On September 1, 2019 another mass shooting occurred in Odessa, Texas. In another iteration of mass violence in America, a 36-year-old man attacked two West Texas towns with an assault rifle. In the aftermath, the Odessa Police Department reported 22 injuries, including 7 deaths. Three police officers were involved as well as a 17-month-old toddler. This shooting follows another recent one that happened only a few weeks ago in El Paso, Texas. Officials report that the gunman, who had been fired from his trucking job the morning of the attack, hijacked a United States Postal Van, killing the driver and opening fire as he drove. The brutality eventually stopped in a parking lot where police officers terminated the attacker. According to officials, while the gunman was fired from his job that morning, his motive for the violent action is still unclear.
This mass shooting has followed several other ones in recent times. It is clear that America is going through a huge epidemic and action needs to be taken immediately. Currently, the political gridlock in Congress has prevented any gun legislation from being passed, and as a result, these mass shootings keep transpiring. Gun violence has become a serious issue in our country; at what point do we say enough is enough and pass the necessary legislation that will prevent these acts of mass violence from occurring again? As the leading nation in the world, we need to set a better example for developing countries, currently we are displaying ourselves as a country of hate rather than one of peace. It is critical that we portray our country as the peaceful and democratic nation it was founded to be. We need to foster a less perilous environment for the generations to come.
Discussion Questions:
- With such political divide today, how can we work to pass legislation that will prevent more mass shootings like this occurring?
- What factors do you think, that are prevalent in society today, are driving these attackers to commit acts of mass violence?
- Do you think an outright ban on private weapons is the best solution to this problem, or do you believe this will be an infringement on citizens’ 2nd amendment right?
Mass shootings occur because the wrong people are able to get their hands on a weapon that can take one's life with one pull of the trigger. I believe that there is legislation that will be able t prevent more mass shootings in the future, but such legislation may be nearly impossible to pass without impeding on the right's of the people. It all goes back to the question: How do we balance security and freedom? I believe that gun violence is a huge issue in our society today, and while there is talk about taking action, there is not much action actually being taken. In my opinion, I believe acts of mass violence is due to the fact that dangerous people are able to get their hands on a gun. This issue is complicated because you never know if the aggressor has always been the way they were when purchasing a gun, or if something in life triggered them to act a certain way and a gun was already in their possession. There are so many "what if" scenarios with this issue which makes it hard to take action. Of course I believe a ban on would best solve this problem' however, that is not constitutional. Whatever legislation is passed in the future, I hope it keeps in mind the safety of the citizens along with their rights.
ReplyDeleteI think legislation that appeases both parties would be pretty difficult; it's not so much about the general rights of the people, but rather how some people don't want to change what they already own. Pushback from gun owners or large businesses is pretty considerable, and slows down any sort of action that may be taken against gun ownership. As for what the attackers are driven by, I think a part of it is from how society and current generations treat people who may be different from the norm. Things happen, anger builds up, and since nobody helps and nothing feels good or healthy, violent outlets are chosen instead. I can't say for sure what people are thinking when they choose to shoot up a school, since I, well, haven't, but I don't think the way we treat convicts or anyone who's just down on their luck is helping the issue at all. Banning private weapons might not do anything, but I believe that a ban on lethal weapons should be passed for public safety reasons.
ReplyDeleteMass shootings occur because of hate and or just pure disrespect for people in society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cindy about how passing legislation that will take steps to preventing mass shootings will be very difficult and unless the public outcry about it is near unanimous, near impossible unless there is a majority of representative in Congress who support and can pass such legislation. Other nations, like Japan, have much stricter gun-related regulations and have much less gun violence so we know such restrictions work; however, I believe in order for such a ban to pass that either the Supreme Court will have to rule with a perspective that supports a ban or for an amendment that will repeal or modify the second amendment. Given our current conservative-leaning Supreme Court, and the vehement opposition to gun control laws from lobby groups, I don’t believe that either will happen.
ReplyDeleteI think the cause of why mass shootings occur as more complex than the single reasons everyone has proposed. For instance, the shooter at El Paso was motivated by racial hate (https://www.apnews.com/456c0154218a4d378e2fb36cd40b709d) while in some cases of school shootings it was caused by men feeling that they can take their anger out on others (with guns).
While I hope legislation that will prevent gun violence will be passed in the (hopefully) near future, I have little faith that it will happen.
I agree with what Audrey said about needing a unanimous public outcry being nearly impossible. A lot of people who own guns believe that if the government implement stricter gun laws, they are imposing on their natural rights. As a result, we have people basing their votes solely on whether or not the new representative will allow them to keep their guns, which makes it even more impossible to get new legislation passed. I think gun violence is still prevalent in today’s society because some people grow up learning to hate those who are different than them and believe that others don’t deserve the same treatment. I also believe it stems from some psychological issues, which has been cited as a cause for a lot of school shootings. I’m not sure an outright ban on guns would be a solution, because I feel that people will keep guns regardless. I agree with Cindy’s stance on banning lethal weapons, but I think a ban on all guns would be impossible to pass and does infringe on citizen’s 2nd amendment right.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Remy in her comment. But to answer your first question, I believe that like what was commented above, that it is near impossible to have a consensus about gun laws. As we are learning in class, the Constitution is very conservative friendly it would be pretty much impossible to pass anything gun related. The typical gun control argument has already been stated, but I personally believe that if we just keep punching a brick wall, nothing will happen atleast for the time being. It will be a very difficult task, and it's probably already being done but to concentrate on other aspects not concerning gun laws to help the United States, I feel would be very beneficial to our community, or atleast more than just arguing. I hope this major issue would be suppressed in the near future.
ReplyDeleteI think there are two main concerns regarding this entire issue. One, that our modern society has basically grown to encourage fissures between different groups, with increased radicalization and personal opinions. Two, that certain weapons that are far too extreme for personal protection or hunting are allowed to be purchased. First of all, with the introduction of the internet like-minded groups can come together easier than ever, and this creates a kind of mob mentality that an outsider can have a lot of difficulty breaking into. This basically creates mini echo chambers, where the same ideas bounce around continuously being reinforced by the same people. Eventually, it becomes almost a doctrine, and it is practically impossible to convince them otherwise. Secondly, the particular issue with guns is that anyone can purchase a semi-automatic rifle, without a good reason. Nobody needs a semi-auto to protect themselves or go hunting.
ReplyDeleteI don't think we will reach a consensus on gun laws in the near future. However, to try and pass legislation to prevent more mass shootings will be hard because we are so split on gun regulations. Some people use guns for hunting, which is a big part of their society. Other people in the US don't use them. Those who do own guns will definitely argue against those who want more regulation on guns due to the mass shootings that have been happening recently. I think that the fact that sometimes people aren't inclusive will anger those specific people, and thus wanting revenge from the anger that was built up. To satisfy their anger, they lash out and create mass shootings because at the time they aren't emotionally stable. I do think that an outright ban on private weapons is a good solution because a lot of other nations have less gun violence than we do with a more strict gun regulation. If this does happen, a lot of arguments will say it is against the 2nd amendment, which is the right to bear arms.
ReplyDeleteIn response to your third question, I do believe that an outright ban on guns would be an infringement on citizens' second amendment rights. Additionally, I believe that an outright ban would be impossible to pass knowing the current state of opinions on gun legislation. Instead, I believe that stricter gun laws are necessary to prevent mass shootings in the future, which will be just as hard to legislate. With the rise in the number of mass shootings in the past decade, I believe that the issue of gun laws should be immediately addressed in order to prevent the deaths of more innocent lives.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to question 2, I believe that the current political climate is a extremely polarizing field, leading to more and more people are becoming aware and active with situations in the political community. With this, more people feel validated in committing extreme acts of violence, because people are justifying their actions for them. In other words, both media and the community around people are the things that drive these attacks. I'm not at all saying that media is bad, just that it is a tool that can be used to warp news in a way to antagonize the other side, which, as we learned in Mr. Corti's AP Psychology class recently, completely distorts our entire view on people, believing them to be completely against everything we are for. In regards to the third question, I believe that there is absolutely no reason that assault weapons should be allowed. However, I do not think there should be an outright ban on guns. It is extremely difficult to regulate this, but there should be some kind of restriction, because guns are way too easy to obtain at the moment.
ReplyDeleteThe factors that cause all of these mass shooting always vary. Some shooters might have some sort of mental illness, others might be filled with hate towards other individuals, and some think will make serve a random cause because of it. All we know is that we can't let them keep happening. The cycle is always the same: A mass shooting happens, huge media coverage, "thoughts and prayers", nothing is done, and another shooting occurs. I mean, I'm not saying that prayers are not good, as a Christian myself, I think it's great for people to pray for each other, but more needs to be done during these days. Getting rid of guns is not a possibility because it would be really hard to do so, so, the best option the nation has is making it harder for people to own guns, AKA stricter gun laws. Nations that have done this, Singapore, Brazil, Canada, and China, for example, had little to none mass shootings althroughout their history. I think a solution to this issue won't satisfy both parties, but at least to me, the solution should satisfy the Democratic/Liberal side because they have given great arguments about their reasons to have stricter laws in the nation than the Conservatives/ Republicans have done at protecting guns.
ReplyDeleteArticle used: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/03/22/new-zealand-mosque-shootings-how-12-countries-compare-weapons-ban/3235123002/
I believe that both parties would definitely not agree on how to handle this situation as they each have their own beliefs about gun control. However, I also think that if these situations continue to get out of hand, the general public would push for new legislation and many have experienced the detrimental effects of mass shootings. Until this occurs, there is simply too much political tension to pass a sufficient gun reform law. As for the second question, I believe that most of the attackers seem to have no outlet for their anger and desperation which causes them to lash out in unhealthy ways. Mental illness reforms would go a long way to help those who could be considering a path of violence. I don’t believe an outright ban of private weapons is necessary or feasible; however, I believe stricter legislation for acquiring a gun is needed.
ReplyDeleteGun violence has become a significant topic of debate in these past few years, and by the looks of it, nothing being done has proved the situation to be notably improving. With the political division in the government, I do believe that coming to an agreement on a resolution to this issue will be extremely difficult in that both parties have opposing views and differing beliefs. In regards to the second question, I think that there are many reasons as to why these mass shootings happen. I think that it varies from person to person, but contributing to that could also be that guns are so easily accessible to people of all ages. As a result, more people are able to gain access to these guns and use them for reasons besides those that are considered reasonable -- such as a form of protection. Moving onto the third question, I don’t think that there should be an outright ban on all guns or weapons. In doing so, it would be extremely hard to regulate and enforce this law -- especially since many people living in the US already have privately owned guns in their possession.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the second question, I believe that there are many contributing factors that may provoke attackers to commit acts of mass violence. Poverty could be an attribute to the reasoning behind the attacks. Welfare programs are have been and are currently established in many states nationwide. However, the extent to which these programs are helping the poor vary from state to state. Certain states who are more industrially and economically advanced that have an abundance or a relatively significant amount of success within their state, tend to offer more support to families or individuals who are struggling to maintain a foundational lifestyle. Poorer states that may be rural, offer less help and focus on getting people out of the welfare program, compared to the other more developed states who not only focus on the same goal, but look beyond that and effort to look for potential jobs for the individual. Another factor could simply include mental instability; certain traumatic events that may have occurred in the person's life, which may have included violence, in that they see fit to act out in the same manner. Gun regulation is a significantly controversial topic that I feel the Federal Government endeavors to move away from and not address directly due to the heavy amount of opponents and supporters.
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting that the federal government spends so much money on nation defence in an event of "international terrorism" while the fail to recognize the terrorism that takes place in America by Americans. Mass shootings are something that needs to be brought into the spotlight. Individuals are losing their lives because the government fails to provide structure to such a dangerous market. I personally feel that the NRA should create programs and policy to protect citizens of this country, instead of protecting the industry that kills thousands of citizens. It's unfortunate to realise that many places refuses to amend gun control laws because they believe it is an infringement on the second amendment. I believe that gun possession is unnecessary, but individuals do have the right as long as it is regulated and safe.
ReplyDeleteOne Policy proposal that will enable the government to actually pass legislation that will reduce the amount of mass shootings happening in the USA is called "Democracy Dollars". The idea is to give every american $100 a year to give to candidates, use it or lose it. ~300 million people having the ability to contribute to political campaigns that reflect their values would effectively drown out the influence of mega-donors who prevent gun legislation from passing, like the National Rifle Association for example. The main factor I believe to drive the violent behavior of mass shooters is depression that becomes channeled into anger, but the mental health conversation when it comes to mass shootings is often brought up to distract from policies that would actually prevent people from getting the sort of firearms that can kill hundreds in minutes like an AR-15. Unfortunately . . . I don’t believe it would be viable to ban guns in America considering how many we have. It's too late for that. I believe the best course of action is to create buyback programs, better background checks, and reasonable gun control legislation. This legislation will be much more easy to implement if we wash out the NRA’s money with Democracy Dollars. Policy idea from presidential candidate Andrew Yang.
ReplyDeleteMaking legislation that all the people will agree with is a difficult situation as there are deep partisan divisions. However, if a clear majority of people support a form of legislation, no amount of gridlock or filibustering would be able to prevent that piece from passing. A prevalent factor that drives the problem of mass shootings is that people that should not be allowed to buy guns are having no trouble buying them. This goes back to the lack of legislation about gun control. An outright ban on private weapons would not be supported enough for it to pass in Congress. Though without the sale of commercial guns, the number of mass shootings would most likely decrease, this would violate the second amendment. A more bipartisan bill such as regulating who can buy a gun would be considered by members of each party.
ReplyDeleteDue to deep partisan divisions, it will be hard to make legislation on a controversial topic, to some, that everyone will agree on. As seen from the past, these situations have continued to get out of hand due to the lack of legislation made. I believe that if these situations continue to happen and more people have experienced the detrimental effects of shootings, that the general public may begin to push for new legislation. In response to the third question, I don’t believe that there should be a ban on all guns or weapons in our country. By the US outright banning guns and weapons, it would become very hard to regulate and enforce this law. Moreover, then you must deal with the many Americans who privately own guns, which may be even harder to regulate.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion gun safety needs to be emphasized more than ever at every age level. Education is key to being able to reduce violent encounters in the future. I believe that an outright ban on what are designated “lethal weapons” is not justifiable. It is the user, not the implement that poses the greatest risk to society, end of the day anything can be a weapon in the right hands, a car, a stone, and baseball bat all can be lethal. It is futile nor logical to ban these items; therefore, proper education and mental services must be used in order to obtain a more stable state in society.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, gun safety needs to be emphasized more than ever at every age level. Education is key to being able to reduce violent encounters in the future. I believe that an outright ban of what are designated “lethal weapons” is not justifiable. It is the user, not the implement that poses the greatest risk to society. At the end of the day anything can be a weapon in the right hands, a car, a stone, and baseball bat all can be lethal. It is futile nor logical to ban these items; therefore, proper education and mental services must be used in order to obtain a more stable state in our current society.
Delete