Gun violence: It’s a health crisis. Treat it that way.


By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings


This has been a tough post to write.  Not because there is nothing
to say, but because there is so much to say, it's been difficult to
keep it down to a readable length.  However, since there have been more
than 5000 gun deaths since the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and nothing has been done

the wake of December's mass shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School in
Newtown, Connecticut, there were a number of ideas floated to stem the
epidemic of gun violence sweeping the country – reinstituting the
assault weapons ban, closing the gun show loophole in background check
laws, and banning ammunition magazines/ammo clips that are larger than a
certain size, among many others – all of which have been strenuously
opposed by the gun industry's lobbying group, the NRA, and most of which
won't become law.

Witness Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and 44 of his colleagues banding together to block a proposal to close the "gun show loophole" in the federal law requiring background checks for firearms purchases.

though 90% of Americans, across all demographics – Ds, Rs, gun owners,
liberals, conservatives, whatever – supported the common-sense move, 45%
of US Senators were cravenly swayed by the NRA's campaign

In addition, in states where the NRA's
tools hold sway over the political structure, they've actually passed
laws to put more guns on the streets of America.

Witness Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signing HB2455 into law.

requires municipalities and counties, with a few very specific
exceptions, to sell any firearms that come into their possession.  The
bill is targeted at gun "buyback" programs, where gun owners turn in
weapons, usually for a small financial compensation, and then the local
or county police agencies have the weapons destroyed.

offended the tender sensibilities of the gun industry, their lobbyists
in the NRA, and their lackeys in the Arizona so much that they passed a
law to override the wishes of gun owners and to usurp local control.

proposals that have been offered up in an effort to reduce the number
of gun deaths will help, but all have the same underlying flaw that
would ultimately limit their effectiveness, if any of them are ever
enacted –


None of them seek to address the
underlying causes of the epidemic of gun violence that's sweeping the
country – a societal affinity for using violence as the first, not last,
resort for resolution of conflict.


Nor do they address the "guns as toys" mentality that suffuses the gun subculture in America.


easy access to firearms is a significant contributing factor in the
torrent of violence, a bigger factor may be the attitude that firearms
are toys that can be used or handled in any way without the user bearing
any responsibility for the results of their handling or use of the

That can, and should be, addressed in a way that doesn't infringe on anyone's "rights".

Even if the gun fetishists (who, it should be noted, are not part of the group of *responsible* gun owners, who make up the majority of gun owners) don't like it, and they sure as hell won't.

the people who are leading the efforts to reduce the number of gun
deaths should take a page from the way that a previous behavioral health
crisis was address.

That previous crisis?  Drunk driving.

the early 1980s, when the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration started tracking the numbers, more than 21,000 people per
year died as a result of alcohol-related motor vehicle accidents.

By 2011, that number had dropped to a little less than 10,000.


Why did that happen?

large part due to a concerted effort, started in the early 1980s, to
reduce both drinking and driving and the social acceptability of
drinking and driving.

That effort included raising the legal drinking age (at the time, most states set that age at 18) to 21, changing the culture of enforcement (bars that
served people until they were so intoxicated that they could no longer
drive safely would lose their license and be subject to lawsuits, and
police officers who let drunk drivers go with a warning would be held
financially liable when one of those drivers would later get into an
accident after being released
) and increasing the penalties for those convicted of driving while under the influence (license
suspensions became almost mandatory, as did jail sentences and hefty
fines.  And that was even in cases where there were no injuries or
property damage

In short, the problem was addressed by addressing irresponsible behavior.

Drinking alcoholic beverages wasn't outlawed (they tried that with Prohibition.  It didn't work.  In fact, it failed miserably.).

Driving a motor vehicle wasn't outlawed (good luck with that one, not that anyone I know of is crazy enough to even suggest that, much less try to implement it).

and driving, on the other hand, while already against the law, was no
longer winked at.  Because of the death toll that they inflict upon
society, drunk drivers are now treated like the danger to society that
they are.

To be sure, deaths due to intoxicated drivers
haven't been reduced to zero, and won't be, but a huge dent has been
made in the problem.

A similar approach may be the most effective way to address the epidemic of gun violence in the United States.

banning guns, and no one with any credibility is pushing that as a
solution, wouldn't "solve" the problem, any more than banning alcohol
during Prohibition stopped all production and consumption of alcoholic
beverages (or any more than the so-called "War on Drugs" has done
anything to reduce the availability or use of narcotics, but that's a
topic for another, very long, post

However, there
are a few approaches that can be taken that will address anti-social
behavior without diminishing civil rights.  Though the gun industry,
NRA, and gun fetishists will scream otherwise.

Offered, but not in any order of importance –

Roll back the legal shields created for gun manufacturers. If they
start having to pay for their actions to make it easier for people who
shouldn't be allowed near firearms to gain access to them, perhaps the
industry will think twice about mass manufacture and mass marketing of
handheld weapons of mass destruction such as the Bushmaster rifle and
large capacity magazines.

2. Place as much emphasis on
the *responsibility* that goes with possessing firearms as the NRA
places on the "right" to possess them in the first place.  As with the
example of drunk driving, intent to harm others wouldn't be relevant –
everything from accidental discharge of a firearm with no harm to humans
or property thru accidentally causing the death of another human should
result in prison time.  Leaving a firearm in position, and condition,
where it can be found and fired by children, should also result in
prison time.  Incidents where such a firearm is actually fired would
result in more prison time, and incidents where someone is actually
harmed would result in even more prison time.

3. Quit
messing around and expand background check requirements to cover all
sales of firearms, not just those involving licensed dealers.

will argue that it is unfair to criminally and civilly punish people
and businesses for accidents or for acts made in "good faith".

would argue back that even if it is, it's less unfair than sacrificing
the lives of thousands of innocent men, women, and children every year
upon gun fetishists' (and profiteers') altar of fear of civil society.