The New York Times latest op-ed piece of teenaged sophistry is calling for gun control in the wake of the latest American massacre. Their focus on removing guns from the equation shows exactly why journalism is in its current state of collapse. It is their profound inability to see the difference between a cause and a symptom.
It is truly shocking that in 2017, we have educated white collar professionals who have no ability to think. They know how to follow a preachy script and throw a temper tantrum when their script is rejected for its huge holes in logic, but it cannot hide the fact that their arguments are shallow and do everything but the very thing they need to do to change an outcome.
So let's take a look at the bigger picture that The Times is too afraid to see, shall we?
America does not have a gun control problem. America has a violence control problem. There are plenty of Americans who have guns and never went on a rampage; so having a gun is not some sort of Jekyll and Hyde elixir that turns nice and peaceful people into monsters by mere possession alone.
Now, let's take away all those guns. Does the mean the violence problem magically goes away?
Of course not. In the UK, they are having a rash of acid attacks. We have had a lot of terrorist attacks that use cars or trucks to ram into pedestrians. People make bombs. They also like to use knives, ropes, wires, poisons, and even their bare hands to kill people.
If someone is intent to kill one or a thousand, they will not be deterred if you take away those little toys.
They find other ways to carry out their plans, like the Unabomber did. Or Timothy McVeigh. Or the Boston Marathon bombers. Or Sayfullo Saipov.
None of those people needed a gun. Gun control would not have stopped a thing. So stop telling Middle-class America that if they buy into Gun Control, all those blood stains are going to magically disappear.
How dare you.
There is a far bigger, more complicated problem: violence control. Why do you have so much violence?
It is a world-wide problem. People resort to violence. They are out to maim and to kill. They are out to terrorize and traumatize. There are no easy, simple, as-seen-on-TV answers.
Preaching a superficial solution solves nothing, but the problem is if we begin to focus on the reasons for violence, a lot of people are going to get enraged that the stuff of their souls will be exposed as the problem.
Suggesting taking guns away avoids that issue, and the reason why it is a solution that is doomed to fail.
But the same unformed thinking plagues the journalism profession: they do not look at solutions that will expose the very stuff of their souls that will expose the true root of their problem.
If you want a solution, you have to face the problem.
And The Times is not willing to do that as they haughtily preach to the little people how they ought to think and what truths they ought to ignore.