Mass Shootings Solutions: Facts Over Emotion

Mass shootings traumatize the American soul.  The nation's emotions run the gamut from sorrow to moral outrage to steely resolve to stop the killings.  But before the last ambulance departed the latest scene of a slaughter, politicians weaponized the crisis to wage war on guns and the president.

The belligerent rhetoric and ugly name-calling on both sides of the issue of gun rights conflates a complicated problem.  Before a solution can offer hope of halting violence, there must be a reckoning of the root causes driving often troubled young people (males) to commit wanton murders.

While it's natural for raw emotions to surface after such a tragedy, no one should use victims as political pawns in a legislative chess game to pass hastily thought-out laws.  Solutions require a close examination of the facts and a clear-eyed focus on keeping Americans as safe as possible.

Since guns are often seen as the culprit instead of the shooter, let's start with some firearm facts from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Centers for Disease Control:

In 2017, the most recent statistics, there were 39,773 deaths by firearms, the highest annual total in decades.  You likely have read this headline in the news.  But do you know the reason for the hike? Sixty percent of gun deaths were self-inflicted.  Gun suicides are rising faster than firearm murders.

Yet no politician seems to care about the alarming rise of suicides.  Why are so many people killing themselves in a society with advantages few countries enjoy?  Why haven't we done more to find the answer?  Perhaps, it is because a single loss of life doesn't generate inflammatory political rhetoric.

In any massacre involving a rifle, the drumbeat for a ban on "assault" weapons is deafening.  Before entertaining this idea, politicians should consider that FBI data shows that five times more people are killed by "knives and cutting instruments" than rifles.  Should we consider outlawing knives?

Prior to plunging headlong into solutions, Congress needs more data on what motivates mass killings by young males.  The Parkland High School shooter was 19-years-old. The El Paso killer was 21.  The Dayton gunman was 24.  Unfortunately, not much data exists on young shooters.

However, a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, a research arm of the Justice Department, has been cataloguing the life histories of all mass shooters.  The work has produced a database of information going back to 1966 on every mass shooting in the United States.

The study found that the vast majority of mass shooters experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age.  That violence may have been physical or sexual abuse, parental suicide or severe bullying, often leading to depression, anxiety and other mental health issues.

In virtually every mass shooting there often is a trigger point, usually a identifiable crisis in the months and weeks leading up to the killing spree.  Another factor that motivates these heinous crimes is the perpetrators' fascination with the celebrityhood conferred by the media's coverage of shootings.

That's one reason mass shootings tend to come in clusters because the publicity often spurs others to act.  Their evil deeds are, if not celebrated, at least magnified on social media.  The prospect of notoriety in death appeals to young people who feel neglected, unimportant and isolated from society.

The mainstream media as well as the raw sewage posing as social media are never held accountable for their roles in contributing to the violence.  They hide behind freedom of the press but media platforms must be more responsible, reigning in their lurid coverage of shootings and the triggerman.

Studies such as the one cited earlier should serve as a starting point for dealing with the issue of mass shootings. Restricting or banning weapons will not end the killing if the nation fails to address the early warning signs of disturbing and often bellicose behavior of young males.

Turning to proposals, Pew Research found there are sharp divisions among Americans who identify as Republican or Democrat on gun policy.  However, there is some common ground among the groups.  That should be a starting point for Congress to make a bipartisan push for legislation.

There is near unanimous agreement that people with mental illnesses should be prevented from buying guns.  Most Americans concur that people on federal no-fly or watch lists should be barred from purchasing weapons.  Majorities favor background checks for sales at gun shows.

Although there general but not majority support for tightening background checks, there should be a way for politicians to hammer out a balanced approach that will make it less likely that someone unstable or emotionally disturbed with be able to legally acquire a firearm.

There is also budding support for so-called Red Flag laws that would allow local police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present danger to himself or others.  Currently, 13 states have passed some form of Red Flag law.

After the temporary removal of the weapons(s),  there is a court hearing.  The gun owner is allowed an opportunity to appear in court and contest the order.  A judge decides if the weapon will be permanently confiscated or returned. This due process ensures a fair and open proceeding.

Despite these common sense suggestions, some politicians and special interest groups will champion laws banning firearm ownership.  If only, killings were that easy to stop.  Illinois and California have two of the country's strictest gun control regimes, but the results show little or no impact.

In fact, although Illinois and California are home to about 16 percent of the nation's population, those two states account for more than 20 percent of the nation's handgun murders, according to FBI data. Those figures offer a sober assessment about the effectiveness of stricter gun laws.

The bloodshed of mass shootings sickens every American.  But it is no excuse to turn the gun debate into a bloodsport marked by a focus on gaining political power.  Americans want solutions not a rancorous sideshow of grandstanding and finger-pointing.  Victims and their families deserve better.