The Poverty of Gun Culture

Guns are amazing instruments for making work that would otherwise be difficult easier. Preparing a cow for slaughter, warding off nocturnally raiding rodents, or even signaling with flares during a construction project are all beautifully fantastic purposes that fill roles which otherwise would not be done to the same degree of work. There is a poverty, though, that is deeply embedded in the most fibrous of partings weaved into the culture and history of guns. It is a poverty of hunger. From gun culture, there permeates a need that is potentially unprecedented in terms of the monolithic impact that it has on those of whom who live within the dimensions of its structural compositry. There is no greater hunger than the one that arises from the actions which are designed to alleviate, do away with, make sense of, or properly address that hunger but, in the stead of the aforelisted phrases, does the opposite. The compounded dimensions of complexity are crippling because of their gravity of impact but also the elements of inconsistency that develop from their patterned habituation. To be hungry for food, medicine, law, education, knowledge, wisdom, or more gun culture is a poverty that is unethically mortifying and from its throes, there is a perpetual basis for how it is that harm can take root. Gun culture is a damaging frame of design when considering the ethics of partial development associated with need and supplementative response, and from a position of fundamentally based rationale, the logic that formulates around the philosophy of poverty, guns, and hunger is one that moves to the black and white linearity of where one would situate their own person, and even their humanity, in the aforewritten cultural narrative of conflictual instrumentation. The poverty of gun culture is hunger, and the solution only propagates the dynamics present in that understanding by degrees of naturally housed and associated principle.