Firearms and the Tendency to Kill

U.S. : 11127

Germany: 381

France: 255

Canada: 165

U.K.: 68

Australia: 65

Japan: 39

For the countries other than the United States, the figures portray somewhat of a deviation too, but when the data from the United States comes into the picture, the interval enlarges dramatically. Amazed by the figures, Michael Moore tries to reason why, and raises a couple of hypotheses.

First, he wonders whether more people own firearms in the United States. However, since hunting is very popular in Canada, Canadians own millions of guns and rifles - yet there are only 165 records of annual deaths by firearms in the country. Moore also compares the history, religious affairs, and the demographics of the two countries, but nothing suggests a hint. In the end, without a solid theory, he keeps asking "What is it?," but no one seems to have a clue.

In such a popular yet controversial issue, every one will have a thing or two to say, so here is my two cents:

Michael Moore is right when he states that many countries have very bloody histories, like the Nazi Germany. However the case of the United States is different in the sense that it is a nation of immigrants who perceive life more like an individualist battlefield.

The term 'American' does not exactly refer to a certain group of people who share the same culture or values. It refers to the people who come from a variety of backgrounds but live on the same land. Except for the native Americans, all of the American people travelled overseas throughout the centuries to get a piece of the 'American Dream.' But in fact, there never was a commonly shared 'American Dream.' People were in the pursuit of a personal, material dream, and most of them were ready to do whatever it takes to achieve it.

Spaniards took the lands of the native Americans, and killed millions of them. Spaniards won; native Americans lost, and more importantly, their loss was Spaniards' gain. Very shortly after the white man set foot on the so-called New World, he brought black people from Africa in cages, and enslaved and used as a factor of production. The white man was armed, and more powerful, and he won. The black man lost; and his loss was white man's gain.

Later in the 19th century, white men were not able to resolve their disputes, and fought one another this time. Those in the North won, and slavery was no more. But since the centuries-old perceptions were still in place, a new era of segregation started, and lasted at least until the fifties, if not today.

In the book An American Dilemma, Gunnar Myrdal and Sissela Bok state the following, which may shed a light on why carrying a gun is traditionally important in the American culture:

Repeating the patterns of slavery times, the white Southern policeman, "a crucial and strategic factor in race relations" acted as an agent of white planters and employers to enforce black obedience. As part of a system of social subordination, the Southern policeman not only arrested but also summarily sentenced and punished blacks, commonly without the trouble of a trial.

The lawless lawman was a brutal menace, a poorly trained and ill-educated white man of low social status, taught from an early age to despise Negroes. The chief way this man rose in the world was by carrying a gun and wielding the power that came with it. He was, in short, a "weak man with ... strong weapons". (p.538-544) (emphasis mine)

Since 1492, the social, political and economic environment in the United States has been a battlefield, where every one is inclined to find a way to stay alive and well - physically or financially. In other words, the struggle for wealth, which drove the first Westerners overseas, still continues. Because, in the United States, life is more about winning or losing. This land is where the word 'loser' is more commonly used as a degrading term. Some cultures do not even have such a use for their equivalent of the same word.