The Newtown massacre, as it’s being called, which recently claimed the lives of twenty-six children and adults, when a young man went into a school and began shooting, has sparked off an international debate on gun control and has incited the National Rifle Association in America to respond by giving a speech today at a news conference at the Willard Hotel, in Washington, DC.
The speech, by the NRA’s Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, calls on the US government to place armed police officers in every school. Until now, Barack Obama has rejected the call to introduce the presence of guns on all school campuses in America, but will that change? We don’t think it will, not just based upon Barack Obama’s brilliant speech shortly after the events at Newtown, or the rather less bullet-proof speech given by Mr LaPierre himself, but because the real problems must be addressed by looking at both prevention and cure. And unwittingly, LaPierre’s speech advocates for such change, despite trying to push the NRA’s agenda.
LaPierre’s central argument is powerful: we protect the very things in society which are dearest to us, through the controlled use of weaponry. Banks are secured using armed guards, presidents and prime ministers are all protected by gun-carrying officers and agents and soldiers deployed around the world to fight against things like terrorism, all use guns to defend nations and states. The fact that LaPierre is careful to highlight the use of guns in a ‘controlled’ fashion, makes the argument all the more clever. He even makes the point that if there had been an armed police officer present at Newtown that day, those lives that were lost may have been saved, under different circumstances. Circumstances which would mean every child going to school in the morning would be greeted by a gun-carrying police officer.
This is the point at which LaPierre’s argument begins to falter. He makes no mention of the fact that a culture in which children grow up seeing guns at school, even in a controlled environment, would lead to a culture of fear amongst our children; a fear of an event, which whilst seemingly endemic to the United States, is still a rare phenomenon: since 1966, in America, there have been 90 school shootings, resulting in 231 deaths, with 13 of those 90 shootings being fatality-free. That’s less than two shootings a year, not all of which result in loss of life.
LaPierre does though, make some interesting points and his sentiment that guns are inherently inanimate objects that cannot directly cause loss of life, because they need a human being to pull the trigger, is a fair point, but he goes on to dilute his own argument by deflecting the increase in violent crime on things like video games and movies, which have all been inspirations for some of the most awful copycat killings in America in recent years. By pointing the finger at other inanimate objects and targeting other industries, LaPierre manages, with awkward efficiency, to cause the reader to reflect on the sincerity of his own sentiments regarding gun culture and the part it has to play in violent crimes which claim the lives of young children and adults, in places like Newtown.
But it’s not just the wobbly moralising, or the cock-eyed rhetoric which spoils this interest-driven speech. It’s the tacky attempts at trying to soften the image of the gun industry, to give it heart. LaPierre chooses to talk about the NRA’s membership, which is 4 million strong but he elects to detail the membership by mentioning mothers, first. It’s a heavy-handed approach as far as starting speeches of this nature are concerned and lacks all the finesse a considered and cautious man might possess.
If that wasn’t enough, LaPierre uses the tired old trick of instilling fear into his listeners (or readers). He talks of a society that is “populated by an unknown number of genuine monsters“, people, he tells us, that are “so deranged, so evil, so possessed by voices and driven by demons that no sane person can possibly ever comprehend them. They walk among us every day. And does anybody really believe that the next Adam Lanza isn’t planning his attack on a school he’s already identified at this very moment?”
But he doesn’t stop there. LaPierre goes on to ask how many more killers are out there: “A dozen more killers? A hundred? More? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation’s refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?” His lack of understanding on other issues comes to the fore, as he ruminates over national databases, presumptions over the current decrease in federal gun prosecutions and debatable conclusions about hurricanes and their impact on violent crime. His piece de resistance though, has to be this quote; that “A child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18.”
LaPierre doesn’t clarify where these scenes take place, but we would imagine the vast majority of these events are viewed through the TV screen or movie theatre.
This brings up another Achilles Heel in LaPierre’s argument. Whilst LaPierre and the NRA would have us believe that guns are not part of culture and are merely on the sidelines of this debate, he draws in the comparison between guns, video games and films, as well as a culture which suffers with mental illness – all topics and issues which affect plenty of other nations and states across the globe. But what makes America’s plight so much more poignant is that like for like, when size and population are taken into account, America is still one of the most deadly when it comes to gun crime. And that is down to one simple fact – guns in America, unlike some other parts of the world, are widely available to members of the public.
This debate then, has to be about culture first and foremost; instilling good structures in place to help members of society who need help, not to feel alienated and alone and to ensure that everyone has access to care and a community they can be a part of. But the presence of guns in America cannot be ignored, and LaPierre and the NRA would do well to acknowledge the part guns play in a culture which seems all too ready to pull the trigger.

Many in the USA believe that “assault weapons” should be outlawed. I agree .After all not many hunting folk would go after a herd of deer with a sub machine gun !If the boy who murdered all those children had possessed only a rifle he would have had to stop to reload after the first shot and probably could have been disarmed.The NRA being a rifle asociation could hardly object logically if citizens were allowed rifles but no other weapon.
Thank you for your post, FA.
Has anyone ever seen a gun in court accused of murdering anyone?
It is not the gun, it is the human using the gun that kills others.
The media and games are full of gun killing scenes. The more killing the good guys do the better people seem to like it.
And what of those Americans etc going into other countries and murdering others?
That is accepted as being just fine, but it is still killing others and even glorified.
Naturally young people are confused from all this indoctrination that killing others is the way to glory.
However in the school shootings there is a pattern, a predator program pattern and all the killers eyes look the same- totally out of it, so one asks what drugs etc are having them so disassociated?
I propose we look deeply into the minds of the people who murdered and not the tools used to kill.
Then solutions will follow.
If someone wants to murder, s/he will find a gun.
“They know about the psychiatric-drug connection to murders and suicides. But they won’t say the magic words. They’ll just keep biting their tongues.
And “out of respect for the victims,” the drug companies aren’t running ads anywhere near this media coverage. Translation: the companies don’t want to encourage the public to make the connection between meds and murder.
Prozac, murder. Zoloft, murder. Paxil, murder. Ritalin, murder”
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/lanza-bloomberg-obama-guns-psychiatric-meds-and-mass-hypnosis-in-newtown-connecticut/
Thank you, Portia. Glorifying guns certainly doesn’t help.
We in fact have armed guards in some high schools as well as metal detectors. I suspect that it is no coincidence that the Internet was flooded, yesterday, with the picture of the armed Israeli teacher.
I think we need to cast this as the culture surrounding assault weapons, not guns; and refer to it as “regulation” rather than “control.” We all know that is the only ace for compromise. And the compromise will be further muddled by the definition assigned to “assault weapon.”
I, too, think that the real issue is mental health awareness and care. I am troubled that the President has not put this on the table. If his healthcare plan provided some substantial change in the culture surrounding this issue, we would have heard it mentioned. So, I fear that there is no real change in the existing culture where mental health care is limited, and where insurance companies manage the care rather than physicians.
I really thought that Obama would use the opportunity to say that some regulation on weapons coupled with existing changes put in place for mental health awareness and care will result in a comprehensive new approach towards prevention of similar events. The silence on this point gives us the answer.
Until both issues are put on the table in e same discussion, we will only be pretending to talk about the problem.
Thanks for the post, Natasha. Whatever I can do to promote the discussion we are having here, let me know.
Tom
Thank you for your post, Tom and for clarifying the position regarding armed guards and metal detectors and the very helpful suggestions on terminology. I did think that Obama eluded to health care in his speech, however that is just my take on what he said. He was very careful to tread very lightly on all counts. It will be interesting to see what happens next policy-wise in the following months.
Your thoughts are always welcome and thank you for sharing them.
In case you hadn’t noticed Tom, Israel has been at war or under threat of annihilation for over 60 years and the arms carried by teachers is to protect the children against terrorists.
Where is the evidence that any of those who carried out these massacres of innocent people had been diagnosed as mentally ill prior to the shootings and/or had been receiving any form of psychotropic drugs.?. The mental illness assertion is a red herring to try to absolve others for their complicity in these events and that anyone could commit such crimes in certain circumstances.
In my experience there are some people who have a `Rage within’ them with the causes being an abusive upbringing, feelings of worthlessness, being socially isolated, and disconnected and disaffected from social groups. They are otherwise `normal’ people but vent their pent-up anger in various ways – some are violent and abusive towards marital partners and their children, others become workplace bullies, or engage in street violence, road rage etc etc. It is but a small step for such people to move on to carried out a massacre of others to give vent to their anger and aggression.
No need for condescension Ragnvald. Most readers lose track of someone’s point when they start out with a comment like that. Actually, I was in Israel in January 2009 doing some work at Wahat -al- Salam / Neve- Shalom.
Tom
A very disingenuous presentation by La Pierre – does he not know that Presidents, Prime Ministers, and banks have been robbed DESPITE having armed guards. He wants to turn schools into battlefields and hostage-taking situations.
Yes it is about culture, and especially the macho `Rambo’ culture which pervades America today and which feeds the fragile ego’s of the American male population. Those who tend to have guns are those who similarly have savage dogs in their homes, because of their feelings of inadequacy and inferiority and with no other sense of worth or status in society. They cannot gain community respect by any other means because of their inadequacies, so their mantra becomes, “If you don’t respect me, then at least I will make you fear me.!.”.
Thank you Ragnvald, for your thought-provoking comment.
100% true and very well put
What would have Mr.Wayne LaPierre have said if any of his Family were brutally murdered like this. How can we ask him for a reply to my question. .All people who become marksmen are training themselves to KILL. Please note that this dirty COWARD used his weapon on unarmed children and adults. Consider the word WEAPON. I an sorry for the LIVING Families.
Pingback: Best of The Rest « Researching Reform
An interesting thought. American Forces personnel are less likely to be shot and killed in Baghdad or Kabul than in New York and most other American cities. Which country is the `War zone’ again.?.
Pingback: Best of the Rest « Researching Reform
I am receiving several emails from the American Gun Lobby about a rally this Saturday. I reply to them that they are collaborators and accomplices to the mass killers and they are responsible for putting the guns in the hands of those mass killers by opposing any form of controls and that they argue for guns to be freely available. The Gun Lobby have the blood of all of those i\nnocents on their hands.