Guns

On the news this morning, the CEO of Cinemark called the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, an isolated incident.
Isolated? The mayor of Toronto said the same thing just last month when a gunman shot several people in a mall. The same was said last year in Arizona after Congresswoman Giffords and others were shot in front of a Safeway in Tucson.
In fact, Colombine and every incident since then has been called “isolated.”
On top of that, at every mass shooting, area residents have said they never expected it to happen “here.” Well, clearly, here is exactly where it happens.
But why? How is it friends, relatives, and neighbors don’t see that slow burn that leads up to such a shooting?
Of course there are copycats. But what drives the desire to cause such mayhem and tragedy? I think it comes down to two things.
First, there is a level of violence in our media today that is unprecedented. Violence is on the news every night. Many of the new release movies have strong levels of violence. And of course there are video games.
Now, the majority of people who see the news, go to a movie, or play a video game are probably not likely to become a mass murderer. But some are.
Combine the violence in the media with the hate spewed on some radio and TV talk shows, and we have a heady mix for someone on the edge. I wonder what presets the police will find on the car radio James Holmes drove to the theater in Aurora. And if they could get to his computer, I’d bet they’d find he explored many of the sites Jared Loughner, the shooter in Tucson last year, had been searching.
Some would say we need to monitor people’s web activity. I surely won’t go there though I do understand the sentiment. But surely someone noticed a change in behavior, a threat, some kind of motive.
Are we all our brothers’ keepers? In a sense, we are. We need to notice when someone’s behavior changes, when the mood darkens. And I think it is way past time for Hollywood and video game designers to consider their culpability in these acts of violence.
Second, of course, are the weapons themselves and the organizations that champion them. I am not at all anti-gun. However, are we making our country safer by allowing them to get so easily into almost anyone’s hands?
To drive a car – a deadly weapon in some senses – we have to study, practice and receive a license. To buy and use a deadly weapon, we have only to drop by a store or gun show, or simply click the button on the internet.
Why is there not a master list of who is buying what kinds of weapons? Loughner was known to be unstable, so if his name had popped up on a list indicating he’d tried to purchase an assault weapon, just maybe his murderous spree could have been prevented.
I know the constitution gives us the right to own guns (and I own one), but it doesn’t say that gun purchasers shouldn’t be background checked. It also doesn’t say anything about weapons designed solely for assault. We can’t (legally) to buy rocket launchers and nuclear bombs – other weapons of mass destruction – so why assault rifles?
The weapon James Holmes used in Aurora was banned in 1994. Largely in thanks to the NRA and gun lobby, the ban expired in 2004.
One day, at an NRA convention, some member on the edge could walk happily into the convention, one of many carrying an assault weapon. Smiling. He could then open up and shoot and kill fifty or sixty people.
And because the room would be full of righteous second-amendment-believing gun-toting good Americans, three quarters of the room would stand up and shoot back at this madman. And then how many would die.
Only then might the membership change their stance.