Friday, December 14, 2012

Our Plague of Gun Violence

It has happened again. Today there was a mass-shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. A few days ago, it happened in a shopping mall in Portland, Oregon. We are still not that far removed from the atrocity in Aurora, Colorado. Mass shootings seem to be becoming a disturbing trend, but maybe that is just a byproduct of media hype. Even if they are not happening more often, I think it is fair to say that the issue should be discussed with a goal of amelioration.

After one of these events, the same arguments take place, with the various sides barely listening to one another. The gun control crowd talks about how we need more gun control. The anti-gun control crowd usually has a little more diversity of opinion. Some say the answer is more guns and less control. Some say we need to do a better job of enforcing the laws already on the books. Some throw their hands up and say that nothing can be done, crazies are going to find a way to kill people. And then there is the group that always seems to say "too soon." As in, "it's too soon to have any kind of discussion about this." President Obama's spokesman said as much today. Frankly, that is an abdication of leadership.

Jeff Goldberg has a provocative piece in the current issue of The Atlantic. He is generally a moderate, maybe a shade to the left of center, and treats the issue of gun violence and what to do about it fairly. His conclusion is that maybe more guns really is the answer.

Whether you like it or not, there are guns everywhere in America. We cannot ban or confiscate our way out of this problem. However, there are some things we should seriously consider:

1-Close the gun show loophole. Forty percent of guns are purchased at gun shows where background check and waiting period regulations either don't exist, are not enforced or are relaxed. Nobody should be allowed to purchase a gun without a background check and everyone should have to wait five days before picking their gun up.

Yes, this will impose a burden on law-abiding citizens who just want to exercise their right to bear arms. Yes, it will not fully stop guns from falling into the hands of felons and crazies. But it will prevent some guns from falling into the wrong hands. To me, that is an acceptable trade-off.

2-Civilians should not be allowed to privately own certain classes of firearms. I don't know exactly which weapons should be banned, but some have no purpose other than mass killing and nobody needs them.

Any Second Amendment argument against this is specious. Every right in the Bill of Rights is qualified in one way or another. You cannot yell fire in a crowded theater and expect to escape punishment. Also, just in case anyone was wondering, there is no need to keep automatic weapons on hand to start an insurrection when the UN takes over. It is not going to happen. If you think it is, you really ought to see a psychologist.

3-Maybe we should require x number of hours of safety training prior to allowing someone to own a gun. This likely won't cut back on mass shootings like the one that happened today, but could prevent accidental shootings, which are still a problem. We make people take a test and get licence before they can drive a car. Guns are dangerous and it is not unreasonable to expect people to take a test and get a license before they use one.

4-Maybe, just maybe, it is time to start issuing more permits to carry and carry concealed handguns. Permits would require additional training and not be handed out as of right. But if there are more proven responsible people floating around with more guns maybe the death toll won't be as high. Goldberg even thinks that it may have a deterrent effect. I tend to doubt that. People who do this stuff generally are not the type to be deterred. Anyone who approached a mass slaughter rationally would realize that the gunman is always captured or killed. However, maybe these mass shooters would be taken down after only 2 or 3 dead instead of a dozen.

It is grim to think of things in those terms. But that is where we are. We can make progress around the edges, but we are never going to confiscate the hundreds of millions of firearms at large in this country. And we are never going to completely eliminate the risk of these mass shootings. The counter-argument is that more concealed weapons will equal still more violence. Read the Goldberg piece. The evidence does not bear this out.

If we could completely transform our society and eliminate the culture where firearms are valued, we wouldn't have this problem. But let's be honest, that is not going to happen. People own firearms for a variety of reasons. Most of them legitimate. I don't own a firearm now and have no reason to. I live in a well policed city in a high rise with 24 hour desk attendants and sturdy doors. If I lived on a farm in the middle of nowhere, maybe I would buy one.

But everyone, especially responsible gun owners, should realize that simply parroting guns don't kill people, people kill people is irresponsible nonsense. Guns do make it a lot easier to kill people. If every gun disappeared today, would all murders cease. Absolutely not. Twenty two people in a Chinese school were just knifed and severely injured.  But we need to start thinking about societal problems in a different way. We've got lots of problems and most of them have been with us for a long, long time. The solutions are never instant and rarely easy. The way to go about solving problems is one step at a time, working diligently to make life better little by little.

Just because relatively minor  regulatory changes and an assault weapon ban won't solve the problem completely and will involve some inconvenience for law-abiding citizens does not mean that they are not worth doing. I would like to think that even most gun owners accept this fact. And maybe, just maybe it is time to start experimenting with allowing well-trained individuals to carry more guns in public. It would make some people nervous. But if it reduces the death toll of the next mass shooting, that would be worth it too.

2 comments:

Spencer Lawson said...

Thank you for your post. I agree with all of the points in your post. Pragmatic and reasonable. Great ideas for combating crime.

The problem with the shootings we have been seeing lately is that they are not based in criminality. There is no risk/reward calculation on the side of the perpetrator where increased ubiquity of firearms would tip the scales toward prevention. These seem to be individuals bent on enacting a devastating horror and then commit suicide by police, or their own hand. I'm truly at a loss as to how to prevent these types of events especially at schools, airports, churches, government builds where no one carries except for active law enforcement.

Big C said...

Stigmatization of-- and failure to treat --mental illness are at the core of our mass murder issue. Efforts to limit access to weapons do little to ameliorate death by firearm inthis country. Folks with personality disorders are much likely to commit these crimes, but they're not sexy diseases. That antisocial "bastard" or "bitch" with BPD is just as likely to kill an other as he/she is him/herself.