>I had to choke when president Clinton said in response to the tradegy that
>we simply must teach our children that conflict should be resolved with
>words not guns.
>
You are absolutely right. The criminologist Dane Archer (_Violence and Crime in Cross-National Perspective_, New Haven: Yale U Press, 1984) notes upsurges of violent crimes in the aftermath of wars and armed conflits among nations. That tendencey is especially pronounced in victorious nations. He explains that government use of violence legitimizes it, in eyes of citizens, as a means of conflict resolutions.
Our fearless leader has been using violence very casually, unleashing cruise missiles and bombers on pharmaceutical plants, trains, and refugee convoys each time his popularity is threatened. So it should not be very surprising that a few deranged kids followed his footsteps and went ona shooting spree to boost their own dwindling popularity. What else can you expect from the deadly combination of alienation caused by suburban living, and infatuation with violence and celebrity cult that permeates pop culture?
Talking about gun control in this context is changing the subject. Both liberals and NRA-types view guns as fetishes which can destroy or save our society while ignoring social conditions that encourage violence.
BTW, NRA is a living proof of a deadly attraction between guns and psychopaths. Ordinary criminals appear are paragons of purpose-rationality vis a vis NRA crazies. It is not criminals with guns that I fear, but the law abiding NRA psychopaths.
Wojtek