Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
Does the old rallying cry "Guns don't kill people. People kill people" hold up to philosophical scrutiny?
To play Devil's advocate, the NRA slogan probably fits the data more accurately than the philosophers suggest it might. From 1959 to 2005 gun ownership and use stayed basically flat, then decreased slightly in recent years. However, in that time gun violence spiked tremendously, then fell just as rapidly. Today, it is easier than at any time in history to obtain a powerful, high magazine, accurate, cheap, semiautomatic handgun (a Glock, for example) than at any time in history. However, gun violence is negligible compared to what we saw in the 80s and 90s. Ownership and violence seem not to correlate; we therefore have to conclude that it is culture that predisposes one toward killing.
There's a frustrating amount of ad hominem (or variations thereof) in the comments section there. The argument should not be about whether or not guns change the subject (I would argue they do), but about the consequences of this on the philosophical/psychological sphere.
Sure, we can say that guns change how people think, how they are - the follow-up question is: are we opposed to these changes as a society?