Entering the Gun Control Debate

On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza marched into the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut after killing his mother Nancy. Twenty students and six adults were shot dead that morning with three assault weapons that Adam had stolen from his mother’s home.  The death of so many innocent children on that fateful morning has brought the gun control debate to the forefront of Washington politics.

On Monday, February 4, 2013, President Obama traveled to Minneapolis and outlined his campaign to pass gun-control legislation. First and foremost, the president is after achieving universal background checks. His more ambitious goals include his insistence to place a ban on a long list of assault weapons including the one that was used in the shootings. In his address, Obama sought to respond directly to the demands of the all-powerful National Rifle Association, which seeks to protect the second amendment rights of all Americans. He even went so far as to criticize the gun lobby as unrepresentative of gun owners. As he has done with other controversial legislation in his first term, the president is using the power of social media and his influence on the American people to pressure their members of congress to act immediately in favor of his agenda.

As a country, we mourn the loss of the victims of such senseless deaths at the hands of deranged and deeply disturbed individuals. Any rational person would agree that there is a need to address the increase of gun violence in the United States. The point of contention now is to figure out how we address the causes and potential solutions to such violence. Thus far, the ideas that have been floating around (increased gun control legislation, armed guards in schools, etc.) fail to address the root of the problem: a culture of violence. After all, there is no research to suggest that an increase in gun control laws will lead to a decrease in gun violence. To the contrary, there are statistics suggesting that stricter gun control laws leave law abiding citizens without firearms and enable criminals to be more reckless with their illegally obtained weaponry.

I contend that the root of the problem is cultural. Societal norms no longer restrain extreme levels of violence in the same manner that it once did. Song lyrics, video games, television shows and movies are just some examples of how societal norms have shifted drastically in a direction that indirectly accepts violence as a social standard. Certainly, I enjoyed my fair share of Grand Theft Auto (a video game where players can steal cars and violently rape and kill prostitutes) or Call of Duty at a very young age, whereas my parent’s generation played Tetris and PacMan as their form of video game fun. Perhaps it’s the failure of the nuclear family that has led to instability in childhood and caused an increasing number of teens to turn to gangs for acceptance. Maybe it’s the rapid decline in faith more broadly that has removed traditional values and principles from American youth. I reckon that it is a combination of these social changes and many others that have led to a more violent society and only through a combination of social changes promoting the opposite ideals will lead to a substantial decrease in violence. The point I’m trying to make here is that I do not believe this is an issue we can legislate our way out of through Washington politics. The solution needs to start at home, continue in school (reforming education) and after school extracurricular programs and confirmed through other activities and institutions. We need to return to a society that condemns violence, not one that tolerates it and it is my belief that the solution begins well beyond the confines of Washington D.C.