in

Another Solution to Mass Killings

Andrew Yang is almost, sorta, right

I said pretty much the same thing in my Insurance Solution to Mass Killings.

One could argue that we HAD a way to turn young men into healthy citizens and we’re now reaping the results of what the left has sown over the years. I can’t even imagine what my father would have said about:

Actually, I have an idea what he’d say and it would involve a lot of four letter words — and my father knew a lot of four letter words!

Are we surprised that more than a few young men are confused about what being a man is all about? And that some might be attracted to  confirming your maleness through inappropriate acting out — the ultimate being thinking you have no choice but to take a human life in order to feel properly alive?

What has been society’s approach to civilizing young males? Marriage, of course. You want to get married, have sex, and raise kids, you need to have a behavior that at least one female will tolerate. Unfortunately, marriage is now “outmoded” and corrupted. You could throw in “abortion on demand” into the mix as well, if you like. In any instance, there’s little reason for a young male to give a moment’s thought to becoming civilized.

But here we are.

Can we or should we try to find new ways to civilize young males in the absence of a strong tendency toward marriage? There’s only one way I can think of and that’s mandatory military service. Unfortunately, we’ve made the military more of a social experiment than a trainer of men.

Women — if you want to go into the military, you’re free to do so and you might actually have some benefit in civilizing a few young males along the way.

I’m going to speculate that one reason that China has such a large standing army is for exactly this reason. China has 34 million more males than females which is an awful lot of extra testosterone to have running around a population.

Assuming that we can’t shuttle our young men into the military, the next best thing I can think of is to try to limit their access to weapons.

Oh, no! 2A! 2A! Give me a minute before you launch.

There are two parts here. The first part is trying to limit access to their parent’s weapons. This is a frustrating situation for which we might be able to come up with a reasonable plan. The second part is when a young male buys a weapon that they are legally permitted to buy.

Limiting access to their parent’s weapons involves locking the weapons up. The use of a weapon by someone in your household who is underage should be a crime and should make the parent an accessory to the crime.

I think there’s an insurance solution here as well. If all weapons needed to be insured, then one of the questions the insurance company would ask is “are their children in the house?” If you want to avoid getting socked with a high premium, you need to show evidence of the ability to keep the weapons out of their hands.

Now to the second part. We need to find a means for someone with appropriate firearms training and experience to make contact with the young men when they purchase weapons. Young women are going to get sucked up in this as well but we need to be “fair” these days.

One method I suggested was insurance which is a capitalist solution. Another scheme would be a government law that said something like “purchasing a weapon of any type from age 16 to 25 (just to toss out some numbers) requires the purchaser to pick up the weapon and the initial supply of ammunition from a licensed trainer who will instruct the purchaser on the proper and safe use of the weapon.”

I’ll go one step further which is to say that all trainers will be either active duty police or active duty military. These organizations will certify qualified trainers. At the very least, we’ve put all of these young people in contact with “the good guys” who have some opportunity to address societal issues and the “gorilla in the room” about young people and weapons.

“My name is Master Gunnery Sergeant Jose Mendez and if after taking my training I find you have used a weapon in a manner of which I do not approve, I will personally hunt you down and shove an M27 up your ass. DO I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR!”

There’s a Bonus Part 3 which is the “but they can get guns anyway.” True but all we can do as a society is put enough friction in the process hoping that a person’s brain clicks in. There is only one way to increase the friction to where “but they can get guns anyway” becomes really hard and that’s to drastically reduce the supply of weapons. And that’s exactly where we don’t want to go!

I always hesitate in throwing out solutions to problems but it just seems that humans are better at critiquing than creating. If you wish to do either, descend ye now into the comments.

 
Mark Rosneck

Written by Mark Rosneck

Site owner and bilagáana

37 Comments

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Loading…

Coming in January: The Trump Impeachment Trial Reality TV Show

Joe Biden Domestic Violence

Joe Biden: Just Keep Punching Domestic Violence!