"a to the motherfucking k"/: latour on weapons

[Otto Sell]

From: <lorentzen-nicklaus at t-online.de>
>
>  re: santana high school/santee, ca.
>
>
>  in chapter 6 of "pandora's hope" latour writes among other things:
"'fire-arms
>  kill people' is a slogan of those people who stick up for a restriction
of the
>  free sale of weapons in the usa. this is countered by the national rifle
>  association (nra) with the catchword 'it's the people who kill, not the
>  weapons'. [as you will have realized by now, this is once more my own
>  re-translation: corrections are welcome. kfl]. the first slogan is
>  materialistic: the weapon itself does something because of its
>  material components, that cannot be reduced to the social qualities of
>  the marksman. the weapon makes also an honest man and lawful citizen
dangerous.
>  against that the nra offers a sociological and, in general, rather left
>  approach [think of drugs or pornography, kfl], which is - taken the nra's
>  political goals - funny enough: just for itself or because its material
>  components the weapon doesn't do anything at all. it's only a tool, a
medium, a
>  completely neutral carrier of a human will behind. if the weapon's owner
is a
>  good citizen, he will use it only well-considered and kill somebody only
in the
>  most ultimate case of emergency. but if it's a gangster or lunatic, then
the
>  weapon - without any change in itself - is simply just a more efficient
means
>  of killing for a deed which would habe been commited anyway. what does
the
>  fire-arm add to the shot? ... [big snip of more than three pages] ...
who,
>  after all, is now the  a c t o r  in my little story, the weapon or the
>  citizen? s o m e b o d y   e l s e (a citizen-weapon, a weapon-citizen).
how
>  technology is made and used, we will never understand, when we still
assume
>  that the psychological abilities of human beings are fixed once and for
>  all. with the weapon inside your hand, you are a different human being.
...
>  the translation takes place symmetrically: with the weapon in the hand
you are
>  somebody else, and also the weapon in your hand has changed. you are a
>  different subject, because you're holding the gun; the weapon is another
object
>  because it upkeeps a relationship towards you. not anymore it's the
>  weapon-in-arsenal or the weapon-in-the-drawer or the
weapon-in-the-pocket, no,
>  now it is the weapon-in-your-hand, leveled at somebody screaming for his
life.
>  what's true for the subject is also true for the object, the same goes
for the
>  marksman as well as for the aiming fire-arm. the good citizen turns into
a
>  rascal, the gangster into killer, the silent revolver into a fired arm,
the new
>  revolver into the used one, the sports kit into means of killing. ...
except
>  for human there are also non-human agents (like here the gun), and both
can
>  have goals (engineers prefer to call this functions). since it sounds in
the
>  case of non-human beings a little unusual to speak of 'agents', we better
say
>  actants ..."
>
>  --- bruno latour: die hoffnung der pandora. untersuchungen zur
wirklichkeit der
>                    wissenschaft. ffm 2000: suhrkamp, pp. 214, 218f. ---
>
>

>
>  may i add that following this argumentation doesn't hinder me from
thinking
>  that to have more restrictive weapon-laws in the usa doesn't sound like a
bad
>  idea at all? no offense intended.
>
> kfl
>
>

Well well, Kai, you (and Latour) are so right in this.
Instead of trying to get a license for my mother or me the registered
Beretta of my father has gone to the weapons chamber of the local police
some two months ago or so, giving me the opportunity to have a real weapon
in my hands for the first time in my life when my father (who died shortly
after this on a heart attack) showed the gun to me. It had been bought in
1940 and my grandfather carried it to Greece and Russia, kept it hidden in
the garden after 1945 and gave it back to my father when he joined the
German Bundeswehr in 1956. It hasn't been fired since then.
Being the first and up to now only member of my family who refused to join
the forces I strongly remember the feeling of coolness (of the metal) and I
admit I thought that in a way it would be nice to keep it, turning myself
into a rascal . . . even I did think so, maybe only for a moment, and I'm
glad now it's gone, the moment as well as the gun.

Otto

Cannot resist passing this along:

> WOW!
> This is frightening!!
> Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more
> than 500 employees and has the following statistics:
>
> *29 have been accused of spousal abuse
> *7 have been arrested for fraud
> *19 have been accused of writing bad checks
> *117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2
> businesses
> *3 have done time for assault
> *71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
> *14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
> *8 have been arrested for shop lifting!
> *21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
> *84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year
>
> Can you guess which organization this is?
>
> Give up yet?
>
> It's the 535 members of the United States Congress.
> The same group that crank out hundreds of new laws each year designed to
keep the rest of us in line.
>
>