I grew up in Central Missouri in the 1960s and 1970s. People drove around our town with guns mounted in the back of their pickups -- mostly twenty-gauge shotguns and .22s. I had friends who hunted regularly. Duck season was big in our neck of the woods. So was driving around with a couple weapons for show. The idea of guns was part of life for us back then. Those were the days of the Vietnam War, too. Weapons, the potential for violent threat at any moment, and self-protection were an odd cultural focus that ran under the grain of everything else.
We were Quakers, though -- my family. We were pacifists. I was also the son of social scientists. My parents knew the literature and the research. Guns make people a bit more edgy than they would be otherwise. Guns are more than just dangerous -- they contribute to the illogic of violence and the idea that threat is a legitimate reaction to danger. There's a lot of very good academic research on this topic going back decades. The media should report on this research more so that we all know the issues.
I don't like violence of any kind. I never even spanked my sons when they were growing up (although my Quaker parents spanked me). And I find it utterly beyond reason that any parent would buy their child a gun for any purpose at all -- including hunting.
A bit over the top? Not for me. My best friend committed suicide on his 19th birthday with a hunting rifle his father had given him as a gift that day. They had an argument because my friend wanted to change majors and become an art historian. His father wanted him to continue on the path to becoming a dentist. My friend locked himself in his bedroom and blew his brains out.
Was my friend crazy or depressed? I don't think so. I'd seen him two weeks before. He was frustrated, without a doubt. And he was passionate about art history. He'd just given me a lecture on surrealist and modernist painters using a coffee table art book my mom had given me for Christmas. But he wasn't leaning towards a violent ending of his own life that evening. He just wanted to become a professor of art history instead of a dentist. That gun just made it all too easy, I'm afraid. Sometimes we feel angry and desperate and we do the wrong thing.
So, I don't like guns. I would imagine anyone who has lost a loved one to the irrationality of guns in any way feels the same way I do. Once you experience the viciousness of what a gun does to the mind, there's only one kind of logic to go with.
But I understand that my point of view is not all there is in this debate. Hunting and gun sports are legitimate pastimes in this culture. And people buy their kids weapons in order to teach them those pastimes. Some people also feel strongly that they need guns to protect themselves. And, yes, I think there is at least some legitimacy to people's concerns about government control of citizen access to weapons.
To me, serious talk between gun control advocates and gun enthusiasts is essential if we're going to figure this problem out. Real dialog. This essay here comes from reading a blog post by John Cashon called "A Dialog on Cultural Traditions and Understanding." In his post, John references the work of filmmaker Annabel Parks. She has made it her career to document the extreme divisions in our society. You can access Annabel's work through John's blog or in the links below.
Both John and Annabel point to the problem of civilized dialog when discussing gun issues. Annabel witnessed confrontations last week in Washington, D.C. during gun control rallies. See her video HERE.
This issue of dialog is more essential on the gun issue than it is on any other issue we have in society. Guns in American culture are at the heart of the question of violence for us. Violence is normal here in this country -- from video games to police dramas on TV to all kinds of movies to life on the streets. Violence sparks up at public events regularly. And we all remember those heady days on the playground and running around the neighborhood where older kids and bullies would try to dictate terms.
At the same time, too, of course, most of us are taught that violence is never the right answer. It's going too far to say that Americans are taught to be pacifists, but virtually all of us would tell you that violence is a sign of evil and that we would only use force in a situation where we were being attacked (or others were).
So there's a kind of schizophrenia here. Violence is part of everyday life and even seen as a form of entertainment (I love football and am always happy come January when the bowl games and NFL playoffs are in full swing). But at the same time we are taught that violence is bad.
Is it any wonder then that dialog on guns is so difficult? Whenever a culture has to negotiate sticky issues with competing concepts and a kind of mass cognitive dissonance it is almost hopeless.
But take things one step further, and this is the real point of this essay. The discussion between gun rights enthusiasts and gun control advocates always reaches its loudest volume after a brutal slaying of innocent people. And it always gets started by those who believe in gun control. Gun rights people feel that the finger is being pointed at them. So they defend their position, circle the wagons, and go into a kind of lock down self-justification mode. We just watched this happen earlier this week. The suggestion offered by the NRA was to put armed guards in every school in America. We continue to hear people speaking about the idea that teachers need to have access to weapons in the classroom.
I shake my head. I hope you do too. When Newtown's community was first thrown into upheaval my heart was broken, but I also saw this cultural struggle coming. I wrote very briefly about my fears for all of us (go here to read "Who Are We?").
Somehow the dialog on this issue needs to be carried out without making others feel that they are at fault for the acts of the mentally ill and confused who perpetrate these bursts of rage. Somehow pointing fingers at each other needs to stop. Somehow all of us grownups need to understand the need to rise above petty, futile, schizophrenic thinking (how many gentle, liberal, intellectuals do you know who love Dexter and The Sopranos?). Gun control is not about taking guns away from people. It's simply about creating responsibility and doing the best we can to protect innocent people from this violent culture we so revere. But we can't talk about this responsibility and the idea of protection as long as we point fingers at each other.
There's so much more to the Adam Lanza story than we will ever know. This lack of knowledge is excruciating and contributes even more to the blame game and cognitive dissonance we all face. My hope for 2013 is that people on both sides of this issue work hard to overcome their inability to talk rationally.
This is one of those moments where our culture can take a huge step forward...not just by gaining a little bit more control over a major source of violence, but by understanding that we're all in this together and that we all have a part to play here. No one is to blame when everyone is to blame. The real question here is whether we see that we're building this world for our children and their friends, or whether we want to stay mired in a world that has proven, once again, that it doesn't work.
I honestly don't know what the answers are here, nor how we get to some meaningful change. I only know that peace and love are more important than violence and that no one disagrees with that. So how do we use them to dis-schizophrenalize our violent culture? That's what we need to figure out.
Worthy Links
"A Dialog on Cultural Traditions and Understanding," John Cashon's Musings
"Story of America: A Nation Divided," Annabel Parks website
"Mass murder, shooting sprees and rampage violence: Research roundup," Journalist's Resource
"The Geography of U.S. Gun Violence,", The Atlantic "Cities Place Matters" pages
"Who Are We?" December 14, 2012, davidbiddle.net
This essay was published at the website "Story of America.org" Check it out HERE.








Salon.com
Comments
http://open.salon.com/blog/esse_est_percipi/2013/01/09/stuck_in_the_middle_with_you
Very insightful. Rated.
I think I can sum up its essential nature: You are asking us to grow up and act reasonably.
Unfortunately, my initial response is: Good luck with that (said dripping with sarcasm.)
We Americans are humans...and like all humans, we are (relatively) just recently down out of the trees. Our technological evolution has been mind-boggling. Our philosophical evolution has lagged to the point where it is not unreasonable to call it "stunted."
The gun problem is serious, but a more pressing problem is that we have the technological capability to annihilate humanity (and perhaps all life)...while not yet achieving the philosophical maturity to make that a statistical improbability.
I will be pleasantly surprised if our country has a mature, reasonable discussion between the extremes of the two sides of this issue, but I won't be holding my breath. And make no mistake about it...without the extremes of both sides finally coming to reality...this problem will not even abate, much less go away.
The number one caliber that commits the most killings each year both accidental and murder is the .22 cal. The .22 is also the most popular for target shooting and hunting as well.
According to a 2008 study by the FBI 68% of all murders were committed with guns and guns were used in 7% of the 5.1 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault.
Sure ban assault weapons, it will not stop the violence, but at least it will make some people feel safer even if they are not.
The number one caliber that commits the most killings each year both accidental and murder is the .22 cal. The .22 is also the most popular for target shooting and hunting as well.
According to a 2008 study by the FBI 68% of all murders were committed with guns and guns were used in 7% of the 5.1 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault.
Sure ban assault weapons, it will not stop the violence, but at least it will make some people feel safer even if they are not.
Obviously no developed economic system can divest itself of the use of money but illegal and legal distortions of its function are severely damaging all aspects of society.
The "American" version of mass industrial civilization is the most extreme in fragmentation, anonymization (a word I just invented), and isolation. This manifests in our architecture, urban-suburban design, travel (freeways, interstate highways, air), entertainment, and consumption syndrome, including where and how we shop.
In other words, the problem is holistic, comprehensive. Gun violence is one aspect of a larger problem. I wrote about a couple of aspects - a casually violent attitude towards the rest of the planet (invasions, rumors of invasions), and the effects of stress and absence in early childhood described by "Canadian" physician Gabor Maté in "Full Circle," which can be found on Open Salon.
Broadening the context, since our culture of violence cannot be removed from its context, we live in an era where the climate is changing, and not in a way that is more comfortable for humans. Indeed, as the climate heats up, we can expect that people will too. We also live in a condition of an infinite growth economic system on a finite planet is reaching the limits to its growth. We now have illusory growth, with high-tech frivolities paving the way for labor-displacing growth of consumer luxuries, while human misery and marginalization increases.
Like the Romans and so many others before us, the "answer" may be the all-too-likely decline and fall. If you look at it in evolutionary terms, natural selection might just select us out. I don't think dialogue between two "sides" will resolve this to anyone's satisfaction. Tomorrow will happen. The next day will happen. Then the next and the next and the next. There is a certain momentum taking place that we can't reason ourselves out of. Life will go on. I believe in the Divine. I'm just not so sure about man.
All that said, it seems to me (my prediction) is that the politics here (should have mentioned that in my list!) will get played out in a bill with some sort of stringent ban on semi-automatic weapons and their associated ammo clips, plus a national registry that allows law enforcement to speak to each other. This will all be watered down and compromised into oblivion so that it is relatively ineffective.
Two things that have been suggested to me since writing my essay are:
1. How much of this is driven by varying forms of fear on all sides?
2. Gun control advocates should join the NRA and make their voices heard.
I find both of those observations extremely interesting.
there are social aspects to the gun argument which inspires my contempt. against the wimps, i charge that they only get excited when few middle class people are killed, while america shoots more than 200 per week with never a quiver from the 'progressive' side of town. against the big belt buckles i note that you don't need a military weapon unless your hunting season is year-round people killing, sponsored by the munitions industry.
and that's why nothing much can be accomplished: neither side will address the endemic poverty which creates the crime culture and the over-whelming majority of american gun homicides.
As to the effectiveness of "peace and love", I, as an old peacenik of the sixties and seventies, can tell you that peace has eluded mankind for many eons and nobody can realistically 'love' everyone in any truly meaningful way. We might, however, find in in us to live and let live if "them others" will do the same. Love everybody just isn't ever going to happen, but we might get very good results with respect. we cannot control whom we love; we CAN control whom we will offer respect to. Were all human interaction based upon respect, I don't think we'd go too far wrong.
Great blog David. I'm happy that I stumbled across it!
"R"
;-)
.
Some liberal leftist commie bastards may find this view extreme; but I know a guy who was in jail with a guy who had a girlfriend who slept with an intern at the U.N. who overheard a conversation of someone who said that they heard someone say that this is all in the works! That's proof enough for me! I say repeal all gun laws and arm as many patriots as possible!
If you don't know the Real Conservative yet, he isn't a satirist. He spends all his welfare check on guns. It figures, just like the father of your friend who wouldn't let him live his own life was a gun nut.
As of this writing we now know unequivicably the President is on our side. I don't think he went far enough because I think all assault weapons and ammunition in the hands of the general public should be reclaimed. What a stunning victory for civility that would be. We can start to be proud again of our nation.
What more do you need to know about the Adam Lanza Story? A mentally challenged young man used his mother's guns that she easily bought because SHE didn't have a record & shot HIS pent-up anger at precious children because he was different.
She knew he was becoming dangerous but was in denial & didn't get help in time & then in the dark of night; was sorry she ever showed him how to use them! R
Guns are used in 7% of all violent crimes. Assault weapons are used in 2% of all gun crimes. Don't worry Hollywood and the gaming industry please continue to sell our children violence as entertainment. You are not the problem, it was the size of the clip that is to blame.
Now take a mentally unstable person set them down in front of dozens of ultra violent video game for decades, throw in a few slasher movies, sprinkle in some substance abuse or bullying and you may have a killer. Maybe they use a gun, set a fire, or just run someone over with a car.
I know the narrative is guns. That is the problem with dealing with ideology. Ideologues are so focused on their belief it becomes the single source for all the problems of the world. The Sturmgewehr (assault weapon) has been around for 69 years. They use to sell military surplus weapons mail order in the back of magazines until 62. Although there are more guns now, they are in less households than 50 years ago. Less people have guns today than 50 years ago, yet we are becoming a nation that glorifies violence in movies and TV. But, please do not blame Hollywood we are talking about guns.
That said, we do know what's going on in everyone else's head. A lot of fear on both sides of the fence. Fear and hostility. This is how you guarantee not being able to talk. This is why I wrote my essay (this was written about four days after the massacre at Newtown).
Are we really such children?
Maybe the decades of endless wars since the 50s is having a collective effect on our society. In the 60s we protested the war in Vietnam, today we have two wars going on for over a decade and nothing is said. Maybe all these events are the result of the chickens coming home to roost.
This was typed slowly so that liberals and conservatives could BOTH understand.
The evil [sic] "open [internet]" will end in 2013 with no doubt.
Neeley Jr v FCC, et al, (5:12-cv-5208)
You make a very interesting point. Take it from the other side. The right of the people to oppose government with armed opposition is kind of like the hidden 4th pillar of checks and balances. At its root, democracy as it has been fashioned is successful because it is the best way, the most rational way, of legitimizing power. Providing this 4th pillar keeps the other three in check. That said, the 2nd Amendment is definitely an example of our forefathers not being able to think through the implications of technology development. More than likely they didn't even understand technology development as an issue that needed to be taken seriously.
https://johncashon.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/musing-on-the-second-amendment-and-the-machine-gun/