Gun Violence: An Epidemic?
On Friday, a white supremacist terrorized two New Zealand mosques, killing at least 50 people. He claimed to be inspired by American mass shootings and the presence of Donald Trump as our president and a symbol of “white identity”; his manifesto claims that one of his motives was to further divide Americans on the issues of gun control and the Second Amendment. Today, a shooting on a Dutch tram killed three people and injured five others (police are unsure whether this was terrorism or a family dispute). In terms of incidents that have struck closer to home, 12 people were shot at a nightclub in Thousand Oaks in November; the 2015 San Bernardino shooting left 14 dead (both not including the perpetrators). And according to the LA Times Homicide Report, 603 people have been killed in LA County in the past 12 months. As we’re all well aware of due to the topicality of this issue, the “will they, won’t they” of gun control is hotly debated in the US as we continue to suffer from chronic mass shootings and an egregiously high number of gun deaths per year– but are we now seeing the epidemic spread overseas as well?
An Atlantic article, summarizing a 2015 article by Malcolm Gladwell, postulated based on the studies of Mark Granovetter that “[A riot] becomes a public movement when the momentum is powerful enough to move even the relatively stable people nearby to join in the rock hurling. In this way, a spate of mass shootings might behave like ‘a slow-motion … riot,’ such that each murderous event normalizes, or encourages, new participants to join the movement.”
Is this an issue that should be discussed globally or should the situation continue to be every country for themselves (even if one country’s lax laws make it more likely for gun violence to spread to countries that are working hard to stem the flow of violence)? How should the media handle these attacks given the probability that their coverage of them incites more potential shooters to take action? How does the perceived best course of action on this issue change once we take into account that so many mass shooters share the common demographics of being young white men? Can the epidemic of gun violence be solved by focusing on mental health alone? Do you think the prevalence of non-mass shooting gun deaths in this country (ex. domestic or gang-related violence, which primarily affect communities of color) necessitates a different approach to the gun violence epidemic than the one that might be used to counteract the frequencies of mass shootings? How does suicide and the fact that readily available guns might bring more people to impulsively take their own lives play into this epidemic?
Here are a few interesting articles/stats on this issue (and there are a ton more out there):
I think that this should be an issue that is discussed globally, because as we have seen in the recent shooting in New Zealand, our President's actions and words are directly influencing's people's decisions and actions. Because Donald Trump is currently president, I think that that decision sends a message to the entire world that Americans are supportive of his ideas, even if we are not. I remember talking to my mom about this, as she lives in China, and she had not idea how divided our nation was about having Trump as President until recently. Having Trump as our President makes it seems like America supports his racist ideas, which leads to events such as the New Zealand shooting. I think that the media should continue to cover attacks because it is important for us to know about these shootings so that we can also support movements like March For Our Lives, which is helping to restrict gun laws. I do not think that the epidemic of gun violence can be solved by focusing solely on mental health, as although it may be a factor in gun violence, it does not account for all cases of gun violence.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the most remarkable things about the recent New Zealand shootings is comparing the responses of Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, to that of Donald Trump when similar mass shootings have occurred in the U.S. Ardern was quick to label the incidents as a “terrorist” attack instead of saying he was simply a troubled white man, and called an Australian politician’s statement saying there was a linkage between Muslim immigration and the shooting a “disgrace.” I think that it’s incredibly important for nations’ leaders to respond in times of crisis decisively, and Trump’s lack of such action is incredibly telling of his misguided committedness in helping to preserve current gun policy.
ReplyDeleteI think that the world, in general, is becoming a more globalized place, and in turn policy in one nation affects that of the others - so yes, I think it’s an international issue. I think that it’s a difficult situation in terms of how the media portrays such mass shootings, but it’s definitely important for them to report the truth - I saw a cover of a UK newspaper that was eventually taken down that labeled the New Zealand shooter as an “angelic boy” who was led astray. I don’t think the problem can be solved by looking at mental health alone, because I think that would only solve part of the problem - the whole issue is obviously incredibly complex so there isn’t any one solution.
We need to revisit and revise the way individuals can obtain guns in the first place. It is ridiculous that someone can just walk in with an ID and potentially walk out with a mass murdering weapon. Mental health has shown itself as part of the problem; however, it's not the only problem needing to be fixed if we are truly trying to fix the amount of killings we have. It is really hard to see that our president has such an awful influence on the world (it honestly just makes me extremely mad). If he was truly trying to fix our gun problems, he wouldn't be portraying this image of the white identity being almost superior to individuals who take it literally and clearly too far. I don't know if I am getting my point across all the way, but to sum it up and make it concise...1) I think that the problem of gun control and mass shootings needs to start at who can obtain a gun and how easy it is. 2) I think mental health as presented itself as a large problem regarding mass shootings; however, ONLY addressing mental health will not solve the problem. 3) Donald Trump is basically portraying this image that the white identity/white race is superior and his crazy ass supporters who take that message to heart attack individuals that are different. Trump is influencing easily manipulated individuals and teaching them that his actions are okay.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone so far that the U.S. can be a world leader in choosing how to respond to this issue, but it's interesting to me how the U.S. lags behind on addressing the epidemic of gun violence which has become a public health and safety crisis. I think that, in shaping its gun policies, the U.S. should ideally look toward's Australia's example and take proactive and, from some perspectives, radical steps to minimize the number of guns circulating in the U.S. When there was a mass shooting in Tasmania in 1996, the Australian government (on a federal and state level) responded quickly by banning automatic rifles and shotguns and increasing the necessary steps to obtain other types of firearms. They added in a 28-day waiting period for prospective purchases and required purchasers to justify their purchase (and they couldn't use "self protection" as a justification.) Since 1996, Australia has had one mass shooting (compared to 11 from 1986-1996) and the rate of gun homicides has also dropped. This is an interesting and I think relevant comparison because Australia's gun culture was super similar to the U.S.'s (and New Zealand's), as sport hunting was hugely popular in all three countries and gun ownership was widely embraced. Australia also had a powerful gun manufacturing lobby with immense political influence. But their government took on the lobby and adapted their national gun culture in order to stem the flow of dangerous weapons into the hands of potentially dangerous users, and I think we need to do the same.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't want to write too much for this response but I think it'd be interesting to talk about how the government's response to non-mass-shooting gun violence has been affected by racism and classism, and I think this connects to our discussion about how the government talks about epidemics affecting different communities.
I feel like in the future gun violence needs to be talked about on a global level; however, until all nations have their own gun laws sorted out, I think that it would be really difficult to discuss this topic on a worldwide level. Also, like others have said, I don’t think that this epidemic can be solved by solely focusing on mental health because there isn’t just one part to this problem. Yes, I do think that it is an important factor, however, it’s not the only one. To address your question about the demographics of the shooters, I feel like white privilege plays into the decision making a LOT. I think that this is where the mental health aspect comes into play: if they shooter is white and has a mental illness, the shooting is blamed on the disease, that being said, this isn’t always the case. I just feel like people really need to address the fact that there is a common demographic? I was reading the news the other day (I know this isn’t about a mass shooting but it’s still important) about an 11 year old boy who shot and killed a married couple in New Hampshire. The fact that an ELEVEN YEAR OLD HAS ACCESS to a gun is disturbing and shows that gun laws need to be rewritten.
ReplyDeleteI most definitely think that we need to address this issue and start a global conversation because this obviously isn't just a problem in America. I think the media also needs to stray from the dominant narrative where a white man can commit a horrendous crime, like shooting and killing several people and children in a mosque, but not be called a terrorist or committing a terrorist act when you know damn well if a muslim person commits any crime they're labelled as a terrorist instantly. The media also most of the time sympathizes with a white shooter and use the situation to talk about the mental health problems instead of the obvious problem of the excessive ways people can easily own a gun. Also like Lux, I think the response that nations' leaders and politicians make influence people's decisions and opinions. If politicians would talk about the obvious terrorist attacks that mostly white men commit instead of furthering the radicalization and dehumanization of people of color and people who are Muslim many easily manipulated people like some radical Trump supporters would change their minds and we would actually start to find a remedy to gun violence. I think this issue/epidemic can NOT be solved by only focusing on the mental health aspect alone, so many politicians have talked about how we need to better mental illness healthcare but then no one takes initiative and actually does anything it's just empty promises. My entire life I have heard about how mental illness is the cause of mass shootings and how we need to have more extensive background checks and better healthcare but nothing has ever happened. I think in today's climate guns are way to easy to own, I could probably walk into a Walmart (yes they sell guns) and show them my ID to get a license and could walk out the store with a lethal weapon. It's way too easy for anyone to get a gun and I also think many people think gun control means that everybody's gun are going to be taken but that's not the solution.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile gun violence in theory should be a global issue, I think at least in the US we need to start by addressing our own laws and problems. We are so far behind in terms of gun-related deaths, so we should definitely start by looking inwards.
ReplyDeleteI do think many of the questions you are raising are issues that have been circulating in the debate about gun control, particularly the piece about focusing on mass shootings when guns are killing people every day in predominately low-income communities/ communities of color, whose victims go without a full news cycle of coverage or urgent calls for action. I'm glad that the students who organized after Parkland kept this in mind and had a diverse array of student activists speaking at the March for Our Lives. Also, this website is really powerful and memorializes all of the kids who have been killed by guns in the year following Parkland: https://sinceparkland.org/ There's obviously so SO much work to do on this discrepancy, though, and so I hope that awareness about how we treat mass shootings versus "everyday gun violence" (that sounds ridiculous as I'm typing it, but it's the awful reality of our country, I guess) continues to grow and hopefully inform future policy decisions.
As Sophie said, solving the epidemic of gun violence is difficult to solve on a global level. In terms of social media coverage, I did some more research into how media coverage can possibly incite "copy-cat shootings." Here is an article I found by the National Center for Health Research.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.center4research.org/copy-cats-kill/
This kind of made me think about the Ted Bundy tapes / AHS and the romanticization of those who experience mental illnesses in film and television. Obviously mass shootings need to be covered in media in order to spread awareness — so i'm wondering how we can navigate telling these stories in a way that doesn't romanticize shootings, but instead tells the stories how they are.
In addition to what Simone said, in some places around the country, you can straight up go to a garage sale or something and buy a gun. The accessibility one has to obtaining a gun is absurd and extremely frightening. What’s also frightening is that people think these shootings are okay because they see others doing it and they don’t see anyone trying to stop them (especially not our president!).
ReplyDeleteI watched a video that explained some ways in which we can end gun violence and it talked a lot about the Dickey Amendment. The Dickey Amendment was established in 1996 and it prohibited further research on gun violence by the CDC (also, it was lobbied for by the NRA..). Since then, our lack of public health research has left us ignorant in regards to our knowledge on gun violence and how to prevent it. Even former rep. Jay Dickey ("Dickey," as in the name of the amendment) changed his mind and is now in support of repealing the Dickey Amendment, along with over a hundred of hospitals and medical organizations. If we were provided with sufficient research conducted by the CDC, I think it would be a lot easier to create stricter gun laws because they would be backed with real evidence that would be pretty impossible to go against.
I think the United States should try to focus on gun control methods before trying to remedy the problems of the rest of the world. If we are having trouble controlling the impact of guns in America we should not try to engage in other affairs. While I do not think we should expend our resources on fixing the worlds gun control issues I do think that they should be covered globally because it raises awareness and contextualizes many of the arguments surrounding the issue. I am also interested in exploring the topic of adding more glass into buildings in order to keep students safe/ give them the feeling of safety in schools.
ReplyDeleteThis does seem to be becoming a global issue, and I do think it can be discussed at a global level; however, I think it would make much more sense for countries to work on it on their own because each country is so different, and their demographics all range widely. I think social media has already done so much by showing support for victims as well as just straight up condemning guns all around; however, this has proven not enough.
ReplyDeleteMy cousins brought up the shooting in out group chat and one of them stated, “I bet he won’t get the death penalty cause white people are always ‘mental’.” Regardless of death penalty laws in the US and his understandings of mental illnesses, he did make a point surrounding the rhetoric of these white shooters in America. If these shooters were anyone else, they’d be dragged (as they should), yet because they are white we are almost supposed to be sympathetic of them and their issues.