Skip to main content

I'm not the only one with guns on the mind. I have never been a strong advocate one way or another of gun rights, there have been other issues, like the environment, reason, and fairness that have held my attention instead.

With the senseless killing by a 20 year old of six adults and twenty children, the argument that has been playing out in this country for my whole life about guns is bouncing around in my head.

Are my friends right when they say that guns don't kill people, people kill people?

Would murder still happen if you take guns out of the equation?  I mean, knives, baseball bats, and almost anything else you think of could also be used for murder.

What is the difference between gun rights and the right to own knives, matches, gasoline, or any other dangerous thing?

Some of my thoughts after the croissant, ways of thinking about guns that I haven't seen other places.

The argument goes like this:
"If the killer did not have access to guns, he would have used something else, like a knife or fire. Surely we can't regulate access to things just because they are potentially deadly."

In chemistry, there is a phrase called "Activation Energy" that I've used a lot in my work as a user experience designer for software. The chemistry meaning of this term is the amount of energy required for a chemical reaction to begin. For example, temperature or catalysts may be added to lower the amount of energy it requires for a reaction to occur.

When I design user experiences, I think about activation energy a lot. A button that is visible without scrolling requires less energy to click than a button that you must scroll down to see. A checkout process on an e-commerce site that includes a preferences survey requires more energy than Amazon's "one-click" purchase process.

So it is with guns.

The energy required to kill someone with a gun, compared with the energy required to kill someone with a bat, a knife, drowning, rope, or many other forms of mayhem, is less. All you need to do is aim and shoot.

Think about camera phones. In days gone by, to take a photo, you would set up a tripod, mount the camera, adjust the lens, insert the film, pose the subjects, and then later go through a long chemical process to see the result. Cost and availability of photography equipment notwithstanding, there weren't a lot of photos taken when this is the amount of energy it requires to snap one pic. Now, everyone has a camera in their pocket, and now we are on a trajectory where number of photos taken each year exceeds the total number of photos ever taken by mankind in all years prior.

Point and shoot. It's less work. More people do it. Less activation energy.

There is another reason guns are different than other killing implements, like knives, karate, drowning, etc.

There is a famous thought experiment called the "Trolley Problem" that goes roughly like this:

Five men are standing on a railway track. Unbeknownst to them all, a train is hurling toward them and will kill them all.

Scenario 1: There is a lever in front of you that would divert the train to another track, where only one person stands. If you observed the scene, and had the option to pull that lever to save the five by killing the one, would you do that?

Scenario 2: Same situation as before, five men standing on the track who will all die from the oncoming train. You can save them. In this case, though, you are above the scene on a bridge, and beside you is a very fat man (the thought experiment is not sensitive to weight issues). You can save the five but only by grabbing the fat man and pushing him off the bridge onto the tracks, killing him, to derail the train.

The vast majority of people presented with this problem will pull the lever in scenario 1, but, even though the life/death ratio is identical, would not push the big-boned man off the bridge in scenario 2.

There is something to this.

The fact of killing with a gun is more like pulling the lever in scenario 1, and most other means of murder are more like pushing the man in scenario 2. We (very generally) share an internal moral compass that favors humanity when we are part of the scene.

What if you had the same gun argument with a proponent of "Assassination Drones"?  This guy thinks it's everyones' God-given right to own whatever hardware and technology you want. Never mind that it's a video-equipped, gun-equipped drone that can sneak up on anyone without repercussion to strike them dead at a distance.

I've heard the argument that asks whether there is a difference between gun ownership and shoulder-launched rocket ownership. It's not too far off my point, but the issue is not firepower. Instead, it's ethical involvement with the cause and effect of the action.

So, I do think that there is a difference between guns and knives. From the psychological and ethical perspective of the owner, killing with one is easy and free of (in the moment, at least) perceived personal involvement, and with the other, it's not easy and the act itself gives moral pause to the actor.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  As It Happens, the Planet Conducted a Controlled (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kbman, erratic

    experiment on Friday.

    It sent 2 sociopaths into 2 schools intent on mass mayhem.

    In America it sent someone armed with an assault rifle; in China it sent someone armed with an assault knife.

    There were some 20 fatalities in America; zero in China.

    Much like the recent election, when hurricanes hurt the Republicans' campaign twice shortly before the election. A superstitious person might suspect we were being sent messages from a higher power.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 07:41:45 PM PST

  •  Taking the "activation energy" thought further... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kbman, erratic

    Realistically, someone swinging a knife, bat, axe, sword, 2 x 4, or any other physical implement will tire reasonably quickly.  Someone merely pulling the trigger of a firearm can do it for hours at a time with minimal physical endurance (finger cramped?  use another finger....)

    Another big factor is kinetics and duty cycle--the "recovery time" for someone swinging a knife, axe, bat, sword, etc. is far longer than that for someone using a firearm.  I've used guns at a target range, and have fired off 3-5 rounds a second with no trouble.  I've also used an axe to split firewood, and am hard pressed to split more than one log every 3-5 seconds (on a good day, after building a rhythm!)  

    These are big reasons why slaughter on any large scale is far less practical with "manual" weapons vs. semi-automatic firearms.

    You think it's hot? Imagine what it would be like if global warming really existed!

    by JSc on Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 08:00:09 PM PST

  •  nice diary! (0+ / 0-)

    On the trolley problem, I wonder if the simple descriptor of "fat" humanizes the 2nd victim, creating an empathy connection that influences the decision. The moral solution would be to throw yourself on the tracks, or inform the other person "Only you can stop this".

    I'm very resistant to game theory games...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site