Why the Violence?

Today President Obama said "...there's not a parent in America who doesn't feel the same overwhelming grief that I do."  

But here's the thing. I didn't.  I barely felt sad.  I barely felt anything.

And I felt bad that I didn't feel.   

I remember the Columbine massacre quite clearly.  When I heard the news, I was in the tiny town of Othello, Wash. doing well-water testing with an AmeriCorps team.  The fact that kids, not much younger than those I was with, had done such a thing, planned and carried it out with such determination was simply horrific.  

My oldest child was a few days short of his third birthday.  I was seven months pregnant.  The notion that my children could grow up in a world where children would kill other children with such abandon sickened me.  I was numb.  I cried off and on for days.  But not today.  

When my boy was little he wasn't allowed to play with guns.  We told him "Guns aren't toys, they're tools. They're for killing people or animals.  And since you wouldn't kill for fun, you shouldn't play that way."

Most people asserted that 'boys will be boys' that he'd 'make guns out of sticks, or LEGO's.' He didn't.  In fact, on at least one occasion he told his friends mom, "I'm not allowed to play with guns, can we play something else?"

We told him if wanted to hunt, he could take hunter safety and get his license when he was old enough. And his dad took him target shooting – where he decided guns were too loud even with the ear protection.

So, yes, we own guns*.  We're not anti-gun. But we are anti-violence. 

Eventually my boy began agitating for an X-Box, and he wanted to play Call of Duty - a war game.  I hated it.  I had nothing to do with it.  But he saved his own money from odd jobs and allowance (pretty meager at $2.50 a week) and eventually bought a used console and game.  I cried.  I went through a period of true depression and angst.  I thought "My son is a 'virtual' killer."

However, he's also socially adept.  Friendly (maybe even a little popular) with brains, geeks and jocks, and a very good, diligent student. And, oddly, the gaming - even if violent - helped him build friendships with a broader circle. When asked "Who did you play with today?" it was once a kid from New Zealand!  But typically the answer would be "my buddy from AP Chem" or "Randy from lacrosse."  

And yes, I know, violent games do not make people violent. But they desensitize people. I'm quite positive. They are so realistic they are used to train soldiers... and many of those soldiers come back battle scarred from experiencing the real thing.  So scarred they begin to take out their anger, and violent inclinations on their wives, and children, and selves.  There are no games to re-train them to be loving, nurturing parents and husbands.

One of the posts I saw on Facebook today in the Newtown shooting was 'Why is it always men?" She  noted, "I won't use man." (Presumably because a 'real' man wouldn't engage in such behavior?) But is the reason it's 'always' men is because we start with the accepted idea that “boys will be boys" and will play with guns?

I think a huge part of this problem, gun control aside, is that society thinks its perfectly okay for boys (primarily) to play at violence.

The easy access to guns is one factor in all the shootings of recent years.  After the fact we often find that the shooter had some emotional problem.  But above all, the people who carry out these acts were desensitized. They don't care. They don't imagine the loss to others, they didn't value humans – let alone strangers.  The hour, upon hour, of violent play, violent films, and video games, wears on them.  (Don't even get me started on the new “sport” of cage fighting. If you normally don't stop to look at car wrecks, or wouldn't attend a public hanging what the hell makes you think watching people beat each other for fun or money is okay?)

Desensitization isn't just a random theory.   If you look it up on Wikipedia, you'll see desensitization can be used for good – to help people overcome phobias. But it can also work to bad ends. Everyone who's ever taken psychology read about the children watching violent cartoons and repeating the violent acts on a Bobo the doll punching bag.

My mother's dad was a tuberculosis doctor in the 1940's.  Some of his patients had escaped Nazi Germany.  She heard (or her dad relayed) stories from them, and passed them on to me. When I asked her "How did Hitler get people to go along with the persecution of the Jews?" one thing she told me was that they showed violent movies in Germany that weren't allowed in other countries.  I later read (in college psychology) that was part of Hitler's plan to desensitize people.  They also had nasty board games, such as  'Out With The Jews!’ and games that taught the Hitler Youth war strategies.   Out With the Jews was popular, according to the linked story, up to a million copies were sold!

President Obama, addressing today's tragedy, said it is time to take "real and meaningful action."

What will that look like?  

At this point, it appears the guns were owned legally by the mother of the shooter.  She didn't have them safely locked up, apparently trusting that her son would never do such a thing.  So, in this case, it wasn't an illegally acquired gun off the internet.  And according to this research guns used in about 48 mass shootings since 1982 were acquired legally.

Guns shouldn't be in the hands of the mentally ill.  But how would mental illness be reported, and to whom?  

If a teacher or doctor sees a child they suspect has been abused they are required by law to report their suspicions to child protection agencies.  What is the history and reasoning behind that?  What about the parent's (or babysitter's) privacy?  Society has decided that in the case of suspected child abuse, parents (or others) are often presumed guilty and investigated until proven innocent.  We must find a way to ensure guns don't get into the hands of the mentally ill. We worry about privacy, but not public safety.

What about doctor-patient confidentiality?  And we know that many times people (parents, doctors, teachers) are trying to get additional help but we're so busy protecting individual rights (e.g. it's extremely difficult to get someone committed) that we're NOT protecting the community at-large.

Semi-automatic or automatic weapons should be outlawed, as should magazines with more than 5-6 rounds.   In the Aurora, Colo. theater shooting last spring, more people would have died had the shooter's automatic weapon not jammed.  But with the NRA we can't even talk about such a moderate solution.  

An article that ran in the health policy magazine Solutions reported that:

From 1979 through 1996, 13 mass shootings were reported across Australia. Since 1996, when stringent gun-control laws were implemented, including a mandatory buy-back of all semi-automatic firearms, no mass shootings have occurred.

“Civil libertarians in Australia think we’re crazy” to equate liberty with gun ownership... “They say there’s no freedom if you’re afraid to go out on the street at night.” 

Or to the movies, or to school!  

The article discussed the notion that people might discuss gun controls after an incident like the Aurora theater shootings.  But did 'they'?  Did you?

Certainly the political establishment didn't touch gun, or ammo control or better background checks.  Hell no! It was an election year, that would hurt their chances of winning!

My mom used to have an expression “Your freedom ends where my nose begins.” We regulate the operation of cars through driving exams. We regulate the safety of people in those cars through seat belt laws.  MADD made drunk driving socially and legally unacceptable. We've decided that the benefit to society of such controls vastly outweighs the inconvenience or  infringement on our liberty.

Twenty little children died today. Now, can we please start discussing this public health risk seriously?  

And if we do, can we start at the beginning?

Let's ask ourselves as a society why is violent play - or 'play' fighting - acceptable? Let's stop saying "Boys will be boys," and simply say "No gun play."  And mean it.

 *The guns in our house are not loaded, and the ammunition is stored in a separate place from the guns. When our son started walking, we purchased trigger locks.  My husband misplaced the keys!  They're hidden safe somewhere, no doubt. But getting the locks re-keyed cost almost as much as the initial locks! 

If Wishes Had Wings!

Self publishing is a leap of faith. Making that commitment to pay for a book upfront is something no author wants to do. But chasing publishers and agents, attending writers conferences, and trying to go the traditional route - being signed by a 'real' publisher - isn't something a lot of people have the time or patience for.