US Violence Sets a Bad Example
Two journalists – a reporter and a cameraman – were killed yesterday in Virginia in a shooting rampage that occurred during a live news broadcast on local channel WDBJ-TV. The assailant, identified as Vester Flanagan – a laid-off former employee of the company – died a few hours later from self-inflicted gunshot wounds, according to authorities.
The events set off a new wave of indignation in our neighboring country. Josh Earnest, the U.S. government spokesman, deplored the tragic attack and urged Congress to take common sense measures to avoid incidents of this type, which have been happening frequently in the United States.
In fact, it is undeniable that the excessive proliferation of handguns among the U.S. population is a factor in the shocking episodes of individual violence that repeatedly spread terror and anxiety in the country. This proliferation is encouraged by legal factors, like the anachronistic Second Amendment to the Constitution and cultural factors, like the militaristic and violent spirit inculcated in the population by recent U.S. presidential administrations, most notably the George W. Bush administration.
But beyond the necessary revision of the regulatory framework that permits unrestricted ownership of firearms in the United States, incidents like this one allow a distorted perception by authorities, representatives and a good part of the country’s population, of threats to U.S. security. While the authorities press an anti-terrorist crusade against violent actions that take place thousands of kilometers away – for example, combat operations against the Islamic State – concrete and effective measures to detect and avert individual rampages that lead, with distressing frequency, to shootings and massacres like the one yesterday, are conspicuously absent.
Significantly, the same weapons industry that promotes the fight against threats, real or imagined, to national security abroad, fiercely opposes restrictions on civilian gun ownership at home. Overcoming this double standard is a necessary condition for reversing the worrying situation of homegrown violence that periodically disrupts the peace of a country that holds itself up to the rest of the world as a model of civility.
Furthermore, as regards the proliferation of firearms among the population, the U.S. experience should be seen as a negative role model for a country like ours. Significantly, the events of yesterday in Virginia coincide with the convening of the first Conference of States Parties (CSP) to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which seeks to lay the foundations for an adequate trade in and control of these products, and for the creation of an environment of peace, as [Mexican] Foreign Minister José Antonio Meade explained yesterday. Without disregarding the need to regulate and control the international flow of weapons, it is necessary to be careful that this treaty does not lead to the growth and consolidation of a legalized domestic market in firearms that, in the case of our country, would be difficult to limit to law enforcement agencies. This would predictably end up boosting the firepower of organized crime and would also make possible the proliferation of incidents of individual violence like those that have occurred in the United States. It is to be hoped that in this area, the Mexican authorities will consider these issues in light of the U.S. experience and act, in consequence, with the necessary caution.
The events set off a new wave of indignation in our neighboring country. Josh Earnest, the U.S. government spokesman, deplored the tragic attack and urged Congress to take common sense measures to avoid incidents of this type, which have been happening frequently in the United States.
In fact, it is undeniable that the excessive proliferation of handguns among the U.S. population is a factor in the shocking episodes of individual violence that repeatedly spread terror and anxiety in the country. This proliferation is encouraged by legal factors, like the anachronistic Second Amendment to the Constitution and cultural factors, like the militaristic and violent spirit inculcated in the population by recent U.S. presidential administrations, most notably the George W. Bush administration.
But beyond the necessary revision of the regulatory framework that permits unrestricted ownership of firearms in the United States, incidents like this one allow a distorted perception by authorities, representatives and a good part of the country’s population, of threats to U.S. security. While the authorities press an anti-terrorist crusade against violent actions that take place thousands of kilometers away – for example, combat operations against the Islamic State – concrete and effective measures to detect and avert individual rampages that lead, with distressing frequency, to shootings and massacres like the one yesterday, are conspicuously absent.
Significantly, the same weapons industry that promotes the fight against threats, real or imagined, to national security abroad, fiercely opposes restrictions on civilian gun ownership at home. Overcoming this double standard is a necessary condition for reversing the worrying situation of homegrown violence that periodically disrupts the peace of a country that holds itself up to the rest of the world as a model of civility.
Furthermore, as regards the proliferation of firearms among the population, the U.S. experience should be seen as a negative role model for a country like ours. Significantly, the events of yesterday in Virginia coincide with the convening of the first Conference of States Parties (CSP) to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which seeks to lay the foundations for an adequate trade in and control of these products, and for the creation of an environment of peace, as [Mexican] Foreign Minister José Antonio Meade explained yesterday. Without disregarding the need to regulate and control the international flow of weapons, it is necessary to be careful that this treaty does not lead to the growth and consolidation of a legalized domestic market in firearms that, in the case of our country, would be difficult to limit to law enforcement agencies. This would predictably end up boosting the firepower of organized crime and would also make possible the proliferation of incidents of individual violence like those that have occurred in the United States. It is to be hoped that in this area, the Mexican authorities will consider these issues in light of the U.S. experience and act, in consequence, with the necessary caution.
Previous article![]( "Hillary’s Image Problem")
