Pathways…to Democracy-How should we prevent mass shootings in our communities?
by Doug Garner –
Death by guns in the United States is an ongoing problem, which has become more prevalent in recent years. In 2017, guns killed slightly less than 40,000 people. Between 1968-2012 there were 292 mass shootings (defined as four or more dead) globally. With 5% of the world’s population, the United States accounted for 90 of these mass shootings. Public mass shootings like those in secondary schools/colleges, night clubs, concerts and places of worship, while attracting considerable media coverage, account for less than 1% of all those killed. Death by guns is not as deadly as drug overdoses, which claim close to 70,000 annually. Illustrative of this point is that in Broome County, NY, 13 people were killed at the local Civic Association by a crazed gunman who then took his own life minutes later (2010). Six years later in the same county, over 73 people died of heroin overdoses (population of 190,000). This said, gun violence is a problem that is growing, and the psychological impact on survivors is beyond calculation. I well remember the duck and cover drills done in my elementary school during the 1950s in response to escalating fears about nuclear bombs. Over sixty years later my grandchildren are required to do drills to find safe hiding places with their teachers. So what might a community do?
After the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre, the National Issues Forums Institute (nifi.org) developed s deliberative guide to help schools and communities wrestle with the issue. NIFI identified three approaches, which include the following:
Option 1: Reduce the threat of mass shootings by the following actions:
• Restrict assault weapons, high capacity magazines/armor piercing bullets.
• Make involuntary commitment to mental health institutions easier to achieve.
• Require citizens to show cause for concealed carry permits.
• Require citizens to keep guns out of their houses—instead have them stored in secure places like gun ranges.
• Require a mandatory 28 day wait/background checks for all to purchase guns, including those purchased from private individuals.
As in the case of all NIFI deliberative forums, drawbacks of each action is given and people deliberate the “trade offs”.
Option 2 Equip people to defend themselves by the following actions:
• Post more guards/security officers in schools and other public places.
• Require all municipalities to allow law –abiding citizens to carry concealed guns and greatly expand training for self-defense.
• Arm teachers/administrators so they can protect themselves and their students.
• Drill teachers/students in the best ways to hide and protect themselves in case of an active shooter.
• Teachers/professors/professional staff should be trained to identify people who appear to be unbalanced/or pose potential threats.
As in Option 1, the deliberation guide provides drawbacks for each action given and people need to deliberate the “trade-offs”.
Option 3 Root out violence in society by the following actions:
• News media should refrain from sensational coverage, which gives the shooter fame and notoriety.
• Realign all social services around violence prevention—including youth development, mental health, anti-gang/anti drug programs.
• Restrict depiction of violence in video games and other mass media such as primetime shows.
• Crack down — try to eliminate all bullying in schools/workplaces. Teach peaceful conflict resolution to all young people.
• Parental monitoring of television and computer use by their children.
As in the first two options, the deliberation guide provides drawbacks for actions given and people need to deliberate the “trade-offs”. Through deliberation (weighing an action and its drawbacks) participants come to realize the “trade-off” and why coming to a shared judgment is so difficult. Yet even with a topic that evokes raw emotions, it is possible to have a productive conversation. Working in groups of 15-20, the goal of the aforementioned framework is to move from the raw emotion of gun violence vs. 2nd Amendment Rights to more reflective judgment.
Shortly after the shooting at the Marjory Stonehouse Douglas HS this deliberation was used at a school in Broome County with over 80 parents, teachers, and other members of the community participating. While there was a wide range of views aired, most participants found real value in talking with each other in a civil fashion even when they disagreed on particular actions. One thing is for sure, depression, suicide and related mental health problems are at an all time high in the United States, especially in the Millennial Generation cohort (people born since 1981). Deliberative democracy offers communities a means to discuss a wide array of problems and in the process it can help rebuild a real sense of community which is vital to the health of our democracy .
Any one interested in using this deliberation should contact nifi.org for a template.
You can also contact Doug Garnar at garnardc@sunybroome.edu for any questions.