Listen to the Americans Who Don't Have Guns

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 27 December 2012
by Zhong Xueping (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Elizabeth Cao. Edited by Lauren Gerken.
After the awful school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut in the U.S., an American friend of mine told me that although her daughter, who is a teacher, did not teach at that school, her daughter did live near the school and even knew some of the families of the shooting victims. My friend said that although these vicious shootings are often heard about, this particular one was the closest to home and the closest to her family, making it feel even more shocking. And that this time, because most of the victims were no older than 10 years of age, the cries for gun control felt different than usual.

My friend is skeptical about whether there will be any kind of change with respect to gun control, but not because she supports gun ownership. On the contrary, she has a clear understanding of the politics behind the issue of guns and even the difficulties behind changing the relevant laws. My friend's reaction to the shooting was the most typical of my American friends: stunned, but unable to do anything about it.

In the U.S., just as a dog biting a man is not news, gun-related casualties due to conflicts between normal people occur every day; although the number of these cases is not decreasing, these small-scale conflicts have long not been considered to be news. People only need to refer to the statistics regarding deaths by guns (which doesn't even include the figures for gun-related injuries) to see that. Interestingly, the number of deaths is different according to different sources. In the same year, there were numbers for 30,000 deaths (sources on the internet), 20,000 deaths (an American guest on the CCTV show "Dialogue") and 10,000 deaths (Obama's speech after the Newtown shooting). And although it is unknown which figure is the most accurate, even 10,000 casualties is a shocking number.

Over the years, vicious and awful campus shootings have made headlines. And yet, people still feel shocked every time they hear such news. Even if this news now feels as common as a dog biting a man, it frequently remains nothing more significant than just “news.” Moreover, the numbness and helplessness society feels when these events occur reflects society's numbness and helplessness with respect to these issues. At least so far, the reactions to these events about have not been able to bring about the most basic changes or have any impact on these issues. Indeed, those who are familiar with this cycle of events know that the calls for gun control begin immediately following shootings but, regardless of appeals and attempts at reform, politicians are purely putting on a show and soon everything will return to normal. That is, until the next tragic turn of events occurs and the cycle repeats.

I heard that there those in the U.S. who interpret gun ownership as an integral part of their freedom, stemming from the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Indeed, CCTV and Shanghai TV announcers have said that without a doubt, the Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms. But in reality, over the years, the correct meaning and interpretation of the Second Amendment has been heavily disputed in circles studying American law. Those who are interested are welcome to add their understanding of this subject.

In the U.S., many of the people I know do not own guns and are highly critical of gun ownership and the issue that surrounds it. This, of course, probably has something to do with the kinds of people with whom I interact, who either are members of the Democratic Party or who lean toward the left. Many are also highly educated or scholars. Most scholars look toward the history and political vision of the country to try to study the U.S. and its problems. They understand the relationship between gun interest groups and political groups in gun culture. They know the ridiculousness of the phrase, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." They fully understand that the idea behind the need for an individual to bear arms to defend against the government is "libertarianism," not "liberalism." They clearly understand that all the shootings over the years (not including the ones related to injuries) have been a way of exacting revenge upon another individual or society and have been an issue directly related to society, not a revolt against or a critique of the government. A smaller number of these critics also understand that under the influence of various political groups, these shootings will continue to be covered in the mainstream media as the result of personal behavioral problems and continue to cover up deep-rooted societal issues.

What is most interesting is how these members of the "cultural elite" who fully understand all of these issues voice their thoughts on them, while shootings and gun violence, due to the political imbalance between the groups for gun control and groups for gun ownership, continue to happen over and over again. In the face of this reality, more and more people feel this sense of powerlessness toward the issue of gun laws, as did the friend I mentioned at the beginning. Although these events are unbelievable and shocking, "experts" on the issue do not place much faith change because the situation seems so hopeless that they don’t even dare to hope for change.


美国康涅狄克洲Newtown 校园的恶性枪击后,一位美国朋友告诉我,她做老师的女儿尽管不在那所学校教书,但就住在离学校不远的地方,还认识几位受害孩子的家人。朋友说,尽管常闻恶性枪杀事件,但这次离家门最近,离自己家人最近,更感不可思议。因为受害者大都为不到十岁的孩子,朋友又说似乎感觉到了不同往常的控枪呼声。

  朋友对是否会发生根本性的变化持怀疑态度。不是因为她支持枪文化,恰恰相反,她对持枪文化背后的政治势力有清楚的认识,深知要改变的困难。朋友这样的反应是我认识的美国朋友中最为典型:不可思议,但又无可奈何。

  如今在美国,就像狗咬人不是新闻一样,很多平常人冲突之间造成的个别枪只伤亡事件,每天发生,甚至每年因为枪支走火的案例也不在少数,但早已不是新闻。人们只能从统计数字里了解每年在美国国内因枪械至死亡的人数(还不包括因此受伤的人)。有意思的是,最近在不同人那里得到是不同的死亡数字,有一年三万的(网络上的批评者),两万的(一位在中央电视台英语“Dialogue”访谈节目上接受访问的一位来自美国的评论员),和一万的(奥巴马就Newtown校园枪击案的讲话)。尽管不知哪个数字最准确,但即使是一万也是惊人的。


  多年来,每每成为重大新闻的大多是恶性的校园枪杀案。但是,当这类首次发生时让人感到不可思议的事件一次又一次的发生,即使仍有人咬狗那样的新闻效益,次数多了,虽仍是新闻,却难有超越“新闻价值”的重大意义。而且,社会本身的某种麻木感和无奈感也随之产生,因为至少到目前为止,这类新闻及其引发的社会反应,并没有带来根本变化的“效应”。确实,人们熟悉了的循环恰恰是,此类新闻会立即引发控枪的呼吁,但无论控枪派如何呼吁,政客们如何作秀,不久一切都会一如既往,直到下一个恶性事件的发生,开始下一轮的循环。

  听说,国内有人把美国枪支文化解释为美国人有对抗政府的自由,而这个自由来源于美国宪法的第二修正案。确实,中央电视台和上海电视台的播音员,顺口说出的就是,美国宪法给予个人拥有枪支的自由。而事实上,多年来,在美国法学界里对如何理解宪法关于持枪的意思,一直存有争议。有兴趣者可对此多加了解。

  在美国,我身边的绝大多数人并不拥有枪支,并对枪支文化的恶性发展持批评态度。这当然跟自己交往的人群类型有关,其中绝大多数的政治倾向属于民主党,不少属于民主党内的左翼,主要是学者和学历较高的人。大多数学者看待美国国内的问题比较有历史和政治眼光。他们懂得枪支文化背后各类军火生产的利益集团与政治集团之间的关系;懂得“不是枪杀人,而是人杀人”口号似是而非的荒谬性;明白所谓“个人持枪为了反抗政府”这类宣传背后的极端个人主义理念,是“libertarianism”(极端自由主义)而不是 “liberalism”(自由主义);并且清楚,多年来的枪击案(擦枪走火的误伤不算在内),显现出的主要是个人对其他个人或者对社会的报复,是社会矛盾的一种症候,而不是真正意义上的反抗政府。这些批评者中的一小部分,更是明白,在各种政治利益集团的掌控下,主流媒体会继续把恶性事件解释为个人行为的问题,社会矛盾的本质亦将被继续掩盖。

  有意思的当然是,认识到这些问题的“文化精英”们,在当下美国社会里,他们的话语权究竟有多大。与此同时,与枪支文化共存的枪杀暴力,伴随着批评者和利益集团之间不平衡的话语权和政治博弈,继续一次又一次地发生着。在这样的现实面前,人们更多感觉到的往往是一种无力感。就像我开头提到的那位朋友所感觉的那样:问题到了如此疯狂和不可思议的地步,“明白人”却对这一现实的改变不报太大的希望,因为似乎看不到希望,所以不敢希望。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Trump-Musk: Affair, Breakup and Reconciliation?

Germany: If You’re Not for Him, You Should Be Afraid*

Germany: LA Protests: Why Are So Many Mexican Flags Flying in the US?

Cuba: Summit between Wars and Other Disruptions

India: US, Israel and the Age of Moral Paralysis

Topics

India: US, Israel and the Age of Moral Paralysis

Singapore: Iranian Response in Qatar Was Specifically Targeted at Washington – ‘We Are Done’

Sri Lanka: Pakistan’s Nobel Prize Nominee and War in Middle East

Pakistan: After Me, the Deluge

India: What if Trump Has Just Started Another ‘Forever War’?

Russia: Will the US Intervene in an Iran-Israel Conflict? Political Analyst Weighs the Odds*

Cuba: Summit between Wars and Other Disruptions

Germany: Resistance to Trump’s Violence Is Justified

Related Articles

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem