The problem with the current gun control debate is that it revolves almost exclusively around the rash of mass shootings that have so tragically plagued our country, especially recently. These mass shootings have seemingly crashed over us relentlessly likes waves with a terrifying frequency. These things make people take notice of the problems that were always there. They take notice because shootings of this kind are so incomprehensibly evil and soulless that a response is demanded of us. But they also take notice because the highly publicized and sensational nature of the “story” in the media is impossible to ignore.
People are killed by guns every day., and the majority are not killed in mass shootings that are illuminated by a media spotlight. According to ABC News, in the United States, the rate of gun-related homicide is 3.2 per 100,000 people — the highest rate among developed countries. Yet the disturbing prevalence of gun violence in our country seems to matter only when the deaths are numerous, gruesome and visible enough to merit our attention.
Let’s turn our attention to the President’s newly released proposal on reducing gun violence, the wide-reaching components of which have been stirring up the controversy that is to be anticipated when it comes to gun control. It would enact measures to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands, through a strengthened background check system, including measures like requiring criminal background checks for all gun purchases. It would ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. It would better-equip law enforcement to punish criminals and prevent illegal gun trafficking; beyond that, more police officers would keep watch over communities to better prevent violent crime. It would allow more thorough research to be conducted on gun violence, promoting investigation of societal contributions to violence beyond simply the accessibility of firearms. It would strive to raise mental health awareness and to ensure that individuals living with a mental illness get the treatment they need, and it would be done in a compassionate manner that does not perpetuate harmful stigmas about mental illness.
The proposal, despite being labeled as “extreme” by one congressman and being mocked by incensed gun-owners, is filled with commonsense measures that seem glaringly obvious even before taking into account the nature or frequency of gun violence in the U.S.
Furthermore, Obama has stated that proponents of gun control should be more attentive to the concerns of responsible gun-owners and that respect should be shown to the cultural tradition of hunting. He has not been dismissive of those concerns, nor has he demonized gun-owners. He has noted the stark difference between the situation in rural and urban areas, recognizing the practicality of owning guns in rural areas.
The fact that some want to emphasize mental health and violent media over the legality of semi-automatic firearms stems from a preoccupation with the jarring, large-scale shootings like the recent tragedy in Sandy Hook. The shooter was mentally ill, and so this becomes the focal point of the conversation surrounding gun safety. It happened at a school, and so the possibility of teachers armed with guns is suddenly prescribed as a viable solution.
But what about the thousands of gun-related homicides that occur annually? What about the even greater number of gun-related assaults that result in injury? What about gun suicides, which are at their highest rate since 1998? The numbers and statistics surrounding these issues are varied and complex — gun homicides have gone down while non-fatal assaults have gone up. There is no conclusive evidence that a causal relationship exists between civilian gun ownership and gun violence, nor is there any conclusive evidence to the contrary. There is also no conclusive evidence to support the claim that civilians carrying concealed weapons prevents gun violence. Analysts can assess the numbers and speculate, and they have. Academic research has been conducted, and divergent conclusions have been drawn.
The issue is multifaceted and complex. It is one thing to look at statistics and charts and respond intuitively, and quite another to establish a casual relationship between variables. That being said, to shrug our shoulders and do nothing would be irresponsible. We cannot continue to ignore the fact that our country has an alarmingly high homicide rate and that the majority of those homicides are committed with firearms.
The President’s proposal, while it not eradicating all gun violence or preventing all tragedies, is a good place to start. These are commonsense reforms that certainly will not address every contributing factor in gun violence, but they may help to mitigate some. And if it may be the case that they could reduce the overwhelming gun-related death toll in this country, by any margin, I would say they are worthwhile.
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Follow Allegra Hobbs on Twitter: @allegrahobbs
