Gun legislation is badly needed and widely wanted. Only the USA has an inability to see this, rendering it outside the set of civilised countries (not that the others are actually ‘civilised’ in general, but at least on this point they qualify).
But the other question rarely - if ever - asked on any occasion when such a mass-shooting happens is this: Is it only the USA that seems to have a small but persistent population of (largely) white males intent on mass-murder? Is there some cultural, or societal difference, or some cause of a specific cultural outlook that is unique to the USA? It seems that this may be the case, or if it is not, then we need to study non-USA citizens to see if the same cultural outlook is also prevalent elsewhere and how it is subsumed or at least manifests itself less harmfully elsewhere.
There was a study a few years ago that explained why it is that many Americans vote Republican, despite the fact that Republican policies harm them. It had to with a phenomenon that people couldn’t believe that the politician actually believed in the positions they took. So, researchers asked them “Do you understand that your representative voted against <this perfectly reasonable thing that would have helped you>?” and people couldn’t believe it.
Wish I could find that article. It was stunning, and a real eye-opener in terms of trying to help people understand why they shouldn’t vote Republican.
It’s such a small sample size of non-white mass shooters that it’s definitely not statistically significant, but I was somewhat surprised that they took in the DC snipers alive. Sure, they were caught while sleeping in their car but since when has that stopped the cops from using lethal force?
Here in Canada, we have a few. My arm-chair-non-analaysis says it tends to occur when our mode is more “American” in nature. Thinking of the tragic rampage of a suspected RCMP informer who was given far too much latitude in his police fetish which allowed him to create and keep a duplicate police cruiser and uniform which in turn allowed his murder spree to start with victims mistaking the attacker with someone who would help. (the RCMP & Govt have stonewalled on investigations on this)
On the other hand the possible ‘proof’ that this is not the case may lie in a thought experiment: If guns were as readily available in such huge numbers and accepted as such by society at large in places like the UK, Germany or France, would we also see mass-killing sprees at the same rate of incidence?
Sadly, quite possibly yes.
ETA we had just one in the UK and it was enough to immediately get legislation enacted to even further restrict gun ownership even in the face of a small howl of protest from an incredibly small group of sport shooters.
In response to this debate, two new Firearms Acts were passed which outlawed the private ownership of most handguns within the United Kingdom.[1]
I’m sure they’re present in most Western countries. The USA is the only one that actively enables and fosters them as a matter of both law and culture.
Actual mental illness is an issue of specific cases in America, such as the Sandy Hook killer who got easy access to weapons despite a diagnosis. American culture is as happy to make firearms easy to attain for anyone as it is averse to giving its citizens proper support in addressing mental illness.
The answer to this stupid statement needs to be, every single time, “OK, thanks. Could you tell us what that day would be, so we can follow up? When would an appropriate time be to discuss gun laws, in your mind?”
I dont know about that. As a USian, I found Moore’s thesis in Bowling for Columbine convincing. Canada has a lot of guns too, but a toxic brew of ideological strands in the U.S. that contribute to a certain form of “freedom”-loving gun idolatry make mass shootings much more likely.
The law could be changed (hypothetically) but what is it about the culture of the US that fosters this? Is it JUST the gun laws? Or is there more to it?
ETA @milliefink may have just tried to answer that, exactly as I was typing it.
American culture glorifies the "rugged individualist’, which also ties into the Libertarian dysfunction that blocks improvements like single-payer universal health insurance. It also grounds the culture in toxic masculinity and white supremacy*.
The bounty hunter and the vigilante and the Wild West gunslinger and the survivalist freedom fighter are major American cultural archetypes that bring out a lot of white American males’ inner 11-year-old boy shouting “pew-pew, I’m the hero!” while waving around a weapon from their extensive “armory” (a lot of these guys are also obsessive collectors, drooling over every new acquisition to the exclusion of personal relationships).
Of course, most of these pathetic dweebs would wet themselves if faced with a real threat (so much for the “good guy with a gun”), but they do plenty of damage and help real killers just by sucking the air out of and de-railing any serious discussion of gun control measures in the U.S.
[* this last aspect will, I’m afraid, be the major cultural driver of mass shootings in the West outside the U.S. Right-wing populist Identitarianism is present in most of those countries. I hope existing gun control laws in those countries hold.]
Or just a little too white, in contrast to the recent Atlanta shootings.
No email addresses but a nice ‘email’ form. I just sent this to the President:
Today your organisation issued a public statement which included the text:
“There will be a time for the debate on gun laws. There will be a time for the discussion on motives. There will be a time for a conversation on how this could have been prevented. But today is not the time.”
Please will you tell me when is the time for this conversation and exactly how you plan to address that conversation?
EVERY SINGLE TIME there is a mass shooting one pro-gun organisation or another says “now is not the time…”
WHEN WILL THE TIME BE? Could we schedule a call for a week on Friday, perhaps?
I’m thinking of repeating it and pasting the text into the form with the name of the relevant officer changed in each case. See here - the ‘send to’ field has plenty of options. https://www.cssa.org/content.aspx?page_id=4&club_id=243984
Except by then there’s likely to be/have been another mass shooting. That’s what’s so brilliant about that response. If after a mass shooting is not the time to discuss gun laws, and there’s a mass shooting every few days . . .
