than it is being a USAian civilian living in the USA.

So why did the grunts complain about being sent to Vietnam?


America as it is simply can't exist without it's culture of violence, which means guns aren't ever going away. It's driven into us (whether by design–or not) day after day. I drives the economy: the fear which drives the gun sales; media and entertainment advertising & ticket sales; it softens us up for militarism. The circle goes round and round. Including our sickening healthcare system, for-profit prisons and debt-to-grave higher educational system. Do you really think this rat-hole of a nation is ever going to develop a compassionate "attitude" about anyone? Does it really care about "life"..of any kind? Hell no.



Re your response to Siouxrose11: Well argued and well said.


The author mentions the supreme court case of Miller v. the Untied States (1939). When this case finally made it to the court, Miller was dead and there was no representation of his side whatsoever. Thus the court made its' decision solely based on prosecution arguments. Does this sound like a fair way to make U.S. law?


Beautifully put! It won't do any good sadly. This has been going on for at least six years. But I applaud you for laying it out so articulately and truthfully. And you are kind to refer it as "silly". I call her preoccupation with the plural pronoun "we" as OCD and a constant waste of everyone's precious reading time.

Thank you!


The above is an egregious lie. If Atcheson really believes what he wrote, he shouldn't be writing because he doesn't do his research. And if he did research it, then he shouldn't be writing without having to have the equivalent of a Surgeon General's warning on his work, because it's toxic.

The truth is that

  • the guys who wrote the Constition are on record --original documents-- stating, without constraint or limitation, that citizens have the right to keep and carry arms.

  • from the beginning of the invasions of the Americas and continuing right up until weapons of mass destruction began to be produced, any ordinary citizen could own and carry (if it was carry-able) any weapon available to the military. The only limitation was, of course, the ability to pay for or construct it.

  • The Baldwin-Felts goons who in 1914 drove their homemade armored car back and forth through the strikers' tent city in Ludlow Colorado, randomly firing their "potato-digger" machine gun(s) to intimidate the strikers and their families, and the Ford company goons who shot up the 1932 Hunger March with a Thompson gun, killing and wounding unarmed marchers, weren't breaking any law--it was perfectly legal to own machine guns or anything else--if you could afford to buy them.

  • in 1934, the National Firearms Act added a tax and a registration requirement to machine guns, sawed-offs, and sound-suppressors, making them harder to afford for the working class. The predators weren't bothered by the new costs and restrictions, of course.

  • major limitations began to be imposed in 1968, when mail-order sales were made illegal. This made it possible for states to restrict what people could buy without runnig afoul of the Constitution: simply restrict what dealers can sell/deliver. Dealers have no Constitutional rights.

  • the closing of residential asylums put a lot of very disordered people into the street, many of them dangerous because they no longer lived in the consensual world.

  • one of those disordered individuals, attempting to impress Jodi Foster, tried to assassinate Reagan but succeeded only in disabling James Brady. The "Brady Bill", signed into law by Clinton, added new restrictions.

The current restrictions are modern, illegal as hell, and coincide with the successful attacks on our other Constitutional rights.

Jefferson wrote in his journal that our rights would be taken from us little by little, and that eventually it would cost blood in the gutters to even have a hope of getting them back. Atcheson's lies contribute to that taking.

Will we resist?