Gun Violence in the United States of America - Case Study Example

Business and Government in a Global Context Gun Violence in United States of America Student’s Name: Student number: Name of the unit: Unit Code: Unit coordinator: Word count: Contents Contents 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Power relations between governments, citizens and corporations 4 Gun culture in the United States of America 5 Causes of gun violence in the United States of America 7 Media and gun violence 7 Drug use and gun violence 8 Media coverage and gun violence 8 Mental illness and gun violence 8 Anti-social behaviour and gun violence 9 Ease of accessing a firearm and gun violence 10 Huge investment in military and gun violence 10 The big debate: to regulate or not 11 Conclusion 13 Executive Summary This is a report on the gun violence in the United States of America. It looks at the causes of gun violence naming but a few including mental illness, drugs, gun culture, heavy spending on weaponry, media publication and antisocial behaviours. It also looks at the big debate of gun control regulations highlighting the vested interests of various parties and players who have stalled the passing and enacting of more stringent gun control laws and regulations. Introduction Most recently large corporations have exhibited power even exceeding that of governments. There is increased lobbying by corporations in order to influence government policies by legislators. They in fact have indirect power on legislators (Rhodes, Battin & Silvers 2012, p. 211). There has been drastic changes in the way government conducts business. Boundaries between the government and civil societies have been brought down to some level. Currently, most governments, large corporations, citizens and societies work in association with one another in drawing up and implementing policies relating to the economy, environment and the society at large (Cheshire, Higgins & Lawrence 2006, p. 1). To some, the existence of large corporations is a hindrance to popular justice as wealth can be utilised by the large corporations to buy influence and those in power must give in to the influence of corporations in order to shield the economy from collapsing (Wilson, Dilulio & Bose 2015, p. 454). In the United States of America, there has been numerous deaths resulting from gun attacks. And at the same time there has been intensified debate on improved gun regulation to prevent deaths resulting from gun violence which is on the rise. This report will embark on the looking at the gun violence in the United States of America as an emerging issue. The report will divulge into issues of citizens, business corporations and government in respect to their roles in respect to this issue. The report will also look at the raging debate on gun control in the United States of America presenting facts for control and against the idea of control. Power relations between governments, citizens and corporations In the recent past corporations have grown to form part of the most powerful entities in the world. For instance, in the world’s largest 100 economies, only 49 of the 51 are corporations whereas the remaining ones are nations. This indicates how powerful these corporations. Corporations are driven by profit motive and this being so they tend to emphasis more on profits at the expense of even human rights. Responsibility of governments is to ensure that the social needs and issues such as environment of its citizens are addressed and fulfilled. On the contrary the responsibility of corporations is entirely to make its shareholders are happy (Helgesson & Mörth p. 21). This has always had governments being at loggerheads with most corporations. But in the most recent times, the government has partnered with most corporations in addressing most of the social issues affecting citizens and the country at large. This has been realised under the banner of social responsibility. In European countries the partnership between governments and corporations in solving social issues was lower but this has improved in the recent past. In the United States of America the involvement of the government and corporations in solving social issues is a notch higher and it is used as a benchmark for the other countries (SER 2005, p.101). As far as the United States of America is rated highly in dealing with and solving social issues affecting the society the issue of guns and gun violence is getting out of hand. The United States of America in the recent days and years has experiences a lot of deaths resulting from gun violence. Gun culture in the United States of America Americans and the American government have really struggled to curb gun violence (DeConde 2001, p. 3). Deaths in the United States of America resulting from gun related violence surpass the deaths as a result of terrorism by far. The control has not been succeeding whenever they have been instituted partly because of the culture of gun keeping inherent in the Americans (Orient 2013, p. 77). They have special attachments to guns, an attachment going back as far as three hundred years ago (DeConde 2001, p. 3). Statistics has it that the obsession of owning firearms has its origin in the English colonists. They were so in love with guns in that after creating their own government, they also made it constitutional legal for one to use and use a firearm. There was legal protection as far owning and using a firearm is concerned. This legal protection laid the grounds upon which the Americans equated the right to own firearms as the right of being patriotic (DeConde 2001, p.3; Dizard, Muth & Andrews 2000, p. 1). From the recent happenings in the United States of America it is evident that when guns find themselves in the wrong hands even the safest places such as learning institutions, places of worship, movie theatres and shopping centres into the combat regions (Giffords & Kelly 2014, p. 1). Available statistics also point to the fact that Americans have more often used guns to assault and kill than have most of other individuals in the world (DeConde 2001, p. 4). The constitution of the United States of America affords all Americans the right to own and use firearms (Doeden 2012, p. 6). It is on this right that one of the first historian to look at the this case of gun rights once said the United States of America was the only nation so glued to the right to own firearms that these same laws of gun ownership foment assassins, political murderers, professional hit men and berserk murderers at the expense of the peaceful population (DeConde 2001, p. 4). Others strongly oppose the view held by others that guns in private hands has done more harm than good to the American people saying that the same hands in private hands had proved to be beneficial to the society and continue to do so even now. They glorify the idea of ‘a nation in arms’ (DeConde 2001, p. 4). The same glorification has lots of Americans lose their lives through gun violence by civilians in possession of guns. This glorification of civilian gun keeping has had its toll on the American people and the nation at a large often resulting in undesirable social consequences. Causes of gun violence in the United States of America The history of gun violence in the United States of America dates back beyond the assassination of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther both of whom were victims of gun violence. Findings in the 1990s indicated that each day in the US an individual dies as a result of a gunshot after eighteen minutes translating to 30, 000 deaths in a year. During this same period guns were used by criminals exceeding 164, 000 times on aggravated assault. The same criminals in that same period used guns to carry out assaults on police more than 2,700 times and on robberies they used guns more than 181,000 times. These figures are averages per year (Crooker 2003, p. 1). Media and gun violence Most of the people that engage in violence especially gun violence under the influence of video games and violent movies they watch or watched in their childhood. Studies conducted in the US showed that the more the amount of money devoted to gun movies the higher the rates of deaths by firearms (Lemieux 2014, p. 84). And during this time of learning violence from the media, the parents and the society at large took a low profile as far as the provision of good parenting and direction is concerned. This has come to be termed as the pop culture where most of the young people in the US are more inclined to watching violent movies and play violent video games. Having done that they could want to experiment it on real life and hence move to streets, schools, political gatherings and other places and shoot people indiscriminately. All these exposure to violent media boils down to poor parenting methods. Parents don’t show their kids and expect the same kids to show love to others. This makes it easier for these young people to pull the trigger. The lack of love for this young as the parents are busy in their own cares make them frustrated and angry and are forced to vent their anger on innocent Americans. Drug use and gun violence Quite a number of shootings in the United States of America can be attributed to drug abuse. Those young people engaging in drugs are more likely to pull the trigger to kill. There is vast use of drug especially Xanax and other drugs that anti-psychotic and are mood altering. The popularised use of the drug Xanax in the mid 80’s show increased cases of horrific shootings in the United States of America. Nearly every shooter was on some kind of prescription for such drugs (Webster & Vernick 2013, p. 184). This point to the fact that the use of drugs and misuse of the same drugs in the country has really contributed to the gun violence cases being exhibited in the USA (Conwell et al 2002, p. 410). Media coverage and gun violence Once heinous activities of gun violence take place they are all over on the news, all TV channels put their normal programming on halt to cover that event of gun shooting. The attention the gun violence incidents receive from the media puts the urge in more people wanting to do the same on order to receive such huge publicity (Spitzer 2001, p. 223). The channels airing these mass shootings hit the airwaves with such statements as ‘this is the greatest mass shooting ever in the United States of America with the highest body count’. The violent youth would want to surpass that record and create a new record. More people would want to do the same in order to receive such publicity. This is common among young adults and the youth (Shah et al 2000, p. 159). Mental illness and gun violence When the history of most of the shooters in the United States of America is looked upon, it points to the fact that most of the shooters had been treated before for mental illness. A good number of these people were not able to continue with their treatment because of monetary constraints (Faria 2013). And because of this, the disease takes a toll on them and hence the decision to engage in gun violence. In most cases individuals with a mental history are more likely to become violent when agitated by somebody or something (Sorenson & Vittes 2008, p. 249). In December 2012 Adam Lanza walked into a school in Newton Connecticut with a military grade semiautomatic rifle killing 20 children and 6 adults. It was later established that Adam Lanza was suffering from undiagnosed schizophrenia (Metzi & MacLeish 2015, p.240). Statistics in the US point out that 60% of the mass shooters since 1970 exhibited mental illness signs such as paranoia, delusions and depression before committing the crimes (Metzi & MacLeish 2015, p.240). James Holmes the shooter at Aurora, Colorado movie theatre was under treatment for schizophrenia by the time he opened fire at a crowded movie theatre. Elliot Rodger, Isla Vista, California shooter suffered from Asperger’s disorder (Metzi & MacLeish 2015, p.240). Anti-social behaviour and gun violence Some of the perpetrators of gun violence in the United States of America have had these acts of violence coordinated and planned before they take place. The same perpetrators even after committing the offences try to evade arrest. In a nut shell these people are naturally anti-social. They have poor social skills. The act of trying to run away is a clear indication that they were already aware of the consequences of their actions and hence had a motive behind their actions. A vivid example is the 2013 Boston bombing where the perpetrators had the attack coordinated and planned and were void of empathy for human life (Crino 2014, p. 118). Ease of accessing a firearm and gun violence In the world there are only two countries that have the right to own a firearm enshrined in their constitutions; Mexico and the United States of America (Lemieux 2014, p. 76). Other nations who initially had this as a right in their constitution have so far amended that making gun ownership a privilege not a right. It is easier to access and own a firearm in the United States. This has a direct correlation to gun violence in the nation. Studies in the US have shown that the legal purchase of firearms makes the risk of violent deaths to increase (Hemenway 2011, p. 508). Another study in the same country has it that those people owning firearms are 4.46 more likely to be shot in an assault compared to those that do not possess firearms (Branas et al. 2009, p. 2037; Dahlberg, Ikeda & Kresnow 2004, p. 931). Huge investment in military and gun violence A considerable portion of the GDP of the United States of America is devoted to military expenditure (Lemieux 2014, p. 80). The country has in most cases resorted to military solutions for social and political problems. The most recent one being the invasion of Iraq by US troops. This has seen the emergence of war culture in the United States of America and the militarization of several sectors in the country. More often than not these sectors resort to the utilization of military tools and tactics in resolving social problems. This approach trickles down to the civilians who adopt the same approach in resolving disputes (Haggerty 2001, p. 51; Kraska 2002). The huge expenditure on military also point to the fact there is a lot of military grade weapons within the country. The big debate: to regulate or not The issue of gun control in United States is a thorny issue and has been approached cautiously by all the stakeholders. It is because of this delicateness of the matter that has seen reforms as far as gun control is concerned drag on for some time now without any conclusive solution in sight. This is highly attributed to the political and historical issues. Politically the United Nations legislators have had their hands held in relation to coming up with laws and regulations to control in the country. They are held back in passing gun control regulations because of the varying opinions held by voters on the same gun control issue. They are those ones that are for gun control laws and there are those who are against gun control. They are wary of a backlash from the voters (Lemieux 2014, p. 76). The legislators have not effected any major changes in gun control laws because they are afraid of putting their political careers on the line if they do so. Most of the organisations that endorse and fund politicians are gun zealot organisations and corporations engaged in businesses to do with supply of weapons. Lawmakers fear such endorsements and funding if they dare come up with regulations that may negatively impact on those organisations and corporations in the arms industry. Case in point being the National Rifle Association (NRA) which rates politicians on their stand as far as gun control is concerned. For instance in 1996 politicians who wanted to score highly on the NRA scorecard brought a bill to congress on limiting the funding advanced to National Center for Injury prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to only dealing with injury prevention and control. None of that funding was to be used on advocating for gun control (Kellermann & Rivara 2013, p. 550). Historically the United States has had a violent history (Felson & Pare 2010, p. 1363). It has seen violent periods such as American Revolution, the ‘Wild West’ and the Civil War where most of these conflicts were resolved using weapons (Lemieux 2014, p. 78). The nation is divided as far as instituting gun control laws are concerned. There are so many vested interests as far as the arms trade is concerned in the United States of America. Large portions of the American population put forward antagonistic opinions and asseverate contradictory facts whenever they talk about gun violence. For many of these individuals who include scholars, teachers, lawyers, judges, journalists, politicians and citizens attribute their position to the Second Amendment which states ‘ A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not infringed’ (Carter 2006, p. 24). They argue that guns do not kill people but people do kill people. Those who are for the gun control regulations are urging everybody to put their interests aside and look out for the common good of the American people and institute gun control laws. They assert that the costs of gun violence are intolerable. Hence the need to institute gun control measures. Costs in terms of medical, job productivity, criminal-justice, school and other expenses related to gun violence exceed $ 100 billion per year and affects Americans in so many ways (Cook & Ludwig 2000, p. 117; Melamed et al 2011, p. 546). Gun violence has its toll on the entire socioeconomic spectrum for instance through increased taxes, reduction in property value in areas prone to gun violence limiting choices of people on where to live and visit (Cook & Ludwig 2002, p. 87). The cost of the lives of the American people is the highest. The recent mass shooting at Oregon made the president agitated and went on to rally for and gun control regulations (Catalfamo 2006, p. 512; Weaver 2008, p. 401).Enactment of gun control regulations such as Castle doctrine has done little to avert the gun crisis. More needs to be done. Conclusion A combination of a number of factors has contributed to gun violence in the US. Among these include drug abuse, political reasons, mental illness, a culture of gun violence in the country which is historical as well as the media attention has publicised the whole thing attracting more to gun violence. The debate to control of gun violence has created two antagonistic groups; those that are against gun control and those that are for gun control regulations. All said, problem of gun violence in the American society is huge whether when being looking at it through productive life years lost, disability, economic costs or fear. Current gun laws have exhibited weaknesses as far gun regulations are concerned. References Branas, CC , Richmond, TS, Culhane, DP, Ten Have, TR, & Wiebe, DJ 2009, Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 99, no. 11, pp. 2034-2040. Carter, GL 2006, Gun control in the United States: A reference handbook, ABC CLIO, California. Catalfamo, C 2007, Stand your ground: Florida’s castle doctrine for the twenty-first century, Rutgers Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 504-545. Cheshire, L, Higgins, V & Lawrence, G 2006, Rural governance: Internal perspectives, Routledge, New York. Conwell, Y et al. 2002, Access to firearms and risk for suicide in middle aged and older adults, American Journal of Geriatr Psychiatry, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 407-416 Cook, PJ & Ludwig, J 2002, The costs of gun violence against children, Future of Children, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 86-99. Cook, PJ & Ludwig, J 2000, The real costs, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Crino, R 2014, Finding common ground: Mental illness recognition and crisis response for law enforcement, Lulu Publishing Services, Woonsocket. Crooker CE 2003, Gun control and gun rights, Greenwood Press, Westport. Dahlberg, LL, Ikeda, RM & Kresnow, M 2004, Guns in the home and the risk of a violent death in the home: Findings from a national study, American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 160, no. 10, pp. 929-936. Deconde, A 2001, Gun violence in America: The struggle for control, Northeastern University Press, Boston. Dizard, JE, Muth, RM & Andrews, SP (eds), 2000, Guns in America: A reader, New York University Press, NewYork. Doeden, M 2012, Gun control: Preventing violence or crushing constitutional rights?, Lerner Publishing Inc., Minneapolis. Faria MA 2013, Shooting Rampages, Mental Health, and the Sensationalization of Violence, Surgical Neurology International, vol. 4, no. 16. Felson, R & Pare, PP 2010, Gun Cultures or Honor Cultures? Explaining Regional and Race Differences in Weapon Carrying, Social Forces, vol. 88 no.3, pp.1357-1378 Giffords, G & Kelly, M 2014, Enough: Our fight to keep America safe from gun violence, Scribner, New York. Haggerty, KD & Ericson, RE 2001, The Military Techno structures of Policing. In P. B. Kraska (ed.), Militarizing the American Criminal Justice System, (pp. 43-64), Northeastern University Press, Boston. Helgesson, S & Mörth, U 2013, The political role of corporate citizens: An interdisciplinary approach, Palgrave Macmillan, London. Hemenway, D 2011, Risks and benefits of a gun in the home, American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 502-511. Kellermann, AL & Rivara, FP 2013, Silencing the Science on Gun Research, Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 309 no. 6, pp. 549-550. Lemieux, F 2014, Effect of gun violence and firearm laws on gun violence and mass shootings in the United States: A multilevel quantitative analysis, International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 74-93. Melamed, Y, Bauer, A, Kalian, M et al. 2011, Assessing the risk of violent behaviour before issuing a licence to carry a handgun, The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 543-548. Metzi, JM & MacLeish, KT 2015, Mental illness, mass shootings and the politics of American firearms, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 240-249. Orient, JM 2013, Gun violence as a public health issue: A physician’s response, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 77-83. Rhodes, R & Silvers, A 2012, Medicine and social justice: Essays on the distribution of health care, Oxford University Press, Oxford. SER 2001, Corporate social Responsibility: A Dutch Approach, Van Gorcum, Assen. Shah, S et al. 2000, Adolescent suicide and household access to firearms in Colorado: Results of a case-control study, Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 157-163. Sorenson, SB & Vittes, KA 2008, Mental health and firearms in community based surveys: Implications for suicide prevention, Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 239-256. Spritzer, RJ 2001, The right to bear arms: Rights and liberties under the law, ABC CLIO Inc., California. Weaver, ZL 2008, Florida's “Stand Your Ground” law: The actual effects and the need for clarification, Miami Law Review, vol.63, no.1, pp. 395-430. Webster, DW & Vernick, JS (eds.) 2013, Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Wilson, J, Dilulio, J & Bose, M 2015, American Government: Institutions and policies, Cengage Learning, Stamford. Read More