The answer to that question is not easy.
By the way, I make sense of misery, tragedy, and otherwise unfortunate circumstances by analyzing data. So before the attacks begin, consider that this post may be me grieving.
As much as I can’t stand his politics, Ezra Klein has a decent post that was updated today, in light of today’s tragedy. It is called Twelve facts About Guns and Mass Shootings in the United States. I will use it as a jumping off point for what I’m about to write, but it should in no way be considered an end-all and be-all for research on this topic. Like all journalists these days, Klein has an axe to grind, or more likely a semi-automatic firearm.
Gun Ownership in America Has Declined Over the Last 50 Years
Ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan.
America Is Violent, But Much Less So than 30 Years Ago
These are deaths by assault, not only by firearms.
So yes, America is violent and loves guns, but this reality has been waning for more than a generation, yet the most recent generation has seen more gun related mass killing than any generation before it.
Of the 11 deadliest shootings in the US, five have happened from 2007 onward.
That doesn’t include Friday’s shooting in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. The AP put the early reported death toll at 27, which would make it the second-deadliest mass shooting in US history.
While there is ample research showing a correlation between firearm ownership and homicide, one has to be careful when only considering total deaths by firearms as over half of these deaths are due to suicide. In fact, the majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides. And, suicide is twice as prevalent in the U.S. as murder. The gun control lobby would likely gain more traction would it focus on suicide by firearm rather than homicide.
Even though gun ownership in America has been declining, there is new data out from Virginia showing that as gun sales have skyrocketed, gun related violent crime has fallen:
The total number of firearms purchased in Virginia increased 73 percent from 2006 to 2011. When state population increases are factored in, gun purchases per 100,000 Virginians rose 63 percent.
But the total number of gun-related violent crimes fell 24 percent over that period, and when adjusted for population, gun-related offenses dropped more than 27 percent, from 79 crimes per 100,000 in 2006 to 57 crimes in 2011.
With gun ownership and assault decreasing and the majority of firearm deaths being due to suicide, is there an increase in anything that could be related to these types of tragedies? My initial thoughts turned to Hollywood, music, and video games. Strangely, I could not easily find research on this topic. While it is anecdotal, I think most Americans would agree that violence, gun violence, and celebration of gun violence, have been increasing in our movies, our music, and our video games. The lack of research on the relationship between violent movies, music, and video games strikes me as odd.
Oddly enough, Roger Ebert recently sought to distance Hollywood from gun violence:
I’m not sure there is an easy link between movies and gun violence. I think the link is between the violence and the publicity.
His attempt was a failure, since he blamed it on “the publicity” which is itself a product of the mainstream media and Hollywood. Indeed, Ebert was being a good Democrat. Hollywood is, for the most part, comprised entirely of Democrats, as is the entirety of the mainstream media. It should not come as a surprise that Democrats aren’t blaming their own very successful and extremely influential product for its affect on American culture, which may be the increase in mass shootings and gun violence.
What Will Stop the Madness?
While an increase in gun control laws may indeed lower rates of homicide and gun violence, nothing except for an all out ban and confiscation of all guns will stop a future Connecticut Tragedy from happening. Since many Americans believe that owning a firearm is their last and only defense against a tyrannical government, any talk of government confiscation or banning of guns will only increase the overall number of firearms.
Banning and confiscating firearms is unlikely. Strict gun control laws are a possibility but do not prevent mass murder. Firearm ownership and assault are on the decline. Yet the phenomena of mass murder by firearm is increasing catastrophically. So who is to blame?
I am of the mind that the American media is the primary and most influential agent of change in our culture. Hollywood was quick to dismiss that the Aurora Tragedy occurred in a movie theater. Was that because they know that life is imitating art? Indeed, our lives imitating their art is what has driven the explosion of consumerism. Hollywood and the media tell us what to buy, what to be, and what to think. Over the last generation, this message seems to increasingly be one that promotes violence, and like sex, violence sells.
Instead of our institutions of research, our government, and our politicians keeping Hollywood in check, and instead of mass media keeping our government in check, we have developed a parasitic relationship where Hollywood, mass media, our colleges and universities, and the government are all too eager to promote and protect each other.
Or maybe I’m just paranoid and we blame the failure of our mental health system.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015337
Wow…had heard about that but never researched it…
My guess is violent culture. There seems to be a fascination with violence, evidenced by the top 10 IMDB movies. Also high school life is glorified. If you’re not one of the popular kids, you’re a zero, popular kids seem to be able to bully less popular kids easily?
I am from the Netherlands where weed is legal. I went to the USA, and everybody uses weed. It’s crazy, I only know 2 out of 20 people here that use weed. The culture is very weird in the USA. And it has nothing to do with morality or religion, here in the Netherlands nobody is really religious, but we still know not to overuse weed like in the USA.
I agree with violent culture, but I’m not sure why our culture is violent.
I do not believe it is bullying. Many, many people are bullied yet a miniscule amount, we are talking hundredths, if not thousandths of a percent, go on to mass murder because of it.
I realize you needed to write something and I hesitate to even post a reply but,
Massacres go way back to the beginning of the Country.
Groups killed for scalps
Drive-bys over Turf, drugs, Race and even Booze
The days of the crazed gun slinger go way back to Cowboys and Indians.
Oh sure, it all sounds “dated”, but what really changed?
What changed was they weren’t killing children or innocent people in a movie theater. It is purposeless. It is senseless, if any sort of rational lens or filter is used for analysis.
The massacres you reference had a purpose, typically to gain power or control. Not that it makes it better, or right, but at least we can understand the motivation.
These crimes are different.
Power and Control
same beast
The killer gets a thrill or boost to his/her sense of power, finally taking control
It won’t justify the action to a rational thinking person
Superb post. Well done.
Thank you blogfather.
Some questions need to be answered to make more sense of the exact circumstances of this individual event. Was the assault rifle locked up? Did he have access to the key? Did the fact that he had access to it influence his decision to inflict this type of violence? Not everything is a result of statistics. We are human and thus very much random acting beings. The only question that really needs to be answered is.. are there more kids waiting for an opportunity to acquire a weapon capable of inflicting mass casualties to commit their own Columbine?
Throughout this article, 2 things jump out.
1. He was deeply disturbed.
2. He was deeply into video games.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/adam-lanza-20-deeply-disturbed-kid-article-1.1220752
Anyone want to guess which games he loved to play?
Very well said Shed. I appreciate the intellect looking beyond the gun and considering the true influences that lead someone to this tragic level of senseless violence. We are all holding our kids a little closer today as we should everyday.
One problem exposed by the recent mass shootings over the years is that there is no effective way to defend against a person who mentally snaps,also has access to firearms, and decides to go on a shooting rampage.
If the shooter is a loner with a mental disorder, who doesn’t communicate with anyone their intentions, then the attack is a complete suprise.
Public areas with groups of unguarded people are at extreme risk of this type of threat. In the past few shooting massacres the mentally deranged shooters were drawn to unguarded targets.
One extreme way to reduce the frequency of these events is to ban public gun ownership altogether. But obviously that is never going to happen in the USA for a number of reasons.
And even if there was a ban implemented, weapons will still slip through the cracks and be available. Since people would hide those guns away and keep them secret, it’s possible people with mental issues would still have easy access to them.
In the same line, we could also ban the gun violence in movies and video games, as that gives training materials to mentally deranged shooters. But that’s not going to happen, either.
You could make gun-ownership in any home subject to a “community review”, where representatives from law enforcement and the local governmental body would interview the homeowners to determine if there is any risks, mentally or otherwise, in the home where guns should not be allowed. However, privacy advocates would raise huge alarms on such policies.
The only solution that would help reduce these incidents in the near-term is to have armed guards at all closed-in places were unarmed people would gather, like schools and theaters. Yeah, that’s a very expensive proposal, but I think the cost is worth it, as it should make an intelligent but deranged person think twice about their assault planning.
But, what’s to prevent an armed guard from snapping and start killing those he is supposed to protect? At least the armed guard would be under closer scrutinity than a person with a serious mental disorder, who has access to firearms, hidden away in a household.
Well said.
imho, nothing will get done in Congress unless a real terrorist (AlQauida, Taliban, etc) does something real big and nasty on live network TV, with guns and explosives legally purchased (or stolen) at a major corp., or Congress itself, taking out 50-100 congressmen (sadly, even that may not move things along,
Woodshedder, thanks much for your post & for bringing up these issues & statistics to discuss .
I hope we will all expand our minds & not just stay in our narrow political tribes on this issue. It is quite possible that failures of our mental health system, inadequate gun control, violent video games & movies ALL were causes of the current and/or other mass shootings that occurred recently.
Incidentally, I have the highest respect for you, Woodshedder and find most of what you say to be thought provoking. However, I am continually surprised at how far the Right Winger denials of obvious facts go. Fox News is the MOST watched news station. So you can NOT get more mainstream media than Fox News, which is a fact-free Far Right Wing propaganda outlet. So obviously, in point of fact, mainstream media can not possibly be liberal biased.
There is no evidence that main stream media is liberal biased. The other mainstream news stations, besides the most popular one, Fox, are addicted to a false equivalence method of interviewing & reporting. That is, they feel a need to balance Right and Left wing views of the news,as if they are always both equally valid. E.g. they may act as if some politician who believes that women’s bodies can repel rapist’s sperm is just as factual in his opinions as a highly renowned biologist would be.
Frog, thanks for your comments. Glad you found the article thought-provoking.
I would caution you though that your assertions about Fox News, I do not believe are based on facts. Perhaps you can post some data to back up these assertions you have made?
I do not watch Fox News, nor do I watch any news, really.
However, I do read, a lot, and I think of at least several articles I have read recently that I think will disprove what you’ve said about Fox News.
Frog, you keeping saying the other networks aren’t biased. And my eyes and ears keep saying, “no, this guy is wrong.”
“…are there more kids waiting for an opportunity to acquire a weapon capable of inflicting mass casualties to commit their own Columbine?”
That’s too easy – 100% certainty. What I think may be more useful questions are:
1. How do we reduce the probability of that acquisition, and still be compliant to our 2nd Amendment?
2. Given that a percentage of such attempts at acquisition will occur no matter what is implemented, how do we reduce the probability of attack and reduce casualties in those attacks that are carried out?
There are practical steps available on that second point if people would get out from behind their political hysteria and have the courage to act. Clearly that first step is very difficult politically, and as a practical matter. But in the violence prone Middle East, having some well trained armed personnel at schools and other vulnerable areas (malls, etc.) has proven to work on that second point. Address mental health, cultural, and other issues? Sure. But stop the bleeding first. Consider it please, this is a life-and-death matter.
A school security expert was out today saying that even armed security likely wouldn’t have stopped this kid.
Perhaps, but over several similar incidents, certainly some would be delayed or stopped at some point before they finish on their own. Others might be deterred. Is enhanced security at schools worth the trouble? I’m not convinced this is the ultimate solution, but I’m also hearing endorsements for it from law enforcement and others. My girlfriend teaches K, and I worry. I’m going to do further research, and will consider pursuing this locally. Thanks Wood.
I agree, a committed shooter can walk in, pop the guard and go about his business. Guard might get lucky but maybe not. One can imagine many scenarios where a single guard or even multiple guards, wouldn’t be able to stop a crazed shooter at any public location, school, mall, public gathering.
Check out SB59 in Michigan. They just created an “enhanced CPL” which gives the holder the ability to exempt from most gun restrictions in otherwise designated “pistol free zones.”
Excellent post. No easy answers here, or solutions, but to think Hollywood’s glorification of violence and general depravity doesn’t play some part in our culture’s violent tendencies, is being ignorant.
We can’t stop these acts, but we can slow them down. I just don’t get the need to own assault rifles or large clips. I don’t get why anyone should be able to buy bullet-proof vests. I don’t get why someone should be able to buy ammunition that that go through said vests. The 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms – but I think we also have to take into consideration the right to not be shot and killed while in kindergarten.
I don’t want to ban guns – but what I would like to see is a thoughtful set of restrictions instead of just stonewalling. The NRA could lead on this issue instead of throwing up a wall and yelling slippery slope. And there are any number of things that could be tried.
We also need to figure out how to handle the privacy issues related to mental health. States are supposed to update federal databases with information on people with mental health issues to prevent them from buying guns, but states are generally not providing this information because of questions about the privacy of such data. That’s gotta get worked out. That’s what happened in Virginia Tech, for example.
Two issues that are not an issue with what happened in CT:
1. We could also really use a uniform code around gun laws – it is far too easy, right now, to go down to South Carolina (where my brother lives), buy a bunch of guns and then bring them to another state.
2. End the gun show loophole – if people want to buy weapons, there should be one process, not a very easy workaround.
Good post Wood, even if we disagree about the issue.