“This has become routine,” declared Barack Obama, president of the United States, referring to the latest shootings at educational institutions in the country, leaving [people] dead, wounded and terrified.
In the majority of shootings, the aggressors come from homes where they were familiar with weapons and had legally acquired them. In the case of the attacker in Oregon, he had 14 weapons; six at the site of the shooting, and the rest in his home.
Each time a tragedy occurs, as with the ones before, the debate over the law that guarantees the right to bear arms is renewed. Those that are in favor shield themselves with the argument that they should be ready to defend themselves, and those that are opposed believe that at the very least background checks and psychiatric controls should be applied to those who wish to obtain [weapons].
What is certain is that there is no doubt that weapons within reach of people who are immature, bitter or have psychiatric disorders is a danger that needs to be avoided. The debate should continue until an agreement is reached that allows for the missing legal reforms [needed] to prevent having weapons within reach of everyone. But the most important [thing] is to work, in all countries, to prevent the real problem: the tendency to resolve differences with violence or elimination of [one’s] enemy.
Portar armas
“Esto se ha convertido en una rutina”, afirmó el presidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, al referirse a los últimos tiroteos en establecimientos educativos en el país, que han dejado muertos, heridos y una sociedad atemorizada.
En la mayoría de los tiroteos, los agresores pertenecen a hogares donde se familiarizaron con las armas y las han adquirido legalmente. Es el caso del atacante de Oregón, tenía catorce: seis en el lugar del tiroteo y las demás en su casa.
Cada vez que ocurre una tragedia, como las recientes, se actualiza el debate sobre la ley que garantiza el derecho a poseer armas. Los que están a favor se escudan en el argumento de que deben estar listos para defenderse y los que están en contra creen que, por lo menos, deben aplicarse controles de antecedentes judiciales y psiquiátricos a quienes aspiran a adquirirlas.
Lo cierto es que ya no hay dudas de que las armas al alcance de personas inmaduras, resentidas o con desórdenes psiquiátricos son un peligro que es necesario evitar. El debate debe continuar hasta lograr el acuerdo que permita las reformas legales que hagan falta para evitar que las armas estén al alcance de todos. Pero lo más importante es trabajar, en todos los países, para evitar el verdadero problema, que es la tendencia a resolver las diferencias por la violencia o la eliminación del adversario. (O)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
During the Cold War, the United States occupied the apex of this triangular dynamic, pitting China and the USSR against each other. Today, it is Beijing that occupies that apex.
History has never witnessed a leader quite like Donald Trump — a mix of ignorance, arrogance immorality, brazenness, insensitivity and sheer stupidity.
The challenge for Washington is no longer whether it possesses sufficient capabilities, but whether the political system can align those capabilities behind a coherent long-term priority.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.