Accessibility to guns and other firearms vary greatly between countries around the world. When analysed every country around the world has a different set of rules and requirements for purchasing a firearm. The New York times wrote an article titled “How to Buy a Gun in 15 Countries” where true to its name it gives a list of steps potential gun owners have to take to purchase a gun in 15 countries. The most shocking part of this article is that it analyzes both developed and undeveloped countries but, despite being the one of the biggest world powers the United Stated dramatically falls short on regulating firearm purchases essentially matching it’s policy to that of Yemen in a two step process, find a gun and buy it, the only difference between the two counties is that the United States requires a instant background check. In contrast, the country with the most requirements to purchase a fire arm is Japan with a 13 step process. The rest of the countries have at least 6 precautions they all take before handing over firearms, with the exception of Great Britain that has five. In countries such as Japan, Germany, and Canada, legally purchasing a firearm requires multiple hurdles to be cleared ranging from presenting two references from former partners (Canada), “Pass a review of your criminal history, gun possession record, employment, involvement with organized crime groups, personal debt and relationships with friends, family and neighbors.”(Japan),Volunteering to be subject to random home inspections by police officers to verify they are keeping their gun in a safe place. These step, along with the general influence against guns in local culture, have become part of why gun-related mortality rates in most countries are so low compared to that of the U.S. In a CNN study measuring gun related homicides per million, Japan reportedly had zero, Canada had five and Germany had one, while the United States had a jaw dropping thirty six. Additionally, according to a Study presented by MSNBC the Unites States makes up about then 4.43% of the worlds population but owns 42% of the world’s civilian owned guns and perhaps that’s why the U.S is also responsible for 31% of the worlds mass shootings.
Author: Admin
Mass shooters
In order to understand what causes mass shootings, it is crucial to analyze who is committing these violent acts. We have explored the profile of a mass shooter by researching the role of race, gender, and mental illness on who becomes a mass shooter. By analyzing data, like the Mother Jones Mass Shooters Database, and research from renown criminologists and psychologists we have been able to explore who becomes a mass shooter. Since 1982, most mass shootings have been committed by white men with acute mental health issues. However, such broad traits are unhelpful when it comes to assessing who will actually commit a mass shooting. Research on the link between mental illness and violent behavior is not useful and insignificant for predicting violent acts. Nonetheless, there has been controversy in the last couple of years in the media, as mental illness is often blamed after an incident of mass violence. We’ve explored the range to which these components affect a mass shooter and how they play a role in who becomes a mass shooter.
Collateral Damage
Effect on Mental Health Survivors
Mental health and mental illness become the scapegoat for culpability in the aftermath of mass shootings. After a shooting, there are mainly two arguments, either the general public and our legislators blame the weapon and demand firearm regulations be enacted, or they rebuke the shooter and question his mental health. The problem with this tendency is that it helps stigmatize an already marginalized community. In a TED Talk given by Carmela Epright, a professor at Furman University, she states that these situations spotlight severely ill patients and people suffering from delusions. She says diverting public attention towards mental health worsens the stigma already held about what mental illness looks like and its severity, when in reality 45 million Americans suffer from a mental illness. A clear example of this is incumbent president Donald Trump wanting to reopen more mental health facilities, where only severely ill patients who are deemed incapable of taking care of themselves, like those suffering from schizophrenia, are committed. His suggestion of opening more asylums will not prevent mass shootings from occurring because most of the shooters did not have diseases that meet the criteria to be committed into a mental health facility. Proposals like Trump’s directly affect people suffering from mental illnesses because opening asylums, in theory, could be a positive action if executed and regulated properly but the fear of reviving the snake pits from the 1960’s where patients were abused and forced to live in inhumane conditions is understandably troubling.
Mass Shootings and Mental Health
Correlation Between Mental Health and Mass Shootings
Contrary to popular belief, any correlation between mass shootings and mental illness is tenuous. After reviewing numerous polls, The New York times estimates roughly half of the American people believe there is a link between the two. The misconception stems from a vicious cycle in the aftermath of mass shootings in which prominent political figures, like president Donald Trump or speaker of the House Paul Ryan, actively associate mental illness and even blame it for these massacres when in fact there is little evidence linking the two. A 2015 study conducted by Dr. Michel Stone, a professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University, found that of the 235 mass killings analyzed, 22 percent of them involved a mentally ill assailant. When asked about this tendency to blame mental health for these tragedies, renown author and professor of criminology at Northwestern University Dr. James Alan Fox, told NBC News “We like to think that these people are different from the rest of us. We want a simple explanation and if we just say they’re mentally ill, case closed. Because of how fearful, dangerous and deadly their actions are, we really want to distance ourselves from it and relegate it to illness.” Fox has also said that out of the 198,760 firearm related homicides from 1999 to 2015, only 1% correspond to mental illness. Although mass shootings and mental health are not mutually exclusive and there have been shooters committed and diagnosed like John Zawahri, the Santa Monica shooter, these men are still outliers and therefore the exception to this rule.
Links with Psychopathy, and Angry and Disgruntled Individuals
When classifying whether an individual is mentally ill or not, personality disorders and psychopathy do not fall under mental illness. Parkland shooter Nickolas Cruz had demonstrated to be angry, isolated, and antisocial with psychopathic tendencies but was not diagnosed mentally ill. In direct messages sent to a class mate, Cruz demonstrated his aggressive behavior, even sending pictures of firearms before eventually opening fire on his school. Nickolas Cruz fits professor Carmela Epright’s definition of a pseudocommando perfectly, a term that she defines as people who kill in public daylight and arm themselves with an arsenal of firearms and ammunition, as well as brag while attempting to kill the most people possible. Professor Epright thus blames anger and aggression for these incidents instead of mental illness. To solidify her claim she cites Dylan Klebold’s quote to a Columbine victim saying, “We’ve always wanted to do this. This is payback. We’ve dreamed of doing this for four years. This is for all the shit you put us through”. In the aforementioned study by Dr. Stone, he categorizes the remaining not-mentally-ill (NMI) individuals into the following categories with the following results:
“Antisocial personality: 20 individuals (11.9%)
Depressive: 11 individuals (6.5%)
Disgruntled: 10 individuals (6%)
Rageful: 11 individuals (10.7%)
Paranoid: 48 individuals (28.6%)
Psychopathic: 25 individuals (16.1%)”
After seeing the results, Nickolas Cruz seemed to hit most points since he was depressive, disgruntled, full of rage and allegedly had psychopathic and antisocial tendencies. This argument helps point to other factors that may not be directly associated with mental health and suggests that maybe these incidents could be attributed to an amalgamation of other components such as anger and aggression.
Mass Shootings, Suicide and Depression
Sue Klebold, the mother of Columbine shooter Dylan Klebold, claims there is a link between depression, suicide and mass shootings. She claims that her son, Dylan, showed signs of depression well before he executed the attack on his school with the help of his friend, Eric Harris. The Columbine shooting ultimately claimed the lives of 13 people and injured more than 20. Klebold says Dylan was self-mutilating two years prior and even wrote in his journal that “he was in agony and wanted to find a gun to end his life.” She also states that 1-2% of suicides involve another person. She says that if the suicides rates continue to climb like they have been for the past couple of years, the number of people who die as a result will increase as well. Similarly, in an NBC News article, senior writer Phil McCausland says that considering the statistics for firearm related suicides is 313,641, it is more likely the mentally ill pose a greater danger to themselves instead of others. 
The graphic shown above provided by CNN also adds to Klebold’s argument by saying that 40% of active shooters take their own lives. The issue with her argument is that her son, and people who suffer from severe depression like him, were taken into consideration in a 2015 study conducted by Columbia University professor Dr. Michel Stone and the results still reflect that only 22% of mentally ill individuals are culpable of mass shootings. This means that despite there being a tangible correlation between mental illness like depression and suicidal tendencies the percentage of mass shooters suffering from theses diseases is still relatively tenuous. There may be a correlation between depression, suicide and mass shootings but like the argument for mental health, it is weak and promotes added stigma on those suffering from mental illness but, it also helps point out that maybe mass shooters could be driven by outside factors possibly social ones.
Race and Gender
Role of Race in Mass Shooters
In order to understand what causes mass shootings and how we can prevent them, it is essential that we understand and analysis the people who commit these vicious attacks. Sadly, there are no specific traits of those who carry out mass shootings in the United States. The perpetrators of these attacks come from different backgrounds with different mental illnesses and criminal histories. However, by examining the several mass shootings that have occurred in the U.S. we can find some propensities of the shooters.
After the Las Vegas shooting, many media outlets noted similar characteristics within the profile of other mass shooters. For instance, Newsweek, published the story “White men have committed more mass shootings than any other group.” The article claimed that since 1982, white men have committed a significant majority of mass shootings. After multiple articles were published on the subject, it became evident that the role of race does play a significant role in who becomes a mass shooter. More specifically, caucasian men are more likely to be responsible for mass shootings.
There is no government agency that officially tracks the race and gender of mass shooters. However, Mother Jones, a liberal magazine, has created an online mass shooter database that actively tracks and records the race, gender, and mental health of mass shooters. Mother Jones defines mass shootings as a single incident in which three or more people are shot or killed. According to data compiled by the Mother Jones magazine mass shooters database, since 1982 white people almost exclusively white men commit 64% of the shootings. Black people committed about 16% of the mass shootings and Asians commit nearly 9%. People identified as either Latino, Native American commit 11% of mass shootings.
Caucasians make up about 63% of the U.S. population, blacks 13%, Latinos account for 17%, and Asians 5%, according to the latest census numbers. These statistics explain why white people are more likely to commit these attacks as there is a more significant number of white people than any other race in the U.S.
While no official government agency or political official has brought up these important statistics, it is evident that whites play a more significant role in mass shootings than any other race. White men specifically have committed the majority of mass shooting, more than the women of all combined races.
Role of Gender in Mass Shooters
Most shooter over the past 35 years have one thing in common and that is that they are all men. Much more than race, gender appears to have more of a correlation on whether or not someone becomes a killer. According to the Mother Jones database, only 2 women since 1982 have committed mass shootings. Additionally, a Crime and Law Enforcement statistic found that from 1982 to February of 2018, men have committed about 94 mass shootings while women have committed about 2 mass shootings. Making men responsible for approximately 90% of mass shootings.
According to criminologist James Alan Fox, women tend to see violence as a last resort while men use violence as an offensive weapon.Women are more likely to share their feelings and have stronger support systems. On the other hand, men tend to be more comfortable around firearms than women. For instance, men own guns at almost triple the rate of women in the U.S. Recent studies have shown that 62% of gun owners are men while 22% are women.
Many people believe that higher levels of testosterone lead to aggression, which would explain why males are more likely to commit mass murders. However, recent research indicates that testosterone is likely a result rather than a cause of violent behavior. The term hegemonic masculinity describes how our society and gender roles are created to ensure male power. Physiologist believe that a reason why men commit mass murder more than women is because in order to regain power in their lives and assert their hegemonic masculinity men will resort to violence and aggression.
Gun Control
Gun Control Definition and Purpose
Gun control, or more specifically, gun control laws, are one of, if not the most popular solution people may talk and debate about to put an end to these mass shooting incidents. The base method of this is to prompt the U.S. government to enforce restrictions on one’s ability to purchase, load, and carry any firearm at any point in time. The goal, however, is not to outright ban the weapons entirely and violate our Second Amendment rights as citizens, but to make it so that people can’t easily acquire their own to intentionally harm innocent people. This in turn will ultimately reduce the rate of which suicides and homicides committed with firearms will occur.
Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws
The results of these laws have come to be a mixed bag as time goes on. Of the many laws passed to affect how accessible purchasing firearms may be, it’s been reported that only a fraction of these barricades are able to produce results in which gun related deaths could be drastically reduced, as much as 80 percent. One of the most effective laws is known as the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act, commonly known as “Brady Law”, which requires federal arms dealers to perform background checks on customers. This alone has allegedly reduced suicides and homicides by up to 40 percent since its passing in 1994. The downside is that this is merely one of a select few laws and regulations that apply to federal licensed firearms dealers, not every U.S. citizen. As of now, there are no restrictions on one’s ability to purchase guns from a private arms dealer, nor are there any background checks performed on the customers in question. Furthermore, the National Rifle Association has expressed the concerns that gun enthusiasts have on these laws and their restrictions. To protect their interests, this organization has made all efforts, from lobbying politicians to protesting, to prevent any more developments in passing these laws, even as these incidents continue to occur. Besides this, people from both sides have argued and debated on the point of gun control laws, one of the most prominent points made being that people will still try to harm other people, no matter what. This among other arguments is also part of what stops the progress of passing these laws in their tracks, as well as Americans’ calls for action against mass shootings and other incidents.
Gun Control in Other Countries, and What the U.S. Can Learn From it
Around the world, policies and restrictions on the overall ownership of firearms are considerably more strict, which in turn produces much lower numbers in statistics on homicides and suicides in comparison to the U.S. One of the most well-known actions taken to reduce gun-related deaths was the 1996 gun buyback program in Australia, where the government forcefully bought back and destroyed over 600,000 firearms for $500 million. This resulted in total deaths by firearms being cut to half of its original numbers by 2006. Most other countries, such as the UK, have normally passed laws in which nearly every firearm is banned entirely from the hands of consumers, and have even instilled rigorous tests and training courses to make it more difficult to obtain such weapons. If such restrictions and actions were to be taken in the U.S., instead of promoting gun ownership and its usage, it is widely predicted that the statistics in gun-related deaths would become substantially lower over time.
NRA’s Role in Mass Shootings
About the NRA
NRA stands for National Rifle Association, which was established in 1871 by Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate, and who adopted the slogan “[to] promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis” (home.nra.org). In 1903, the NRA created “rifle clubs at all major colleges” as a means of encouraging shooting sports amongst the American youth, a tradition still upheld today with over one million members partaking in NRA shooting sports, many of whom are kids belonging to groups such as the Boy Scouts of America. Law enforcement along with civilian training are offered by the organization, in which “125,000 certified instructors…train about 1,000,000 [civilian] gun owners a year” (home.nra.org). The NRA Foundation, which in itself is a tax-exempt organization, was created in 1990 as a means of raising “millions of dollars to fund gun safety and educational projects of benefit to the general public.” Now, the association allegedly boasts a whopping five million members (bbc.com), all who fight to defend the average American citizen’s Second Amendment rights.
NRA’s Influence in Politics
The NRA first dipped its toes into political lobbying in 1934 with the mailing of information to its members regarding upcoming firearm bills (bbc.com). The National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 were both backed by the organization, yet the passing of the GCA marked the NRA’s more active involvement in politics by shaping its future political stance. The Institute of Legislative Action was formed in 1975 as a means of protecting Americans’ Second Amendment rights, and the association utilized it as a lobbying agent to influence government policy directly to their benefit. In the next two years, it would establish its personal Political Action Committee, which would serve as a way to fund and ultimately influence government legislators to pass regulation in their favor. This lobbying technique is what makes the NRA so influential in the passing or stopping of bills, and how it manages to influence elections from local all the way up to national.
The ILA is a domineering entity when it comes to the passing of certain public policy; an instance of this occurred in Florida in which the legislation passed declared that doctors would be punished for asking patients if they possessed a weapon (Watkins). Another effective technique used by the organization to sway citizens towards their cause is the development of their own magazines, shops, and clubs throughout the country. These act as tools to help spread their pro-gun message across the nation, further fueling our country’s controversial gun culture. NRA propaganda also helps draw in money for the association that will eventually go towards lobbying government officials.
The NRA, when it comes to lobbying, invests around three million dollars per year towards lawmakers in an effort to endorse their pro-gun agenda (bbc.com). Other potential contributions, such as towards PACs (Political Action Committees, which are designed to privately raise funds that can influence federal elections or regulation), are not publicly recorded and thus cannot be used to estimate how much the organization spends in total to clout legislative officials. In 2016 alone, however, the NRA managed to allocate a total of $35,157,585 towards government affairs (OpenSecrets.org), making it the top-spending political nonprofit of that year (Sit). In comparison to the entire 2016 election process, it spent $51,854,687, in which $30 million went solely towards Trump’s campaign (Sit).
NRA in Relation to Mass Shootings
The NRA plays a major role when it comes to the promotion of America’s pro-gun culture and our nation’s easy access to weapons. To understand the extent of their dominion, one must consider both their political and social dominance. The association manages to garner political support through the hefty donations it provides to elected leaders while simultaneously swaying the American public through its effective advertising strategies that convince them of the organization’s power and drive in protecting their rights.
After any mass shooting, a pattern is set in motion where gun sales go up six to eight weeks after the tragedy and the organization experiences a spike in donations as well (Nedelman). One of the reasons cited for this is people’s sudden need to defend themselves (Nedelman). Potential handgun buyers may view a mass shooting as the inciting incident that finally convinces them to obtain a weapon as a means of keeping themselves and their loved ones safe. An increase in gun purchases also occurs amongst people that previously never owned one, and a survey done by the Pew Research Center concluded that around 50% of gun owners in America “cite protection as their main reason for owning a gun” (Nedelman).
The dramatic hike in NRA donations after a shooting can be attributed to people fearing stricter gun control being passed in retaliation. American citizens highly value their Second Amendment, and so when it seems the government may infringe this right in any way by passing harsher regulation, people turn to the NRA whom they see as having the ability to protect their rights. All of this promotes the gun activists’ agenda, which entails little legal regulation in the purchasing of a weapon or parts of a weapon, and which ultimately contributes to the wide accessibility of guns (Engel). By the NRA preventing additional gun regulation, it spurs the senseless killing of thousands of innocent people every year, the latest being the Parkland massacre, making it the eighth school shooting in 2018 (Beckett). While some major companies like MetLife and Symantec publicly announced they would no longer offer discounts to NRA members after the tragedy in Florida (Bomey), a rise in the organization’s membership is already under way (time.com). As Charles Cotton, a member of the NRA’s Board of Directors, claimed in a Texas forum, TexasCHLforum.com, the level of opposition pro-gun activists are currently facing can only be surpassed with the recruitment of “NRA members every single day” (time.com).
Mass Shootings 