Another Nightmare

It is difficult to write about the mass school shooting in Uvalde, Texas this week.

There is nothing more horrific than to see 19 elementary children murdered in cold blood along with two teachers.

There is clearly something wrong somewhere.

The question is what is it?

I typically do not like to write or comment on these incidents right after they occur as the early reports are so often inaccurate.

However, Democrats are quick to decide the fault lies with guns.

Left unanswered is how it is that we lived for decades upon decades in this country where people did not march into schools, grocery stores, malls or churches and start shooting. 

The United States has always had rifles and other guns. Why didn't we have school shootings when I was growing up? Or even when my own children were going to school? What we are seeing is a relatively recent development.

What has changed? Is it the guns or something else?

In a blog shortly after Sandy Hook and Aurora that I wrote almost ten years ago, I asked the following question.

"Are we looking at the right target?"

It is easy to point the finger at guns but it seems there is a bigger issue.

Could it have something to do with culture?

Broken families? Fatherless homes? Violence in television and movies? Video games? The internet? Poor mental health screening and services? Less school discipline? Less religious teaching? Too much political correctness?

When we hear about these shootings the profile of the murderous assailant inevitably ends up being similar to what we are finding out about the Uvalde shooter. 

18-25 year old male.

Disaffected and disconnected from society.

Problems with his family.

Drug use.

These shooters all suffer from profound mental illness.

Sadly, I have written about this too many times before in these pages.

Sandy Hook.

Aurora.

Parkland.

Dayton.

What is even more troubling about this shooting are the reports that the shooter was outside of the school for 12 minutes firing shots before he entered the building.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/uvalde-residents-voice-frustration-over-shooting-response-11653588161

Local residents voiced anger Thursday about the time it took to end the mass shooting at an elementary school here, as police laid out a fresh timeline that showed the gunman entered the building unobstructed after lingering outside for 12 minutes firing shots.

Similar to Parkland, we are also now hearing that police were at the scene but did not go into the building because they deemed it too dangerous without more weaponry and resources. It was at least an hour before the shooter was taken down.

What?

It was too dangerous? The police at the scene needed to wait for a tactical weapons team?

How do you explain that to the families of the defenseless children?

Many Republicans suggest the answer is to have an armed security person at each school and harden the access to schools.

However, what good would that have done in Uvalde?

This guy was firing shots outside of the school for 12 minutes and they still couldn't keep him out?

A whole battalion of police were there but it was too dangerous to go in after him? How would a single "School Resource Officer" do any better?

Perhaps there are answers to these questions but all of this suggests that there are no SIMPLE answers.

Let's hope we get better answers over time.

In the meantime, I should repeat a few facts that I have before that always seem to be forgotten in these tragedies as we inevitably hear these talking points.

Why do these mass shootings only occur in the United States?

I have cited statistics in the past that this is simply not true.

This is a quote from a study done by the Crime Prevention Research Center that was published in 2020 that indicates that the United States is far down the list insofar as mass shootings are concerned.

The U.S. is well below the world average in terms of the number of mass public shootings, and the global increase over time has been much bigger than for the United States.

Over the 20 years from 1998 to 2017, our list contains 2,772 attacks and at least 5,764 shooters outside the United States and 62 attacks and 66 shooters within our country. By our count, the US makes up less than 1.13% of the mass public shooters, 1.77% of their murders, and 2.19% of their attacks. All these are much less than the US’s 4.6% share of the world population. Attacks in the US are not only less frequent than other countries, they are also much less deadly on average. Out of the 101 countries where we have identified mass public shootings occurring, the United States ranks 66th in the per capita frequency of these attacks and 56th in the murder rate.

We need to ban the type of rifles used in this shooting.

The fact is that in 2020 (the most recent year data is available) there were only 455 homicides where a rifle was used. This includes any so-called "assault" rifles and any victims of mass shootings.

Handguns were used 8,029 times.

Knives 1,739 times.

Hands, fists were used 662 times.

Homicides by Murder Weapon in U.S. 2020
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

It is true that it harder to create the mayhem we saw in Uvalde with a handgun but when the perpetrator has an hour alone with a room full of small children he could have used any weapon and gotten the same horrible result.

In fact, reports are that the Uvalde shooter also took a handgun into the classroom with a rifle.

We should raise the age that someone can buy a firearm from 18 to 21.

In my view, there is merit to this suggestion. There is little question that the judgment and maturity of an 18 year old is lacking compared to someone older.

We already ban the purchase of alcohol and cigarettes for those under age 21.

We used to limit voting to only those age 21 and older for the same reason. This was the case even though those 18 years olds became independent much earlier in the past than they do today. The voting age was 21 in the Civil War, World War I, World II and the Korean War.

However, the age limit was reduced from 21 to 18 principally based on the argument that if someone could serve their country in the military they should be able to vote. It should be remembered that this change occurred during the Vietnam War when the draft was in place.

We now have a volunteer military. No one is being forced to serve. The argument to lower the voting age does not have the same weight it once did especially when you consider the ages for alcohol and cigarettes were raised.

It seems to me that if the age limit to purchase a firearm is increased because of concerns about judgment and maturity the same question should be asked about the right to vote.

It would be interesting to see what the reaction would be if Republicans stated they would be willing to increase the age to purchase a firearm to 21 if the Democrats would agree to raise the voting age to 21.

We might find out how serious Democrats really are about all of this.

Of course, the U,S. Constitution's 26th Amendment guarantees the right to vote for those 18 years and older in federal elections. This raises the question as to why the 2nd Amendment would not also protect the rights of an 18 year old to bear arms?

As I stated, there are no easy answers.

What is clear is that there is something terribly wrong in our society that this nightmare has played out over and over.

Playing politics as Beto O'Rourke, Democrat nominee for Governor in Texas, did while disrupting a press conference by Governor Greg Abbott on the shooting and investigation before the children have even been  put to rest is not helping solve the problem.

We need to stop politicizing these events and start dealing with the uncomfortable fact that we have serious human and societal problems that underly these monstrous acts.

We are not likely going to be able to legislate this away. 

The root of this problem is much deeper and more complex than any law is able to cure.