Back when Thak and Zog were ruling the cave world with their whale bone clubs, they had one definition for violence. If they mess with you, beat them over the head. Problem solved. Since then many people have invested lots of time and energy into creating many 
different ways to solve problems in a violent manner (which, ironically, creates as many problems as it solves). That was kind of the way our discussion went today at the water cooler.
If someone shoots you with a gun, don’t blame the gun. We’ve all heard that many times, but someone usually still gets in trouble if they use a gun on you. Those are the laws. The same is true for drinking and driving. If you advertently (haha) hit someone with your car while drunk, it’s still murder, and if you inadvertently do it, it’s manslaughter. You still get in trouble. But don’t blame the alcohol. Blame the idiot who decided to drink while driving. The biggest difference these days, though, is that there is more force behind whatever violence we decide to use that the cavemen didn’t have back in the day.
“If someone shoots you with a gun, don’t blame the gun.”
When we think force, we usually think a gun, but there is more to it than just guns. Someone brought up the fact that the United States as a whole is not a violent nation. However, when we do decide to engage in violence, we are surprisingly successful at it, that is, our violence usually leads to death. That’s the really sad part. If you think of all the serial killers from years gone by, you’ll notice that they had to take time in-between kills, or it was incredibly messy, up close and personal. They had to use knives, or their hands, or some combination thereof. You had to be breathing distance from the people you were going to kill, and that made it a more intimate enterprise. Now, though, with sniper rifles and the like, you can be quite far away, and your prey never even knows it’s you who did it to them before they’re dead. Scary, really.
We talked about gun control laws too, and it seems like they only exist to keep guns away from people who really need them to protect themselves, or at least to slow the process down enough so they can’t protect themselves when they really need it. While the criminals go to the black market, get sawed-off guns by the truckload, and can inflict damage almost immediately. It’s like we’re getting punished by the same laws that are supposed to help protect us. But even when we do get those guns and we are in the situation to use them, we are more likely to be harmed with our own guns than to cause distress to the people who are against us.
Then, speaking of alcohol and its inclusion in the violence debate, it has been shown that alcohol use can heighten the senses as well as dull them. And these two influences can change perspective enough to create accidents, both in and out of cars. The glory of cars is that they are incredibly powerful and it’s not that difficult to get a license. Too many people are on the roads driving while intoxicated (under the influence), and they don’t even realize it. That’s the really scary thing. They might be up for causing danger to themselves, but they’re not the only ones on the road.
We concluded that violence is not more widespread than it was in olden times, even if the news makes it seem that way. That’s the key. The news, spread across the internet, cell phones, and through the wires, is able to deliver to us this violence almost right when it is happening. We didn’t have that before, and that media coverage gives the impression that the world is more violent. That was, sadly, my cue to leave, but I could still hear the rest of them debating the issue even while I was walking away. Maybe we should ban alcohol again, someone said.
Sam
Sam's Online Journal 