Yesterday, Tim Kretschmer, a 17-year-old boy, went on a shooting spree at his former school and later in the the small town of Winnenden in south-west Germany. After having found piles of unused ammunition, police also reported that the 17-year-old had intended to kill more than the 15 people he murdered.
As usual, a culprit was needed, because such a heinous crime can not be simply, you know, evil. The German media is full of the fact that the boy's father, a well-to-do businessman, owned (legally) guns, and that he is *gasp* an old-fashioned "patriarch". Do we really have to look any further for a culprit? Take over, Phyllis Chesler!
Of course, the "liberal German gunlaws" (they are anything but liberal) have something to do with it as well. Next we'll have to ban hammers, knives, frying pans, any blunt instruments, chainsaws, power drills, cars, aircrafts and every other thing that might take lives. Who cares that millions of people are not killed by the millions of people who use such things safely, including guns, every day. Who cares that our police is so crippled by politically correct brainwashing, including, but not limited to, the acceptance of women as patrol"men", that they have stopped functioning long ago. How could the murderer go on with his shooting spree after he left the school, killing several more people in the process? Who cares that the three gallant murdered teachers might have had a better chance of defending their pupils had they had guns and not just their bodies.
Some time ago, a case made moderate headlines when a 14-year old girl killed her six-year old sister with their father's hunting weapon. In fact, it was more the anti-hunting appeal of the case than the death of a child that got attention. The father was known as an inordinately conscientious gun owner and through a freak accident the girls had been left alone for a brief while -- with the gun. (I take it that it was a rifle, but use the term "gun" because of its generic quality.) The older girl had stated that her little sister had accidentially killed herself with the gun, which "a ballistic opinion" had proven impossible. (I don't need a "ballistic opinion" to know that a six-year old girl can not kill herself by pointing a long arm at herself, but whatever.) If I remember correctly (the case was discussed in hunting/shooting online fora), both children had been made aware by their father about the potential danger guns implicate, which means a basic tutorial on how they function. Grandfather (who had given the girl an alibi at first) and father (who claimed that HE had loaded the gun and not just left the box with bullets beside it, which is highly unlikely for the conscientious gun owner he reportedly was) have protected her and will presumably go on doing so. Now you tell me that a 14-year-old girl on the verge of adulthood, who has been made specifically aware of the danger guns implicate, kills her little sister by mere carelessness or a "prank gone wrong" and I will say that, had that not happened, we might have seen a bathing accident or something like that sooner or later.
But we can always ban bathing, can't we? Anything not to be reminded that Evil exists.