A lot of people are talking about Gun Laws and what we should do about them. Some main issues that are used as evidence for those arguing for stricter gun regulations and bans are mass shootings, school shootings, and suicides. However, when we see this we instantly think take away the guns but a lot of the time it runs deeper. Instead of fixing the problem on a surface level, I think we should dig deeper and go for the roots of the problem.
On the other hand, it isn't just as easy as monitoring those who do have mental health issues for many reasons. One is that the government can't simply monitor their every movements or tap their phones or anything that invades their privacy. Another is that we cannot assume that everyone with some issue is going to turn violent. While "nearly two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides" by people with mental health issues (1), only 1% of mass shootings and 3-5% of violent crimes are committed by them (2). Clearly, all these mass shootings and school shootings aren't all being caused by those with mental health issues. So what now?
One thing that not many people look into are the regular statistics of these shooters that don't have to do with mental health issues. For example, "Ninety-seven percent of mass shooters are male. The overwhelming majority are white. Beyond that, mass shooters share weaker links. They have beliefs ranging from misogyny to white supremacy. Some are seeking revenge. Many have a history of domestic violence" (2). Again, this is not saying that we should or even have the right to monitor every white man who believes in white supremacy or has experienced domestic violence. We can't.
Very obviously, I have no idea how we can stop these mass shootings and gun violence. One thing I do know however is that the problems of these violent actions run much deeper than that they had easy access to guns. If everyone had a gun but no reason to shoot, then no one would shoot. We need to go into the reasons people have to shoot if we want to remedy this problem. Again, no idea how. Please comment your ideas.
Source 1: like Ricky Lopez mentioned in his post @ https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-america/)
Source 2 : https://www.aafp.org/news/blogs/freshperspectives/entry/20190918fp-massshootings.html
I really like the point that you make, about background checks not being as effective. Although background checks can reduce crime, many of these people that undergo background checks often get away with getting a gun, especially when they shouldn't have a gun. An example of this would be Dylan Roof, his narcotics charge never reached the FBI examiner and so he was able to obtain a gun. There is a problem with how poorly states report mental heath issues which is why some of these people that get guns are not considered mentally insane until after they have committed their crimes, which can be attributed to the 1 percent that you were talking about. And while background checks are not as effective as they could be, it's much better to have some sort of check on people who obtain a gun than no regulations at all. Of course criminals could get weapons through the black market, so it is not to say that these regulations can not be improved.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post, and I liked how you included statistics for your arguments. I agree with your point that it is impossible to predict who will be the next mass shooter. Furthermore, I do not believe that it is fair to discriminate against someone simply because they match a certain criteria, as they themselves have done nothing wrong. One country we can analyze to better understand gun control is China. Private possession of firearms by citizens is prohibited with extremely limited exceptions, with the main one being hunting. While this is extremely authoritarian and can be considered a violation of human rights, there is little to no gun violence in China.
ReplyDeleteSource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control_in_China
I found your article interesting because you attacked the gun issues in a different way. Instead of just simply attacking the government, you mentioned that one of the issues might be mental issues. Honestly, I don't know that many solutions to these problems but I think there are some solutions being offered. At our school, LAHS, there is counseling in case somebody might not be in the right space but there is only so much help that could be offered. Were lucky that our school offers this but not all schools do. Not all the schools have the funds to provide this. Maybe this might be a start?
ReplyDeleteI thought that your post was really interesting and gave a new point of view on American's gun debate. I personally think and agree with you that it would be next to impossible to tell who is going to go on a mass shooting or a shooting spree based off of the fact that they are white and believe in white supremacy. I think though that there are often hints that certain people are going to create a mass shooting, but people close to them often ignore it. Either because they hold the same beliefs or because they don't think that person is capable of that much violence. So I think that people need to be more vigilant and report people who seem like they may do something violent, as people close to them must be able to see that there is something going on.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you on mental health issues and guns. Mentally ill people are more likely to be victims of violent crime than the rest of the population, even though they are often the ones being blamed for it. (https://www.mentalhealth.gov/basics/mental-health-myths-facts ) I personally think that the reason that a lot of people choose mental health as the cause of mass shootings, as it puts the issue onto a different place than gun control. It's low hanging fruit that people can put blame onto even though mentally ill people are mostly harmless.
While mental illness may not be the only issue that is causing gun violence as you argue, I do believe that the statistic you brought up of only 1% of mass shootings and 3-5% of violent crimes being committed by mentally ill people is not the most accurate. For example, Seung-Hui Cho, a Korean immigrant who committed a shooting at Virginia Tech, was earlier ordered to receive outpatient treatment but was still able to obtain a gun. This was because Virginia only reported inpatient treatments rather than outpatient treatments, meaning that the data that background checks might have used was not accurate enough to realize that Seung-Hui Cho was mentally ill. This story came from the article https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1603&context=nlj. Thus, I think that there is a higher percentage of shootings and violent crimes that are committed by mentally ill people than reported because the reported data may not be accurate because of mishaps like the one described above.
ReplyDeleteNice article, like I, said in my comment on Ricky's post. I don't believe the route in banning guns would help in lessening the number of mass shootings and such. There are other approaches such as limiting the access to deadly weapons such as fully automatic weapons or weapons that can be modified. To be honest, there really isn't a way to completely get rid of all the violence, because you remove the guns then criminals will still be able to get them while good civilians will be defenseless. Rather we can limit guns to carrying very few bullets to prevent bigger events from happening. But I like the approach Christian mentioned on counseling, I'd say that counseling from a younger age than high school could also help struggling children who grow up around crappy environments at home in school. I don't know if it's offered in middle school and such but that's a great way to prevent children from growing up with such toxic beliefs.
ReplyDelete