If something can be stated as a news
staple - it is undoubtedly gun violence. It is in the news always, so much to
the point that we are numbed by it. We are only shocked if the violence happens
at a scale and in places unimaginable to us. Indeed. Gun violence is the second highest
cause of non-medical related preventable deaths in America, only topped by
motor vehicle accidents. More people have died on gun violence than on terrorist
attacks since 9/11. The actual numbers
are shocking - many thousands are killed on gun violence every year, in
comparison with less than a hundred died in terrorist attacks since 9/11. No place in the country has been immune to
this maddening violence. Places of
worship – churches, temples; places of recreation – shopping malls, movie
theatres; place of study – schools, universities and places with high security
– navy yard, army bases, have all have been victims of gun violence. Thousands
of innocent lives, including some of very young children, have been lost and
yet this happens with a fair regularity.
With one out of every three household in America owning a gun and gun
advocacy organizations such as NRA having millions of members, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that gun
control is a hugely controversial and a hot topic. This writing attempts to explore the different
dimensions of this complex topic.
Perspective 1 (President Obama disappointed by lack of gun control
laws)
In the exclusive interview with BBC
News’s Jon Sopel during July 2015, expressing his concern on gun control, President
Obama worries, “I've been most frustrated and most stymied by the fact that the
United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not
have sufficient common-sense, gun-safety laws, even in the face of repeated
mass killings.”. Obama provides some troubling facts that underline the
seriousness of the issue, “If you look at the number of Americans killed since
9/11 by terrorism, it's less than 100. If you look at the number that have been
killed by gun violence, it's in the tens of thousands”, Obama notes. He asserts
“it is not something that I intend to stop working on in the remaining 18
months.”
In the 2015 article on The Atlantic, Adam Chandler analyzes the
various speeches made by President Obama after each mass killing gun violence
incident. Chandler points out how the rhetoric of Obama’s speeches has shifted
towards displaying more anger and frustration that these gun incidents continue
to happen. Chandler notes the earlier
speeches Obama made had a softer tone intended to calm victims and their
families with the notable exception being the below assertive section of his
speech after Newtown, Conn school shooting, “As a country, we have been through
this too many times. Whether it’s an
elementary school in Newtown, or a shopping mall in Oregon, or a temple in
Wisconsin, or a movie theater in Aurora, or a street corner in Chicago—these
neighborhoods are our neighborhoods, and these children are our children. And we're going to have to come together and
take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the
politics”. In displaying anger in his recent speech, Chandler observes, President
Obama deviated from a precedent set in over six years of delivering speeches
about mass shootings and gun violence; this time, speaking after Charleston
Church shootings, there was the same rhetorical splay of uncertainties, but
with an entirely different conclusion: “We don’t have all the facts, but we do
know that, once again, innocent people were killed in part because someone who
wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hands on a gun.”
Perspective 2 (Guns protect people)
David Kopel, the research director of the Independence
Institute and an adjunct professor of law at the University of Denver and the
co-author of “Firearms Law and the Second Amendment” in his 2013 New York Times
article titled “A Divide in the Gun Debate Widened by Misunderstanding” contends
the different ways people misinterpret gun issue and argues media disproportionality
inflates gun violence and the stories of self-defense are not represented well.
Kopel notes that the gun issue has been viewed as a rural issue and people
thought that the issue would go away as the nation urbanizes but he points that
it is still very much a mixed issues. Another misinterpretation is viewing it
as “conflict of individualism versus communal values”, Kopel notes. He argues that
there are many people who carry guns for communal good such as individuals
carry guns to protect their families and trained teachers carry guns to protect
school children. Kopel notes the division between people who insist “it is
wrong for anyone (or anyone other than a government employee) to use deadly
force” and others who “see self-defense as the most fundamental of all
inherent, natural rights”. Kopel concludes that national media demonizes gun
usage by “maximize coverage of atrocious gun crimes” and the people who only
know guns via media become very angry that anyone could oppose gun control
whereas the stories of self-defense are limited to local news. He asserts, “A
fairer and less biased media … would help to reduce the emotional temperature.”
Perspective 3 (Children are victims of gun violence)
Geoffrey Canada, president and chief executive officer of the
Harlem Children’s Zone and president of the Harlem Children’s Zone Promise
Academy Charter Schools, in his 2013 New York Times article titled “The Availability
of Guns Affects the Lives of Children” emotionally expresses that gun policy failures
“have been responsible for the ongoing slaughter of children”. Expressing his
distress, Canada argues that, “I have gone to too many funerals of young people
slain by handguns, held the hands of too many weeping mothers” and they are “joined
in grief and outrage by other Americans who sympathize -- and who maybe wonder
if their loved one is next”. Canada is frustrated that this country “continues
to make buying and owning a gun easier than buying and owning a car”. Canada
expresses the immense grief he felt for young innocent victims of Newtown
shooting and reasons that the founding fathers cannot believe, much less
condone, the killing of innocents that is being politically enabled by so
called defenders of second amendment. Canada comments that he understands
people wants guns for self-defense and for sports but he is puzzled “how anyone
can advocate for the easy availability of deadly weapons”
Perspective 4 (Guns and Women Safety)
Caitlin
Kelly, the author of “Blown Away: American Women and Guns”, in her Jan 2013
article in New York Times titled “Women Buy Guns to Protect Themselves” argues
that women want to feel safe and as long as women feel a reasonable fear they
will purchase weapons. Kelly offers some chilling stats on how much women are
in danger of horrendous crimes against them - domestic violence, rape, becoming
a victim of staking etc. Kelly recalls that how she become a victim of
harassment and violence as she was unknowing dating a convicted criminals, how
the law enforcement agencies who are supposed to protect her turned a blind eye
towards her and how helpless and fearful she felt. In a different 2013 New York
Times article titled “Broaden the Base of Support for Gun Control”, Kelly
argues that women represent a significant percentage of gun user base and
involving them can effect better gun control measures. Kelly reiterates that
women feel unsafe and therefore buy guns to protect them. Kelly proposes that,
“President Obama should create a multidisciplinary committee that includes
those most directly involved in gun use and violence, especially women” and
this committee should include people from multiple disciples - emergency room
doctors, nurses, concerned individual gun-owners, domestic violence experts, experts
in diagnosing and treating mental illness etc. Kelly argues that unless this is
done “a viable solution will continue to evade this society”.
Perspective 5 (Solutions for Gun Violence)
In the New York Times opinion page titled “Here’s a Way to Control Guns.”, The Rev. David K. Brawley, the Rev. Otis Moss III,
the Rev. David Benke and Rabbi Joel Mosbacher, members of the Metro Industrial
Areas Foundation aimed at building power for social change, argue that as
a largest buyer of guns, the federal
government can hugely influence gun manufactures to be more accountable leading
to smarter guns that reduce crimes and a vigilant gun distribution making
access to guns harder for criminals. The authors note that President Obama
assured the country in the aftermath of Newtown, Connecticut shootings that he
would do whatever in his power to prevent such future tragedies and notes that
he rightly took the first step of using legislation. But when that failed, the
president failed to use other ways, the authors note. As a largest purchaser of guns in the
country, the federal government has the most powerful tool: its purchasing
power, the authors assert. The authors note that the leading brands of guns
used by the government are also leading brands in crimes. For example, while
pointing out that Smith & Wesson, a large gun manufacture, turn up
frequently in the hands of criminals, the authors assert, “Shouldn’t questions
be asked when Smith & Wesson seeks a contract with the federal government?”
The authors provide several different ways the federal government can influence
this positive change from gun manufactures. “We might measure, for instance,
the number of a manufacturer’s guns found at crime scenes as a percentage of their overall
sales”, the authors suggest. Distributing the guns exclusively through
reputable and thoughtful dealers, making “smart guns” that can be fired only by
authorized users thereby preventing accidents and unauthorized use, reviving
the smart-gun research program of government and incentivizing gun manufactures
for making smart guns are some of the ways to control guns and prevent gun
deaths, the authors recommend.
My Views on Gun Control
“Insanity is doing the
same thing over and over again and expecting different results”– Albert
Einstein. I think this quote is very
appropriate to the gun control discussion as no positive progress had been made
on it and the gun instances happen over and over again. As you look further, there is a well-defined
pattern.
Be it a man, who shoots
people in a park because he is depressed by his marriage not going well or a
teenager who shot his classmates as they are not socializing with him - the
pattern is very simple to spot. Somebody is going through a difficult phase in
life – just like everyone goes through one time or the other, but the
difference here is the person has access to guns. He goes and shoots people
shattering the dreams and lives of innocent people. Time heals most things and
without access to the guns, these people would have recovered and lead a normal
life, but access to a gun changes all that - forever. This underscores the importance of making
access to a gun very difficult.
As someone who has personally
witnessed the extremely nervous moments my friend went through for finding
whether her children are safe, when the news of a school shooting broke, and as
someone who is in complete disbelief that five people including a child had
lost their lives in a random shooting, in a neighborhood park our family goes
every day, gun control discussion is very important to me.
I understand that there are several
dimensions and complications in this issue. Some people argue that stricter gun
control laws affect only people who abide by the law to buy weapons and criminals
by nature don’t follow the rules and hence they have no problem getting access
to a weapon. However, I am sure nobody can deny that military style weapons
have no place in private hands. Even
while using for personal safety, there are countless occasions where people
were killed by accidental firing, even by children, so they must be regulated
as well.
An irresponsible gun owner puts the
entire society at risk. By not passing sensible laws that restrict guns, we are
putting the innocent lives at risk. So it is important for us to participate in
gun control discussion, bring meaningful changes that makes everyone safe.
References:
Sopel, Jon. "Full transcript
of BBC interview with President Barack Obama." BBC News. n.p, Web. 24 July 2015.
Chandler, Adam. "President
Obama's Hard Rhetorical Shift on Gun Control." The Atlantic. n.p, Web. 19 June 2015.
Kopel, David. "A Divide in the
Gun Debate Widened by Misunderstanding." The New York Times. n.p, Web. 6 January 2013.
Canada, Geoffrey. " The Availability of Guns Affects the Lives of Children."
The New York Times. n.p, Web. 9
August 2013.
Kelly, Caitlin. "Women Buy
Guns to Protect Themselves." The New
York Times. n.p, Web. 6 January 2013.
Kelly, Caitlin. "Broaden the
Base of Support for Gun Control." The
New York Times. n.p, Web. 4 January 2014.
David K.
Brawley, Otis Moss III, David Benke and Joel Mosbacher. "Here’s a Way to Control Guns." The New York Times. n.p, Web. 17 July
2015.
