You Can Keep Your Guns if You Support Universal Health Care

Another week, another massacre, another call for a conversation about gun violence that will likely go unanswered in any substantial way.  Perhaps the horror of the events in Connecticut will make this one different.  Perhaps not.  But I felt the need to weigh in as a progressive who grew up around guns, though not often using them myself.

My dad is a hunter.  I don't want to take away his ability to partake in his favorite hobby; if somebody told me I couldn't play board or video games anymore, I'd be mad as hell.  I know that the vast majority of gun owners use them responsibly and safely.  I also know that with around 300 million guns in the country (by some estimates) the odds of reducing them in a significant way are minimal.  But you are in any way horrified by the fact that in 2012 America a deranged 20-year-old can use legally obtained weapons to gun down 26 people, most of them under 10, in a matter of minutes, then you are negligent if you don't want to participate in a discussion about gun violence in this country.  Notice I said gun violence, not control.  Hear me out.

First though, I have to object to two memes I've seen posted widely on Facebook since the shooting:

1. If you think the 2nd Amendment is necessary to protect you from the tyranny of the government, you are a bit delusional.  If you think your handgun or semiautomatic rifle or whatever is going to protect you from stealth bombers, cruise missiles, and nukes, well, good luck with that.  And if the military defects and joins whatever revolution you see coming, then what good is your comparative pea-shooter gonna do?  The exact language of the 2nd Amendment is this: "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 be infringed."  Reading this closely (as conservatives supposedly like to do), you could argue that the amendment became obsolete the moment the US established a permanent, professional standing army.  But I'm not here to make that argument.  Guns are here to stay.  Just don't plan on using them to overthrow the government whose military is stronger than the next 25 militaries combined.

2. I've seen a lot of messages about how if there were MORE guns in schools, i.e. if teachers or other school personnel were armed, such tragedies could be avoided.  Give me a break.  You have no way of knowing what would've happened.  The shooter might've known to just take out the teacher first.  More kids might've gotten hit in the crossfire.  Who knows?  No one.  Moreover, do you really want to turn our schools into militarized zones with guns in ready reach of schoolchildren, even if they are supposedly secure (and what good do they do in a crisis moment if they are)?  It's bad enough that our teachers now have to be trained in crisis response as a routine part of their job.  They shouldn't have to also be trained in the proper use of firearms.  You'd have a lot fewer good teachers if that were the case.  If there were guns on campus, I never would've accepted a teaching position at a school with a student population that included many who had served time and who could be disturbingly enterprising.  One student in my room reacted to accidentally being kicked by punching a hole in a door.  No gun in a lockbox or whatever is truly secure in that situation.  If a teacher has to replace their grading pen with a handgun, society has failed.

I've already addressed the third meme - the horrendous belief that this tragedy wouldn't have happened if (Christian) prayer and (Christian) religious instruction were allowed in public schools - in an earlier post.  In short, if you have a picture like this on your Facebook wall:


You have no place at the table of a serious discussion about gun violence.  If, however, you've passed that test, let's continue.

 I'm well aware the problem's not just about the guns.  Countries like Canada and Switzerland have roughly as many guns per person as we do.  They are an important part of their history and culture.  And gun violence is relatively nonexistent there.  What has become a routine event here would be a national tragedy there - headlines for months.  What sets us apart?  Two factors that I can think of to highlight.  First, certain of our politicians and media play strongly on peddling a culture of fear - of the government and of the "other."  I blame the NRA for ginning up unreasonable and unfounded fears about Obama coming for your guns (they have a newsletter dedicated to such).  Their influence showed when sales of guns and ammo spiked after both of Obama's elections.  Well, Obama's done pretty much nothing so far to limit gun rights.  He's caught a lot of flak from the left for that very reason.  The NRA knee-jerk reactions and widespread influence restrict any meaningful discussion in the name of "cold dead hands."

Fear of the other has escalated dramatically since 9/11.  Fearmongering causes people to feel the need to arm themselves against the terrorists.  Well, unhinged young white males have killed a lot more people on American soil in the past ten years than foreign terrorists.  I can only imagine the reaction had the Connecticut shooter's name happened to be something like Abdul Aziz.  Somebody unsuccessfully tries to blow up a plane using a shoe bomb and now everyone has to take off their shoes in an airport.  Somebody unsuccessfully tries to blow up a plane using liquid explosives and now everybody has to pack their liquids carefully in specifically sized containers.  Somebody mass murders people in a movie theater, or a mall, or an elementary school...and nothing changes.  We fear illusory threats from the government or foreign terrorism to the point where we are blind to address the real problems.

If moving beyond simple gun control, the most prevalent idea for improving the situation involves providing more comprehensive and effective mental health programs.  I agree, but I am afraid that this is rapidly becoming a knee-jerk response from gun control opponents who want to say something other than "I want my guns" in the wake of a mass shooting.  So I want them to carefully consider what they might be advocating, which brings me to the second difference between us and, say, Canada - universal health care.  People here with children that have mental health needs have to fight for jobs that provide the benefits which will cover the services their children require.  It's not always possible.  The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act only covers so much.  Teachers and counselors might have dozens of special needs students on their plate.  It's no wonder that so many tragic cases slip through the cracks.

So I'll make gun owners a deal.  Keep your guns.  They don't bother me.  But give me universal health care.  And I'm not talking the halfway solution that Obamacare is.  I'm talking cradle-to-grave single-payer coverage like pretty much every other advanced country on the planet has.  If you want your gun rights, I want a guarantee that every person with mental health needs will be treated to the maximum extent possible.  And to address the vast majority of gun violence that occurs outside of media-captivating mass shootings, I want more and better programs designed to combat urban poverty.  I'm not saying just throw money at cities; it has to be done smartly.  But if you agree to give the urban poor better health care and better education and employment opportunities, I won't really care if you have a bazooka in your collection.  How's that sound?