Another mass shooting. In a school. Oh, my. Thoughts and prayers. End of story. Until the next time.
There will be a next time, dear reader, some where in these Disunited States of America. No community is immune any more. Even here in River City, we’ve had our own mass shooting. When will it end? Inquiring minds want to know.
The Republicans say we have a mental-illness problem. The Democrats say that there are too many guns in too many hands. They are both right, and they are both wrong. Is The Chas being contradictory? Keep reading.
When it comes to mental health, the Republicans talk the talk, but they don’t walk the walk. They say it’s a local issue; don’t come to Congress for help. Not so. Gun violence is a Nation-wide epidemic; one incident triggers another one (or two or three). Mental health programs and facilities should be funded, and staffed, at the local, the state, and the national levels.
Every school in the United States should have a professional mental-health professional on its staff. If a student is having difficulty coping with his/her environment, being ignored, being bullied, being neglected at home, being brutalized at home, (s)he is ripe for a violent reaction. (S)he ought to have someone willing to listen to him/her and to offer a remedy. Most young shooters do what they do in order to make a statement and then commit suicide, either by their own hands or by the hands of law enforcement.
The Democrats say there needs to be stricter controls on guns. But every time they propose something, even the most moderate proposal – they run into a brick wall. The brick wall has a name: The National Rifle Association, which states (among other things) that the answer to a “bad guy with a gun” is a “good guy with a gun.” The NRA has its centuries mixed up; we now live in the 21st Century, not the 19th Century. The wild, wild West is long past. And what were the “good guys” in Uvalde, Texas, doing for 45 minutes?
The NRA points to Switzerland as a good example of the correct response to gun violence. Switzerland has a high gun-ownership rate, but a low mass-shooting rate (the last one occurred in 2001). What the NRA doesn’t tell you, however, is why this disparity exists. The why is civilized behavior. All Swiss males ages 18 – 34, deemed “fit for service,” are subject to mandatory military service; they are issued either a rifle or a pistol and properly trained in the use of the same. When their term of service ends, they are allowed to buy their service firearm; but they must first obtain a permit (similar to Illinois’ Firearms Owner Identification Card). These permits are listed in a national registry. The current rate of ownership is one firearm for every three citizens, and the rate is dwindling.
Persons in Switzerland who have committed a crime, or have an alcohol, or drug addiction, are not allowed to purchase a gun. Persons who express a violent or dangerous attitude are not allowed to purchase a gun. The cantons, and now the Federal government, conduct rigorous background checks which include consulting with a psychiatrist. The Swiss are not allowed to carry their firearms in public, unless they are going hunting or to a firing range, and even then the firearms must not be loaded until they reach their destination. Concealed-carry permits are difficult to obtain and are limited to security workers or police officers. Sellers of firearms are subject to strict licensing procedures.
Does that sound sensible, NRA? No? Then don’t tell lies.
The Chas would go even further. No one should be allowed to own more than one gun. No one should be allowed to purchase a military-type weapon. No one should be allowed to purchase gun parts which can then be assembled at home (so-called “ghost guns”). And the Second Amendment ought to be repealed, because it no longer applies to 21st Century United States and because it has been totally misinterpreted in the first place. The Chas won’t be holding his breath waiting for that glorious day to arrive.
I said that the Republicans and the Democrats are both right and wrong on this issue. This issue is not an either/or concept. Both approaches must be made simultaneously. Otherwise, the carnage will continue.
Just a thought.