THE FORMULA FOR MURDER

"Another mass murder? That's terrible. What's for lunch?"

 Maybe mass shootings are going to be a way of life in the world today. Maybe they are nature's way of culling the herd. Maybe we could expand our perspective.

 Let's take a macro view of the ingredients of a mass shooting using the following formula:

 Belief--Action--Result

 Belief : "I've been bullied" and/or "I must kill infidels."

 Action: Kill all infidels or kill those I hold responsible for my pain.

 Result: Dead innocent people, often including the shooter, and recognition for the shooter in this life and in the "after life. "

 It should be obvious to everyone that we are too far down the gun trail to do anything about the Action portion of that scenario. We have some 300,000,000 guns (and rapidly growing every time our President opens his mouth) in circulation now. Why can't the heart (Liberal) portion of our society understand that? THAT SHIP HAS SAILED. It's time we take on the Beliefs and Results.

 To take on the Beliefs, we need to more actively pursue mental illness, and we must diminish the romantic/ideological appeal of ISIS to the "lone wolf," by putting our top marketing people on the job to belittle ISIS and make them the punch line of jokes. While laughing at them at home we decimate ISIS itself in the Middle East. Why is addressing killers' Beliefs harder than the fantasy of "gun control" for the heart? From the heads' (conservative) standpoint, we would have to brand and institutionalize many more people than we do today. We would have to accept the fact that all people are not "normal." We would have to specifically designate out loud, who our enemy is and kill them. These non PC activities are very low on the heart's list of solutions.

 To take on the Results we must take away the glory of "martyrdom." Let's take away from them whatever upside they feel comes with their acts. Let's, at the very least, stop publicizing the names of these miscreants. In the unfortunate situation where the shooter is not killed, the head says let's stop two and three year trials to determine if a guy who comes into a movie theater in full combat gear and kills twelve people is nuts. He's nuts! It should take less than a week to decide that. Killers don't care about themselves; what about their families? Confiscate their homes and deport the family members to their countries of origin. Hang on to your hats for this one---how about taking a shooter who is yelling "Allah Akbar" while mowing down innocent infidels for the glory of Allah and his acceptance into the arms of the seventy-two virgins, (like for example the Orlando shooter), hang his dead body upside down, naked with pig parts stuck in his mouth outside the Pulse nightclub and leave him there for a week. Maybe that would negate some of the upside? As wild as that seems I believe that could fit under our constitution better than gutting the second amendment.

 So, with all that goes into a mass murder situation, the mental illness or homicidal ideology that promotes the massacres and the perceived rewards that the shooter gets out of the killings, our President decides to put the country's efforts on controlling ...the gun.

 Let's talk a little more about that curious decision.

 If I am a degenerate nut case and want to kill as many people as possible and I find it hard to get them all in a cage so I can burn or drown them, or find it too inconvenient to negotiate the logistics of chopping their heads off with a machete or loading them in an airplane and flying them into a building, I will go with the most convenient and proficient way possible, a legal, semi-automatic rifle.

Eliminating the semi-automatic rifle is the conclusion of our leader, and for those who think like our leader, to reduce mass killings. To the heart it makes perfect sense; the semi-automatic rifle goes, so will the mass killings. Problem solved.

 What might be the logical gun progression if the semi-automatic rifle is ostensibly off the market? When it was made very difficult to obtain a permit for a fully automatic weapon we go down the gun chain to the semi-automatic rifle because it provides the most fire power we can legally purchase. It would seem that once the semi-automatic rifle goes the way of the automatic rifle, those folks, for whatever reason good or bad, will go down the gun chain to the next most high powered gun, semi-automatic pistols? Eventually we'll work our way down to loading people in a cage and burning them. You work with what you got.

 Hey! Banning semi-automatic weapons worked in Australia! Australia has about 23 million people with 650,000 semi-automatic rifles which were bought back by the government funded by a tax increase. We have 319 million people with close to 4,000,000 semi-automatic rifles ( Hunter's Warehouse sold 30,000 AR15s in the week after Orlando.) which would cost the US taxpayers billions to buy back. We would then see which direction the public and politicians would go, gun control or increased taxes.

 Can you imagine the skill of salesperson who could convince the good law abiding folks, much less the Crips, Bloods, the denizens of the South side of Chicago and LA, MS13, Barrio 18, Aryan Brotherhood, Mongols Motorcycle Club, The Mexican Mafia, Barrio Azteca and the fast growing Trinitarios, to sell their guns to the government? Even if the Government agreed to pay $1000 per returned gun, it would not be worth it to them. So, the only other alternative would be, since I'm assuming asking them politely to turn in their gun might not work, would be to confiscate them by force. With the reduction in the numbers of our military, I doubt we would have the capacity for that bloodbath to occur.

 This is why Trump resonates with so many people. While it would be nice if he had a filter, he is willing to address the Belief part of the equation and that makes sense to people. While the President is willing to spend gobs of money and time doing additional background checks on American citizens who have a constitutional right to own a gun, he is letting/inviting into the US, with minimal vetting, those folk whose belief may lead them to illegally use a gun which he can then blame for the atrocities.

 Why, when there are so many potential fixes to try to reduce mass murders, does the President so doggedly stick to controlling a piece of metal. Does he really want to reduce the number of lives lost or does he have another agenda?