Sandy Hook, Other Mass Shootings and the American Gun Debate
There have been more funerals in the last few days. Five so far, out of the twenty-six lost last Friday. So, despite a lot of funerals already (too many, really), there are still the vast majority to go.
Interesting reactions since the shootings. I received a petition on my Facebook account, urging me to sign as a show of force against a potential, and much debated, ban on assault weapons. I deleted the post.
Also, there was a picture that I saw someone else post. It was from Israel, and it showed children in a line, either going to, or coming from, a playground. The teacher, who looked to be a middle-aged woman, was standing guard, so to speak, with a gun at her side - a sign of protection, if you will. The individual who posted it essentially mentioned that this photograph was an interesting thought.
Indeed, a lot of such ideas have been sparked. many are suggesting that any ban or limitation of arms is not only not the answer but, moreover, that more guns are needed. Principals need to be armed. Hell, even teachers need to be armed. For some gun advocates unwilling to even entertain even the possibility of any limits to gun control (even for automatic rifles and other particularly dangerous assault arms that have no other function than killing on a massive scale), this has been their solution.
In the meantime, the debates about gun control and mental health that this tragedy triggered continue to rage.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) broke what had been an uncharacteristic silence on their part, and announced that they would hold a press conference this coming Friday, a week after the shootings in Newtown, CT. In the past after shootings, the NRA would often go to the areas of such shootings and show the strength of their resolve, often with an address that ended with Charleton Heston's famous words, "From my cold, dead hands."
This time, however, they are taking a more sober approach, it seems. Perhaps it is the shock value of such a horrific event, with very young and entirely innocent children being targeted and murdered in such numbers, that can explain the change in tone. Now, the NRA has said that it is "shocked, saddened, and heartbroken" by the slaughter in Newtown, and is promising a "meaningful contribution" in the debate to ensure that such shootings never, ever happen again.
Let me say this: I think it is long overdue for the NRA to take a more constructive approach towards curbing gun violence in this nation that to simply restate it's age old, all or nothing philosophy towards guns in America. Since it has been easily the strongest advocate and has the most powerful lobbyists for no gun control laws in the United States, then it should also utilize it's resources to think up some ways that such incidents can be prevented, if not outright eliminated, even. Simply reiterating their strong opposition to any gun control legislation or measures is not actually an answer at all. Some have suggested, with some legitimacy, that it has actually added fuel to the fire, and caused even more divisions an entrenched positions on an issue that is coming to a boil in America.
In the meantime, the White House is set to announce later today that Vice-President Biden will be heading an effort to effect change in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings, with the design of influencing gun policy in America.
Shootings Around the World & Responses Afterwards
So, of course, we are hearing about other such episodes, and this latest shooting has already been ranked the second worst school shooting in history. Of course, it is one of many such tragedies in schools, and we also know that these shootings are not restricted merely to just schools. In the last two years alone, we had other massive shootings in Arizona (the one where Congresswoman Giffords was shot) early in 2011, then the shootings at the Aurora theaters in Colorado for the Batman midnight screening this summer, and the Michigan shootings targeting Sieks. All of those, of course, occurred within American borders, and you will also notice that these only include the shootings recently, and make no mention of shootings, school shootings or otherwise, that occurred before 2011. But shootings on such a massive scale have occurred outside of the United States, and the response from both the government and the citizenry proved radically different. I want to focus on that a little bit right now. There are two articles that I have added at the bottom of this blog, and these really are fascinating articles that seem to show the glaring differences in how other nations responded to similar events on their own soil, and how we here, in America, have responded, and continue to respond in what can only be called he latest such incident. It is no secret, but it bears repeating, that no other industrialized nation has had anywhere near the level of repetition in patterns of massive gun violence as the United States has seen. Please take a look at the articles, and decide for yourself, because this issue is just too important not to give some serious, critical, objective thought to.
So, let's take a look at how other countries have responded:
Great Britain
In the United Kingdom, there were two similar incidents. One was way back in 1987, in the southern portion of the country, in a town called Hungerford. A 27-year-old man, Michael Ryan, went on a rampage, killing 16 people and injuring over a dozen others, before turning the gun on himself. In response, new legislation was passed in Britain, Firearms (Amendment) Act of 1988, which made registration obligatory for owning shotguns, and it banned semi-automatic and pump-action weapons.
This was not the last massive shooting in Britain. In 1996, in perhaps the most shooting that bore the most resemblance to last Friday's shootings at Newtown, 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton went on a shooting spree in an elementary school in Dublane, Scotland. He killed 16 children between the ages of 5 and 6, as well as their teacher, before turning the gun on himself. In response, Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act of 1997 was passed, essentially banning the private ownership of all handguns in the nation. Petitions that had circulated with over a million names had helped this legislation along. One tweet worded it directly: "Dublane, 1996. 16 dead kids + adult. 1.2 million sign petitions. UK govt. enacts new laws. Halts private guns. Tag, USA. You're it."
Still, Britain had to endure yet another shooting more recently, in 2010, when Derrick Byrd, a 52-yeal-old taxi driver, went on a shooting spree that lasted nearly four hours, in the process killing 12 and wounding almost 30, in rural Cumbria, in northern England, before turning the gun on himself. I am not aware of any legislation being passed following this incident, as Byrd had acquired and owned these arms through legal means.
Australia
Australia has often been cited as the nation with the most similarities to the United States, since it also has a "frontier" attitude, on many levels, going back to the earliest days of it's history. On April 28, 1996, in Port Arthur, Tasmania, a 28-year-old man named Martin Bryant killed 35 people in eight minutes using military-style semi-automatic rifles. Conservative Prime Minister John Howard, who had just assumed office, and the rest of the Australian government took swift action after enormous horror and revulsion in Australia. He took his anti-gun campaign around the country, and was able to enact a stricter gun control law that banned assault weapons,high calibur rifles and shotguns, and also instituted a government "buy-back" program.
According to researchers from Harvard University in 2011, in the 18 years before the laws were enacted, there were a total of 13 gun attacks that had led to a total of four or more fatalities. Since the law was enacted? Zero such attacks. The numbers of homicides by guns overall have fallen in the country, as well.
Howard later cited this as his greatest achievement during his twelve years in office to an audience in Texas. He describes the response: "There was an audible gasp of amazement."
Howard also commented on the positions of both Obama and his Republican rival for the office following the shootings in Aurora over the summer: "The responses of President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney...were as predictable as they were disappointing."
He went on, mentioning the similarities between the two countries, but stressing the differences in their attitudes regarding gun control: "There are many American traits which we Australians could well emulate to our great benefit. But when it comes to guns e have been right to take a radically different path."
Germany
Like the United States and Britain, Germany has suffered more than one school and/or mass shooting in it's history. The biggest one came a little more than three years after Columbine, in April of 2002. An 19-year-old student who had recently been expelled from the school, Robert Steinhauser, dressed in all-black and armed and with a handgun and pump-action gun, returned to the site of his school, the Gutenberg Gymnasium School in Erfurt, a town in eastern Germany. He killed eighteen people, including two students and thirteen teachers. He also killed another staff member, and a police officer, before turning the gun on himself.
Dressed in black combat fatigues, Bastian Bosse, an 18-year-old who had graduated from the Gerschwister Scholl School (in Emsdetten, near Northern Rhine) in the previous year, entered the school and started shooting and setting off smoke bombs. He shot the school janitor, a teacher, and 4 students, before turning the gun on himself. He was the only one who died in the attacks.
Nearly seven years after the Erfurt shootings, at the Albertville Secondary School in Winnenden, a suburb of Stuttgart, Tim Kretschmer also dressed in black fatigues, and killed 9 students and 3 teachers before he left the school. He then killed a gardener at a nearby psychiatric clinic, before robbing a car, eventually abandoning it (along with the driver), killing 2 more people at a car dealership. He injured two police officers in the exchange that followed, although he himself was also injured. Then, Kretschmer killed himself.
Following the shootings in 2009, legislation was passed increasing the age requirements for large caliber weapons, a registration system, and unannounced inspections to the private homes of gun owners. There also was an attempt to ban video games and other games that were felt to trivialize violence, such a paintball, although this was unsuccessful.
Finland
Like the United States, hunting and gun ownership is huge here. Also, like the United States, it was shaken by mass shootings.
The first came in 2007, when 18-year-old Pekka-Eric Auvinen took his handgun into the school of his hometown, Tuusula, in southern Finland, and opened fire. He killed 8 people, before taking his own life. He owned his guns legally, and was a frequented a shooting range.
The next year, 22-year-old Matti Juhani Saari donned a ski mask and black fatigues (remember that the Columbine killers wore their infamous trench coats, and the Aurora shooter dressed in paramilitary garb, with a hairdo that he hoped resembled the famous Batman villain, the Joker). He went to the campus of Kauhajoki city's School of Hospitality campus in southwestern Finland, and opened fire. He killed 10 people in an hour and a half.
In response, the Finnish government reviewed it's gun laws, and tightened them. New applicants for handguns must show a membership in a gun club for over a year and be confirmed by a doctor and by police. The minimum age was also raised. Finally, permits are valid for five years, before needing to be reviewed.
Norway
Here is where the biggest such mass shooting, and overall public massacre (in two parts), just last year. On July 22, 2011, Anders Behring Breivik detonated a bomb in Oslo, the nation's capital, outsideof the prime minister's office, killing 8 people. He then took a ferry to Utoya island, where a youth camp for a socialist party was, and he killed 69 people there. It famously took the police an hour and a half to actually get to the island and put a stop to the killings.
An independent report on the slaughter followed, and criticized Norway's gun laws, which were deemed "inadequate", and called for a total ban on semi-automatic weapons. However, I am not aware of any legislation that has folloed the tragedy.
Historical Attitudes on Gun Control in the United States
In the 1960's, gun violence became a huge subject on the public mind following high profile political assasinations with the assasination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, of his brother and Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, and of civil rights activist and leader Martin Luther King, Jr., also in 1968, to mention only the three most famous such shootings. A majority of Americans were in favor of more restrictive gun laws, and even the NRA was in favor of restrictive legislation.
Yet, this trend has reversed itself over the decades, as more and more Americans have grown in favor of more lax weapons laws. Public opinion has migrated to a much more pro-gun position over time.
In the meantime, gun violence, high profile and otherwise, has been increasing. It's easy to do the math, and common sense would dictate that the attitude of more guns solving the problem has been proven wrong, time and time again. Gun violence in other industrialized nations is a fraction of what it is here in the United States. The results speak for themselves.
Still, that mentality persists. In the days and even hours following the school shootings at Sandy Hook, gun sales spiked tremendously. Just hours before the Sandy Hook slaughter, Michigan lawmakers passed legislation allowed those with concealed weapons licenses to carry guns into many places, including hospitals, churches, and yes, schools.
There was an episode in Mississippi where an armed Vice Principal actually was able to stop the attacker. But there were other points where an armed guard seemed to have no effect at all in slowing down, let alone stopping, a school shooting that was in progress. Also, there is the question of whether teachers and principles, or other administrators, are actually willing to be armed and, presumably, receive such training. it was never part of the job before, and we most likely should hope that it was not something that they hoped would be part of their job. For that matter, maybe we should ask ourselves what kind of a society do we want to have? Is Israel really the model of the society that we want to emulate? Armed teachers protecting children in a playground? Is that the direction we are going in? Israel, at least, has the excuse of being surrounded by relatively hostile nations that wish it would be wiped off the map, and there are many existing, and well-documented, hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. But here in the United States, we are, presumably, a nation at peace. Why such paranoia? Is that really the nation we want to be?
The question seems to boil down to asking ourselves what the better answer to curtail gun violence would be: more guns, or less guns?
History, both here and abroad, suggests a clear answer. It is up to us, as a nation, to be courageous and truthful about what that answer is, and then to do something about it.
I am admittedly, skeptical that anything will radically change here in the United States. But, ultimately, time will tell. Let's see what happens.
In the meantime, the following quote seemed to sum up quite well the enormity of the issue that the United States now faces following yet another mass public shooting, and hte need, according to David Rothkopf,to have an honest and open examination of our attitudes towards gun. He wrote these words almost two years ago, following the shooting in Arizona:
"No society that holds itself up as an example to the world should, as the United States does, brazenly shrug off what are clearly deep national character flaws when it comes to our love of guns or our celebration of hate politics."
Here are two articles about the NRA taking a more conciliatory position:
http://www.newkerala.com/news/newsplus/worldnews-118870.html
http://nhregister.com/articles/2012/12/18/news/doc50d0e589b9f35672804578.txt
Often times, Americans are quite concerned about their image abroad, and what the rest of the world thinks about the United States, and the goings on here. Many times, people around the world actually do not understand how or why things work the way that they do here in America, and believe me, the gun debate is not a minor one of these things that many outside of American borders simply do not understand. Here is an article by Tim Lister of CNN (View from Abroad: Sorrow, but little hope for U.S. gun control, 12/18/12) that focuses on what foreign reactions can be. This includes reactions from countries who, like the United States, have seen horrible shootings on a massive scale. One British guy, who blogs for the New Yorker, really hit hard, saying, "Nowhere have mass shootings been as prevalent as the United States, and nowhere has the policy reaction been so pathetic." Maybe this could serve as an eye opener for Americans, if they actually cared enough, or found courage enough, to read it and to accept the obvious criticisms and deviations of thoughts and beliefs (and values, even). Thought it was a very interesting article, and I would recommend it. I used this quite a bit in writing this blog, particularly the international shootings:
http://cnn.com.ru/2012/12/17/world/connecticut-shooting-world-reaction/index.html?hpt=hp_mid
I know that I listed this article yesterday, but it was such an interesting article, illustrating the differences in approach and attitude in other nations that have experienced similar episodes, and how their reactions specifically differed then here in America, where what appear to be random, massive shootings occur far too often. This article is by Paul Armstrong of CNN ("How other countries deal with massacre nightmare", 12/17/12), and serves as another glaring example of the disconnect between American attitudes and those of other abroad. I would go so far as to say that, in other countries, their approach to gun control is more of a common sense approach, while here in the United States, paranoia about any restrictions on the availability of arms, particularly of assault weapons, being equated with an attack in individual liberty. How about the liberty not to live in fear all of the time of such things reoccurring? In any case, this was a very interesting article as well, and should not be missed. Like the one above, I borrowed quite a bit from this article in writing this blog, especially on the shootings in other countries:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/17/world/world-newtown-shootings-gun-controls/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Here is an article that focuses in on Australia's gun law (by Matt Phillips of Quartz, titled "15 Things to Know About Australia's Incredibly Effective Gun Clampdown", mentioned in the above links as well as in the blog, and shows how it came about, as well as how effective it has been:
http://news.yahoo.com/15-things-know-australias-incredibly-effective-gun-clampdown-091332049--politics.html
Here are individual links on the shootings in Germany that I used in writing the part on German school shootings. The parts about the legislation, I got from Wikepedia:
http://articles.cnn.com/2002-04-26/world/germany.shooting_1_gunman-police-officer-pupils?_s=PM:WORLD
I listed this on yesterday's blog, as well. But this is such an important issue, and the shootings last Friday were so shocking and revealing about just how much the threat of gun violence, massive and otherwise, exists here in the United States in particular, that I thought I would add this article in yet again. It is from Mother Jones, and is quite informative.
No comments:
Post a Comment