How Many More Must Die before America Realizes the Need for Gun Control?

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 14 June 2016
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Alex Harper. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
In the early morning of June 12, a shooting in Orlando, Florida shocked all of America, gaining global attention. A young shooter, potentially affected by religious extremism, was able to easily take the lives of 49 Americans and wound another 53, causing the most severe mass shooting in the history of the U.S. Still more disappointing is the fact that the U.S. has practically no way to manage these vicious attacks, apart from condemning them, feeling sorrow, and then waiting for the next shooting to happen. Even though there is no way to know where the next incident will occur or who the attacker will be, the fact that there will be more shootings is almost certain, and that is the most frightening part. Last December, a shooting in a California recovery center for disabled persons led to the death of 14 people, with 17 others wounded. At the time this kind of “home-grown terrorism” was shocking news, but the shooting on the June 12 demonstrates a new extreme for the potential killing power of “lone wolf” shooters. The extensive reporting on the incident will possibly stimulate more would-be desperados with enmity toward society or a desire to stir up terrorism. Unless America launches profound changes to its gun control policies, there is a real possibility these shootings will become even more frequent.

But there are already 250 million guns dispersed among the people, and America is chained to the enormous financial gain that centers on the manufacture and sale of guns. Will the U.S. be able to reform? The answer is rather pessimistic. The right to bear arms has been an important thread of American history, running all the way back to the nation’s founding. Even though it is often a hidden piece of America’s societal value system, it is nevertheless capable of being a tough center of resistance. I’m afraid implementing strict gun control policies in the U.S. would be harder than forcing all Americans to eat only Chinese food and switch to using chopsticks.

So, is it that Americans want to continue enduring shootings, much like dealing with frequent and repeated infections of the common cold? It is worth noting that the June 12 attacker, 29-year-old Omar, was a security guard by profession; it was completely legal for him to have a gun. Finding out which of the millions of gun permits in America were indiscriminately given and perhaps pose a deadly danger to U.S. society is a nearly impossible task, and U.S. law has no way to bestow legitimacy on this kind of investigation.

In reality, American society is locked in this position. As a result of the existence of the National Rifle Association and other organizations that intensely resist gun control, politicians that advocate gun control can only briefly call upon a few surface moral arguments. They do not dare put themselves in the middle of such a major conflict because they need votes. The fear a large number of Americans feel toward these shootings is only intermittent, and it has not yet taken shape into an overwhelming movement of public opinion. Therefore, demands for gun control only happen immediately after shootings, and are soon left forgotten and unsettled.

A distinctive national feature of the U.S. is that it is hard to carry out large-scale social reform. The density of America’s society is far lower than Eastern countries; the space in which the average member of society lives is comparatively large, but the importance given to collective social interests in the U.S. is far inferior to the importance given to such interests in Eastern societies. Making a part of society change its current “survival situation” for the benefit of the majority is extremely difficult in America.

Some people assert that “that’s just the way it is” in the U.S., the American-shaped process has been lucky to lead a majority of other countries, and it has reached the pinnacle of national strength. But, the U.S. faces more obstructions to making even a little change than developing countries face in making reform. We often think that America’s ability to correct itself is very strong, that it has an innate tendency to keep up with the times, but this is possibly not completely true, or at least we need to identify which mistake it is correcting. The people have so many guns, and even at a quick glance the abuse is obvious; the destruction of so many lives is testimony to that abuse. But up until now, the U.S. has yet to make any changes. This fact is depressing to many Americans.

Even though we still have not seen any signs of a formidable driving force, perhaps American society is finally waking up to the issue of gun control. The question of whether or not the U.S. is able to form a critical consensus needed to stop these vicious shootings and take decisive action is an important aspect of whether or not American society will be able to maintain long term vitality.

If shootings and terrorism become increasingly connected, I’m afraid it will be a nightmare when it comes to governing American society. It does not matter what unprecedented or tough measures Donald Trump claims he will take toward Islamic extremism in the future, or if Hillary Clinton defeats him and maintains “stable tactics,” once terrorist shootings grow in number, the subjection of America’s national strategy to some kind of influence and restriction will probably be very hard to avoid.


12日凌晨发生在佛州奥兰多市的枪击案强烈震动了全美国,也备受全球瞩目。一名有可能抱有极端宗教思想的年轻枪手如此容易地夺去49名美国人的生命,另致53人受伤,造成了美国历史上最严重的枪击案。更令人绝望的是,美国对治理恶性枪击案几乎毫无办法,人们除了谴责、悲伤,接下来就是等待下一起枪击案的发生。尽管新的枪击案将发生在哪里,未来的亡命徒是谁都无从得知,但它们终将会到来有很高确定性,这是最让人恐怖的。  去年12月美国加利福尼亚州的一所残疾人康复中心发生枪击案,造成14人死亡,17人受伤,那起“本土恐怖袭击”成为当时的爆炸性新闻,但是12日新的袭击展示了“独狼”枪手杀伤力的新极限。媒体的大规模报道很可能刺激更多仇恨社会或者想制造恐怖主义轰动的潜在亡命徒,除非美国在控枪问题上发动深刻改革,否则枪击案真有可能越来越多。

然而有2.5亿支枪分散在民间、围绕枪支的生产和消费已形成巨大利益链的美国能改革得动吗?答案是令人悲观的。民间拥枪是贯穿了美国整个建国史的线索之一,它是美国社会价值观一个虽然隐蔽、但却能够感知的支撑点。让美国社会严格控枪,这恐怕比让所有美国人都改吃中餐、使用筷子还要难些。

那么美国人要继续忍受枪击案就像感冒一样频繁的反复发作吗?要知道,12日的袭击者、29岁的奥马尔是一名职业保安,完全合法的拥枪者,要查出全美千百万张拥枪证有哪些是“滥发的”,对美国社会有着致命危险,那几乎是不可完成的任务,美国法律也无法对这种大规模的调查赋予正当性。

美国社会实际上僵在了这里。由于存在“全国步枪协会”等强烈抵制控枪的实体组织,主张控枪的政治家只停留在道德呼吁的表层,他们因为选票利益不太敢置自己于一场大冲突中。而大量普通美国人对枪击案的恐惧又是间歇性的,并未形成压倒性的舆论运动。因此对控枪的呼声总是随枪击案而来,随后又不了了之。

难以进行大规模社会改革,这是美国的一个国家特征。美国的社会密度远低于东方国家,社会成员的平均生存空间较大,集体共同利益在美国被赋予的重要性也远不如东方社会。让一部分人为了多数人利益而改变他们的“生存现状”,这在美国尤其难上加难。

有人断言美国“就这样了”,它在形成过程中幸运地领先了世界上的大多数国家,走上了国家实力的巅峰。但让它改点什么,比后发国家改革的障碍可就多多了。通常认为美国的纠错能力很强,与时俱进是它的天性,但这未必就全是真的,或者说要看纠什么错。民间有这么多枪,弊端已经一目了然,一批批鲜活生命的陨落在证明这个弊端,但美国迄今就是改不动。这个事实让不少美国人沮丧。

也许美国社会终将在控枪问题上“猛醒”,尽管现在还看不到那股强大推动力出现的迹象。或许可以说,能否在消除恶性枪击案问题上形成关键共识,采取决定性的行动,是美国社会能否保持长期活力的试金石。

枪击案如果与恐怖主义发生越来越紧密的联系,恐怕将是美国社会治理的噩梦。无论特朗普未来上台对“伊斯兰极端主义”采取空前强硬的措施,还是希拉里战胜特朗普进而保持“稳健策略”,一旦“恐怖主义枪击案”增多,美国的国家战略受到某种影响和牵制大概都难避免。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: As Genocide Proceeds, Netanyahu Is Yet Again Being Feted in Washington

Canada: Canada’s Retaliatory Tariffs Hurt Canadians

Germany: Trump’s Words and Putin’s Calculus

Topics

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Spain: Global Aid without the US

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Related Articles

Germany: US at a Crossroads

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity