As I strive to put my thoughts down on paper, I find myself being ambivalent about the ever-growing problem of gun violence in our country. The genesis of my ambivalence grows out of the pessimistic belief that nothing of any substance will lead to meaningful change so why address the problem. As President Biden stated the other night, why does the magnitude of such violence not resonate in other countries. The United States stands alone as the alleged civilized country with the highest rate of gun violence. Tragically, many of the victims of these careless and horrific acts are children—those least likely to defend themselves. Over and over children are being killed while they sit in a car, lie in their bed, play in their yard, walk down the sidewalk in their neighborhood, or sit in a classroom in their school. Yet, it is not just children that are savagely killed by senseless use of a gun, as evident in the recent massacre at the Buffalo, New York food market. Most of these victims were older adults who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Similarly, those killed in Tulsa were all older adults. The bullets being shot by a deranged individual have no age-related markings; therefore, anyone in the path of the bullet is a target.
Are there answers to the ongoing mass violence that we are experiencing throughout the country? Are there meaningful and enforceable policies, procedures and practices that can be followed to address the problem? Indeed, as gun proponents are wanton to say, “guns don’t kill, people kill,” This is a truism that does have merit, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that in the absence of a gun being so readily available, the death of another person would not be the outcome. Guns do kill. Guns in the hands of disturbed individuals can be and are lethal. Yes, those who have been diagnosed or viewed as having mental health issues need to get the interventions that are needed to, hopefully, stave off any tragic behaviors leading to the death of another. While mental health deficiencies can be improved, it has also become a shibboleth for those advocating for loose to non-existent controls. The Webster definition of shibboleth is “a word or saying used by adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others as empty of real meaning.” To advocate for advancing the availability of mental health services is credible, but it is not a cure-all for the problems we are witnessing. Nevertheless, the “gun rights adherents” will inevitably go to the mental health issue as the real problem. It is not the real problem. Yes, it may well be a contributing factor, but the real problem is the availability of guns and assault weapons to anyone who has the dollars to pay.
Similarly, many of the adherents to which I refer, will hide behind the second amendment which provides for individuals to own and bear arms. As I have noted in a previous blog, the meaning inherent in the second amendment was based on a point in-time when there was an absence of enforcement agencies. State militias were seen as the vehicle for enforcement of laws or regulations. We no longer have state militias. It is my belief that this amendment needs to be viewed in the context of the times and is not an absolute. It must be subject to reconsideration and interpretation considering a different cultural and societal context. The second amendment does not provide license for every individual to own and bear arms and use them at their discretion.
Will any substantive action be taken by the politicians in Washington? Sadly, but realistically, there may be some “window-dressing” palliatives growing out of a bipartisan attempt at placating the populace. It should be noted that most Americans believe in, and support reasonable controls related to gun ownership. Even though the argument for banning assault weapons is, in my judgment, a no brainer, it will not be included in any legislation. Raising the age to twenty-one to purchase such a weapon will be cut from any “new” legislation. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has donated over one hundred million dollars to the political careers of Republican representatives and senators. Mitch McConnell alone has received over twelve million dollars from the NRA, and more than thirty million dollars was contributed to the ill-fated Trump campaign in 2016. In Alabama, more than $300,000 was given to Republicans running for representative or senator. These politicians are beholden to the NRA and like-minded organizations and; therefore, will not make any decisions that counter the skewed message of this powerful lobbying entity.
The insanity of the political arena is what will keep meaningful change from occurring. Yes, there may well be legislation that comes from this latest barrage of mass shootings. Red flag laws will be given some support and states will be encouraged to enact these. Mental health services will be given tacit attention, but not at a level that will have significant or substantive impact. School safety will be a priority, but you cannot make the schools an impenetrable fortress so kids can be safe. Adequate and pertinent training of police and security personnel may be given some attention as well. Each of the above could be beneficial; however, the primary and real problem still exists. Guns are too readily available for anyone to be able to purchase one. Laws that broaden this “right” such as no controls on carrying a concealed weapon, are not the answer. I recall talking to a former student who told me that she carried a gun in her purse. In discussing this with her, I mentioned that having it available to you means that you could use it—is that what you want? There was not an answer to that question.
If we are ever going to get anywhere in controlling these mass shootings it will only be when there is a political environment of caring. As a society we must get beyond the belief that all this is inevitable. The answers to this growing problem are not partisan and it behooves all Americans to support reasonable and defensible controls. Background checks should be a given to identify any individual who could be, potentially, harmful to others or themself. Waiting periods must be addressed to limit the impulsive purchase and use of a gun. The age for purchasing a long rifle, such as an AK-47, must mirror the Federal restriction on the purchase of a handgun. The age for such a purchase should be raised to twenty-one for the purchase of any gun. Efforts to control the sale of guns at gun shows and through private dealings must be addressed. As a civilized society, we can no longer tolerate or accept that mass shootings will be an ongoing reality. A poll of Democrats, Independents and Republicans found that 44 percent of the Republicans believed that mass shootings were a reality of a free society. Further another study found that after three days from a mass shooting, the general population tends to forget and lessen any demands for effective change. We cannot lose sight of the fact that according to the Gun Violence Archive, through May 2022 there have been over two hundred mass shootings in the United States. (A mass shooting is defined as four or more individuals being killed or wounded in a single incident) This is unconscionable. Is this what we have come to—a return to the wild, wild west!