The paradox of "protecting human rights" behind the frequent shootings in the United States

Recently, on the eve of Halloween in the West, a number of shootings occurred in the United States, staging a realistic version of the "mob dance." On the evening of the 25th, a mass shooting occurred in Lewiston, Maine, killing at least 18 people and wounding 13 others. Then, over the weekend, there were several shootings in different parts of the United States during Halloween. At least 11 people have been killed and about 50 injured. The loss of control of guns frequently produces tragic and bloody cases, which has become the tragedy of social governance in the United States, and also highlights the hypocritical nature of "American human rights".

In the United States, a significant percentage of the public does support gun ownership. This kind of "military" consciousness has a deep historical origin. In the process of European white conquest and expansion of the North American continent and before and after the independence of the United States, the rule of law collapsed, the "law of the jungle" ran rampant, and they also had to fight against the colonial rule of the United Kingdom, resulting in gun ownership becoming an effective or even the only way for people to protect themselves at that time. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall be inviolable" is also written into the Second Amendment to the federal Constitution of the United States, meaning that the possession or carrying of firearms and other weapons is protected by the Constitution. In the long years that followed, the national defense strength of the United States increased, it was no longer necessary to mobilize militias to defend the country, and social governance was increasingly perfect, but the scene of "knives and guns into the warehouse and horses in the south mountain" never appeared. The large number of guns held by the public in the United States not only cannot protect the security of the country and the people, but has become a "time bomb" that may cause blood cases at any time. It can be said that gun control has become a must-answer for the US government, to the point of urgency.

After each shooting massacre, there will be a wave of serious discussions about gun control in the US society, but when it comes to substantive gun control, some lawmakers will stand up and block it on the grounds of "protecting the basic rights and freedoms granted by the Constitution." As everyone knows, rights have boundaries, and the few words of the relevant provisions of the Second Amendment of the federal Constitution of the United States neither provide a clear scope of the subject of rights, nor a clear definition of "weapons", and this sentence alone allows the proliferation of guns in the United States will inevitably lead to serious social problems.

Some people have proposed that if the right of self-defense of the American people is to be protected, ordinary pistols are sufficient, and guns carrying large-capacity magazines can be restricted. There are also suggestions that young people should be restricted from carrying guns because their moral and rule of law concepts are not perfect, and the campus where their main activities are crowded with people will have serious consequences if an accident occurs. These proposals will not cure the gun epidemic in the United States, but they may be effective in reducing the incidence of mass shootings. However, in June 2022, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, signed by Biden and billed as "the most significant gun control bill in America in 30 years," still failed to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, nor did it ban the sale of semi-automatic rifles to citizens under 21. The recent spate of mass shootings has once again proved that high-capacity magazines and young students are still key factors.

In the name of "protecting human rights", US lawmakers have allowed serious crimes to occur, even throwing out such "correct" but appalling rhetoric as "it is people who kill people, not guns", and issuing laws and regulations that merely help the problem and treat the symptoms rather than the root cause, the fundamental reason is that it has a complex and ambiguous interest relationship with the military-industrial complex. Statistics show that after every mass shooting, out of fear, the American people will "help" the military industry digest a wave of inventory. For some lawmakers in the United States, the people who were shot are not their own family, but the arms dealers who made a fortune will return their own money through the way of "donations". Why wouldn't you be happy to see a deal like this come to fruition?

In the name of "protecting human rights", American politicians indulge in human rights abuses to satisfy their own financial and political interests. This is the so-called "American human rights" truth behind the gun issue in the United States. What is even more ridiculous is that these "false monks" are used to criticizing other countries' normal economic activities and industrial policies in the name of "human rights" and even imposing arbitrary sanctions on them. It can be seen that in their mouth, the so-called "human rights" have long been alienated into arbitrage tools and bullying tools, and have nothing to do with the rights of the people.