We're Missing the Mark on Mass Shootings: The Same Will Be True in the Madison, Wisconsin Case

Whenever a school shooting occurs, or any mass shooting event for that matter, it is always a terrible tragedy. There is always something that gets missed before it happens. By the parents. By the administrators. By our politicians. By frankly everyone. In the aftermath we want answers. Unfortunately, the questions we pursue are often not the ones that lead us to the solutions we need.

For instance, President Joe Biden wasted no time to seize the opportunity to advocate once again for stricter gun control laws. One has to question the relevance considering the shooter in this case that happened in Madison, Wisconsin was a 15-year old girl who, by current law, cannot even legally obtain a firearm.

What law would have prevented her from getting access to a gun?

And of course, it's likely that calls for tighter regulations will intensify in the coming weeks following this tragic event that left three people dead, including the shooter, and many more injured. To me, that is as much a part of the tragedy as the event itself.

As controversial as it may be to say this, and this is something I have been saying for a long time, guns are not the issue, and if we ever want real solutions, we need to set the guns aside in order to get to the bottom of it.

Lack of religion isn't the issue either, as this Wisconsin school shooting clearly suggests. It happened at a private Christian school, and one would presume not only were the parents religious, at least the shooter was exposed to a religious upbringing.

Of course, the details are quite slim here. The shooter took her own life and so she can't tell us what motivated her to do the shooting which left one teacher and a fellow student dead. But one would presume that there was likely some bullying going on.

What it comes down to most of the time for me is the mental health issue coupled with what I see as the rampant misdiagnosis of fake illnesses doctors can prescribe dugs for. Kids today are more medicated than ever for all sorts of things like learning disabilities to hyperactivity and anxiety.

In other words, everything is a disease now that must be treated with some sort of drug. And who knows what the real effects of these drugs are considering kids are still in their developing stages of life. Whatever they put in their bodies determines how they grow and what they grow into, and while I am no medical professional, I think that thought stands to reason.

Are guns an issue? Sure. I think we can all agree that guns make it easier to carry out these acts. But to say they are the problem is too easy. And the more we focus on that, the less likely we will be able to get at the root and have any impact on stopping these things from happening.

When I say people are missing things before these things happen, what I am referring to are the signs. Because I am sure there are always signs. The parents miss them. The administrators and teachers miss them. Everyone misses them and then when something does happen the only thing we focus on are the guns that do the consequential damage of what we missed in the end.

Was this girl on medications for anything? We don't know. Was she bullied? We don't know. Even still, at least in the case of bullying, how did we get to where we are now where the final decision is to kill people? Bullying has been occurring since the beginning of time, but while shootings are a regular occurrence these days, it's still a relatively new thing.

You can argue that's because access to guns is easier. But is it really? As I said before, for decades we have enacted more laws than ever to make it harder to obtain guns. Sure, it is still easy for the most part. But the point is that we have more laws on the books than ever and equally, we have more shootings than ever.

So, the question becomes, if the stricter laws haven't prevented or slowed these shootings down, but rather, since new laws were enacted shootings actually increased, what are we missing not only before a shooting event occurs, but what are we missing in finding the solutions to them?

It's yet another tragic event that will only go down as that. Something we can reflect on. Something we can point to when we discuss the need for more control over powerful weapons. But what it will accomplish in terms of getting down to what causes these things?

It will accomplish nothing at all because we will continue to miss the point. Meanwhile, the next shooter is simply waiting their turn.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

 

Mass Shootings Unaffected By Gun Control Laws

I am as tired as anyone should be over the string of mass shootings which have taken place over the years. The latest rampage at the Planned Parenthood facility notwithstanding. But what I am more tired of is of the discussions that occur following these heinous acts.

Gun control.

We have to keep one very important fact in mind as we try to figure out what we do to prevent or try to stop the carnage and bloodshed. Controlling guns will not do anything to solve the problem. In fact, it could actually hinder the effort.

Let's be very clear what gun control is about. It is not about protecting normal people from crazed maniacs. It is about controlling the law abiding public and making it more difficult for them to legally obtain and carry firearms which could potentially effectively neutralize a threat posed by any crazed maniac who comes into a building with evil intent.

Granted, there are some instances where someone is able to legally obtain a gun who ultimately turns around and uses it in a crime. You can't predict when a normal person is going to snap. But the bulk of these acts are conducted by people who have their guns through other means—the black market for example.

What are two "solutions" that I think we have empirical data to prove are ineffective? Gun control and so called gun free zones. In nearly every instance of these heinous acts the establishments were gun free zones. All a gun free zone means is that the zone is free of guns in the hands of responsible, law abiding citizens. It does not mean that a bad guy will stop at the door and go on his merry way to conduct his mayhem elsewhere.

In states and municipalities where we have the most stringent gun control laws we also have data to show that those are areas where gun violence is the worst. Chicago being a leading example. Same is true of Washington D.C. and Detroit. Gun control has only worsened the violence and increased the body count.

Gun control laws are to the mass murderer what relaxed IRS laws and regulations are to the tax cheat. A virtual payday. An opportunity to conduct their deed with no one to stop them.

In any one of these mass shootings had their been someone with a concealed carry to stop them, while it would not have prevented the murder of some, it could have been effective in neutralizing the threat that more people might be killed in the event. In every single one of these cases while people are ducking under desks, locking doors, and trying to avoid sprays of bullets, what are they waiting for?

Guns. Lots of guns.

I ask one simple question. Would you rather wait for the police to make their way inside, locate the threat, and take that threat out? Or would you prefer that someone under the desk beside you who has a gun, who knows where that threat is, is able to stop the threat right there and then?

Until we realize what we need to be examining in these cases we will get nowhere with the discussion, and frankly we'll get nowhere with solving the problem. The president has called these acts "routine." I agree with him. It seems to be getting that way. But what is also routine is our constant return to the discussion of gun control laws which are far removed from why these things occur, and why these things are not stopped sooner when they happen.

TV talking head Bill O'Reilly has suggested tougher gun crime laws, and even while that won't stop all gun crime from happening, it could potentially get more guns off the streets that would otherwise wind up in the hands of bad people. Any crime involving a firearm, including armed robbery, would demand a mandatory 10-year sentence in a Federal prison. In addition, in these cases I say confiscate and destroy the firearm—or perhaps return it to its legal owner if you can match it up.

But more than that, I say let's get away from this touchy-feely gun free zone that helps no one to be safer, and let's allow anyone with a concealed carry permit to carry anywhere, anytime. In the grander scheme of things these are random and rare events. But they happen often enough that I'd feel safer knowing a good guy with a gun beside me can stop a bad guy with a gun in front of me.

After the Navy yard shooting, more talk of gun control of course

Of course all of the usual suspects are turning up in droves touting more gun control laws in the aftermath of the latest Navy yard shooting in Washington, D.C. How many times can it be stressed that gun control laws cannot stop these types of events from happening? Whether or not there are laws controlling who gets guns and who does not, those who are seeking guns will find their way to them, and gun control laws only target responsible gun owners.

Take a quick look at Chicago. If ever there was an example of the Wild West that so often gets brought up when anyone talks about concealed carry, for example, there it is. Chicago is among one of the municipalities with very strict gun control laws. Incidentally, so is Washington, D.C. Gun control laws would not stop the black market for guns. In fact, it may even fuel it.

Had more people been armed at the Navy yard I think one thing is clear. There would be less dead, and the gunman likely would have been shot and killed much sooner. If more people had guns they would have a choice other than to run and be shot at. And what about some of those witnesses who said they could see the shooter shooting from a window? If any one of those witnesses had a gun, not only could they have made note that the shooter was there shooting at people. They could have fired a shot at the window and maybe taken the gunman down.

It is fine to wait for the police to arrive and assess the situation. But while this is happening precious time is wasting away, and people are left for dead. Perhaps if the situation were different, and one of these witnesses had a gun the question from the police would not have to be, "Where's the shooter?" but instead could ask, "Where's the shooter's body?"