Talk of the Town

Gopnik Review:

This article asserts a variety of interestingly logical points about the US's reluctance/incapability to pass sufficient gun control legislation. The first of which is the notion of a blind sympathy Americans have for victims of tragedy. Mr. Gopnik explains this observation excellently by giving examples of how reform following crisis is frowned upon by American culture. In addition to being a valid point, Mr. Gopnik uses this passage to set up his defiance of that exact social norm, and begins to address the main topic of the article--a call for stricter gun control. I found this part of the article extremely refreshing, certainly original. Gopnik is precisely right about this counter-intuitive American sentiment. It seems that we are much more willing to mourn and feel sorry for ourselves following a disaster than to work to prevent the next one.

Comparing the US to other nations in terms of large scale firearm incidents was another convincing approach. Other nations have had similar shootings, but have passed stricter gun control laws and reduced deaths following. Mr. Gopnik, in effect, blames American statesmen for the quantity of incidents we've had. He points out that numerous western democracies have had shootings like the US's, but have rebounded not by brooding over past losses but by enacting laws to prevent future losses. Outlaw the guns that are used to kill, and killings will become less frequent and less potent. I do think there is something to be said for Gopnik's elementary logic, as gun control legislation has obviously been shown to work in other countries.

Mr. Gopnik also proves to be a good compromiser. He feels most of the opposition to tighter firearm regulation comes from rural America. By only outlawing semi-automatic hand guns (the weapons used in almost every large scale killing), America's hunting population would be kept happy, and shootings would potentially be prevented.

I agree with a lot of what Gopnik is saying. He makes strong cases with his comparisons and observations. It's an altogether convincing article.

Sontag Review:

Ms. Sontag also makes an interesting observation about the American mind. Whether it is patriotism or fear of appearing weak, America reacts to 9-11 with an unmistakably tough-guy attitude. Sontag suggests that a calmer, more rational approach would prove far more rewarding for US foreign policy. I agree that it is always the way of the American politician to tell the public what it wants to hear. After the terrorist attack, Americans received a heavy dose of pro-American, we-shall-overcome rhetoric, and Sontag is wary that this may not be the best approach. I especially related to the idea that the US government's time could be better budgeted calculating the next move or reforming our intelligence operations.

I think Ms. Sontag's real purpose in writing this article is to motivate the public to oversee the government's management of the situation. The citizens need to sift through all of the emotion and find the reason. Sontag's doesn't intend to condemn American politics or find a reason to target the Administration; she's trying to help prevent the US government from making a brash foreign policy decision and open the people's eyes so that such an event won't be allowed to occur.