Guns? Mental Ilness? Or just a lack of basic human respect?

So currently it seems like the whole world is in a discussion about gun control due to the school massacre in the US last week. But is this really the issue? OR should i say, is this the MAIN issue?

The situation, from reports is that the “gun enthuisiast” Adam Lanza, lived with his mother, who had prepared the house for the apocolypse.

As we all know by now, Lanza, killed his school teacher mother before going to the school she taught at, and open fire on two Year 1 classes killing 20 children and numerous teachers, the school principal and the school psychologist.

Although the gun debate is obviously the first one that we go to due to to already shocking history of gun crime in the states, there are many more issues that seem to be missed.

If Lanza,who suffered from a form of Aspergers, didnt have such easy access to guns (by reports, his mothers arms in order to protect them during the apocalypse………), would he have been able to carry this crime out?

If the international media hadn’t turned previous school massacres into a media frenzy, and elevated the perpertrators to celebrity heights, would the idea have crossed his mind?

IF there wasnt such a big deal and hype and ridiculous, crazy talk about the end of the world and the apocalypse, would THIS have changed anything.

The care of those suffering from a mental illnes in the states (from my limited knowledge) seems to be absolutely shocking. This is no different to the care in Australia. In my opinion we have a LONG way to go in the treatement and care of mental illness. The fact that in a country like Australia there are people in retirement home and aged facilities that are in their early 20’s/30’s is seriously disgusting. Why is there even a discussion as to if we need a facitily specifically for this group of people?

Although i acknowledge that the mental state of Adam Lanza may have played a part in the events of last week, and it is definitely something that needs to be discussed at a national, or international, level, i wonder HOW much it had to do with it. Many, or should i say, the almost total majority of people with a mental illness have not shot a person, let alone a school and therefore a community.

Lanza was armed up to the hilt with semi automatic weapons when his body was found after shooting himself after the rampage.  These weapons were apparently registered, legally, to his mother. Im all for the holding up of rights, but when does a right become abused? When does a government need to re assess a “right” in the interest of the safety of the population?

Or the big question, how long does a right stay a right? The second amendment was adopted in 1791…….well over 200 years ago. Now i wasnt alive back then, but im pretty sure that alot has changed in that 200 odd years. The percieved pressure we are under has changed, the ability to handle said pressure has changed, The world and attitudes have changed. The politics of the world have changed…..

Im pretty sure that the writers/signers of the 2nd amendment would reverse it if they knew that crackpot, hillbilly pshyco dumbfucks were using it to jusitfy the use of arms in the way they are today…..

Surely if the right to bare arms is allowing mentally unstable, whether it be medically or due to a perceived high pressure time in their life, easy access to firearms, and then perpetrate shocking violence as we have seen WAY too many times in the last few years it needs to be updated or strengthen. Keep the right but put conditions on it. OR allow someone to have a firearm IF there is a NEED for it. Then ensure that it is stored properly and training is given on how to use if necessary.

Seriously, is it necessary to be able to pick up a firearm and ammunition while you do your weekly grocery shopping?

After all the second ammendement does refer to a “Well regulated militia” not untrained, uninformed individuals.

But how much is the media to blame for these tragedies? Im not saying they shouldnt cover it as i think things like this need to be discussed and known about in order to facilitate and bring about change. But is it necessary to give the perpertrators fame? Is it necessary to over report the situation and in the detail they do? Is it really necessary to write with such emotion in their stories? Are the facts themselves, minus emotion, not shocking enough?

If every single shooting wasnt blown into a HUGE international circus show for days and weeks afterwards, with every detail released on how they planned and executed the attacks would they continue? IF the perpetrators identity wasnt released and they had no fame at all, whether negative or else, would it be as attractive an option?

I understand the media is a business, and the pull of the mighty dollar is strong but at what cost to humanity does it come?

Personally i dont think this is a gun control issue, or a mental illness issue, or a media issue. I think its all of them and more. I think its an issue of resepct for others. A respect for life itself. I think its an issue of the power that we give fame and money. I think its a issue on the priority that we give things in our life.

I think events and tragedies like this show up not only the ridiculousness of things we find important in the day to day but even more so, the lack of respect we conciously give to each other as human beings on a day to day basis. If we respected the life of other human beings, the idea of having a firearm to “protect our property and family” wouldnt even be an issue.

The whole thing is bigger than guns, media, and mental illness. Its about how fucked up we have stood by and allowed our race to become. We are all at fault in some small way.