I disagree with Emma Davis’s call for tighter gun controls in the US (May SR).
Firstly, anyone who is intent on killing does not need a gun — homemade bombs, Molotov cocktails, machetes and cars driven at high speed are generally effective.
The constitutional right to bear arms should be defended because it ensures that the state does not have a monopoly on being armed. The same state that Emma quite rightly says would not be touched by any restrictions.
I would imagine if you added up all the deaths of school shootings in the USA they would pale next to the shootings by the police which being a daily ingrained occurrence do not have the same headline grabbing attention as school shootings.
How to relate to the genuine concerns of the students who initiated the inspirational protests is something that requires further debate but conceding to tighter gun controls is mistaken.
Striking is the way
Don’t adopt ‘moderate flank’ strategy
Criminal legacy of London Olympics 2012
Drivers must demand better