In the wake of the latest shooting, you’ve probably seen someone opine (or done so yourself) that any preventative measure will be ineffective, because Evil.
Some have. But better to say that “EVIL” is (a) treatable, not immutable, and (b) the disease behind the symptom (gun violence).
Stop it. Stop it right now. No matter what you believe about the nature of Evil, using it in this way is a deflection. It’s lazy.
Depends on how you define it. See above. If you define the term in its religious/spiritual sense, where “evil will always be with us”, then yes, it can very well be a cop-out, a deflection, or lazy. However, if you define the term as the behavior of somebody who is diagnosably ill, it’s not a cop out at all.
A selfish cop-out. It’s easier to blame the devil (or whatever the emblem of your preferred scapegoat is) than it is to create real change in our country by reforming our gun laws, a measure which has proven effective in all other developed nations.
Let’s cut to the chase here, because I sense that the cop-out is on you.
Do you believe that the ONLY solution to mass killing violence is gun control? That ALL we must do to address that problem is control guns? If so, the lazy is you.
Here’s reality: Sans a Constitutional Amendment to ban firearms, the type of which exists in all the nations that your “proven effective” link references above, none of the remedies that are considered Constitutionally possible would likely result in a decrease in our gun related violence, which on a per capita basis and limiting the discussion to mass killings, is not as bad as it is in a lot of places that have total or near total bans:
No competent statistician would ever use gross numbers which are dependent on population size to compare anything nation to nation. The counterintuitive (to be sure) message here is that our liberal gun laws do not seem to make us a more dangerous place, as far as mass killings are concerned.
That all said, mass killings are, of course, unacceptable in a civilized society, so it is incumbent on all of us to think outside the box and not just give in to a kneejerk reaction (gun grabbing) which may very well have no effect at all on the problem, considering (A) the US is swimming in firearms, and (B) for the vast majority of these mass killings, the gun control measures that have been suggested would have no effect at all.
So, frustratingly, what can be done that we KNOW would work?
Well, basic security comes to mind. Compare your average school (talking about it’s physical layout, here) to your average bank. The bank is a hardened rectangle with one way in and one way out, with minimal windows; the school is a sprawling building with “wings” that radiate out from a center, with as much light as can be architected in, and entrances/exits all over the place.
Bottom line: A bank can be easily secured. A school, on the other hand, is a security professional’s nightmare.
Another thought? In our society, we use armed guards to protect banks, corporate headquarters, politicians, and celebrities. However, when it comes to schools, it seems that if they have any armed guards at all, they often have less training than the regular police, and are simply not enough of them to secure the aforementioned security nightmare.
Considering the above, how can anyone NOT come to the conclusion that we value money, our economy, our politicians, and our actors more than we do our children? Hm? Don’t you put your best security on your most valuable asset? Who guards a diamond with one person, but puts a dozen guards on a piece of granite?
We’re responsible for letting children get gunned down in school.
No, “we” are not. “We” are looking for a solution that can reasonably be assured of success, considering the realities we have on the ground.
I can already hear the familiar refrain saying that if it’s not guns, they’ll find another way! Except that there is no way to take lives as quickly, effortlessly, and thoughtlessly as with a gun.
So, basically, you don’t care if you get the best solution possible, as long as you can limit the body count?
One more thing: While I wholeheartedly support a commitment to improving mental health care, that is not what is driving the epidemic of gun violence.
Well, it’s certainly not the gun which is driving it. A gun is an inanimate object that doesn't bother anyone, until it gets in the hands of the wrong person.