Gun Culture and the American Nightmare of Violence

[Triana]

. . .

Focusing merely on mass shootings or the passing of gun legislation does not get to the root of the systemic forces that produced the United State's love affair with violence, writes Henry Giroux.

"The rise of violence and the gun culture in the United States cannot be separated from a transformation in governance in the United States. Political sovereignty has been replaced by economic sovereignty as corporate power takes over the reins of governance. The more money influences politics, the more corrupt the political culture becomes.

Under such circumstances, holding office is largely dependent on having huge amounts of capital at one’s disposal, while laws and policies at all levels of government are mostly fashioned by lobbyists representing big business corporations and financial institutions.

Moreover, such lobbying, as corrupt and unethical as it may be, is now carried out in the open by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other individuals, groups and institutions invested in the militarization of US society. This lobbying is then displayed as a badge of honor – a kind of open testimonial to the lobbyists’ disrespect for democratic governance."

THE REST:

http://billmoyers.com/story/gun-culture-and-the-american-nightmare-of-violence/

[libodem]

1. .

[Triana]

2. +1

The cuckoo-bird contingent should not have firearms.

[libodem]

4. Absolutely

[Duckhunter935]

3. ..

[SecularMotion]

9. No comment?

[libodem]

5. .

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. Actually, the definition of militia is found in USC Title 10, Section 311

[branford]

7. Actually, no.

In fact, the men in the top appear to be exactly what many of the Founders were precisely afraid of when drafting the Second Amendment.

Further, the regular and irregular militia are made of the able-bodied people capable of taking-up arms, and hence those ranchers with guns, as well as many people on DU, would be definitely considered the militia.

[Javaman]

8. so...

you're a constitutional scholar?

please point to exactly were it states anywhere in the constitution regarding "irregular militia" that are made up of "able-bodied people" that you state.

last time I check it clearly states "a well regulated militia".

[Straw Man]

10. US Code

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

-- https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

[Javaman]

12. well, I will admit I am wrong but that is also completely terrifying.

on edit, isn't up to the federal authorities to organize a militia?

and not some group of morons who claim they are just because?

[branford]

13. No, federal control of armed forces, particularly a standing army,

terrified the Founders, and was one of the primary reasons for the existence of the Second Amendment and its state analogs in virtually all state constitutions.

You must always remember that the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, was all about restricting the powers of government. Federalism was also imperative, and anything not explicitly permitted to the federal government was reserved to the State or the People.

The Founders were liberal revolutionaries, but as they just won the revolution, were also classic conservatives in their fear of "big government."

Lastly, I certainly do not consider myself a "constitutional scholar," but I am an attorney with a degree in American history, and well versed in related subjects by dint of professional training and personal interest.

[libodem]

11. .

[aikoaiko]

14. What rise in violence? Is he talking about the rise from the late 1960s to early 1990s.

Because since 1993 gun homicides have steadily declined to 1960 levels.