More outbreaks of gun violence are sure to come

There is an established pattern, and perhaps you have noticed it every time another mass shooting happens somewhere, whether Tucson or Columbine. People outraged at the atrocity but also at the ease with which a demented person acquired a gun write impassioned letters to the editors of daily newspapers calling for gun control. They are quickly followed — although now they are preceded — by other writers passionately accusing them of cruelly trying to politicize the tragedy by foisting their anti-gun sentiments upon law-abiding gun owners. Stalemate and inaction follow as neutralists call for reason and tolerance in public discourse. Sound familiar?

This is only partly why more outbreaks of gun violence are assured. The predictable yin and yang of protesters and counter-protesters does not seem to move people even as the horror of a greater slaughter also fails to bring any sort of solution. There is also the underlying American lust for rugged and ruthless individualism. Other countries as developed and sophisticated as ours have national cultures much more concerned about the common good even to the curtailing of the rights of an individual for the good of the most number of people. Such countries will routinely tax their people more heavily than does our government, and for unheard of social benefits like the availability of art and music for all at little or no expense to the patron, let alone things like universal health care for all.

In this mind frame, the government is the villain that dares to threaten my vast panoply of rights, whether or not mentioned in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, whether real or imagined. I get it into my head that the Second Amendment allows me to buy and carry a handgun even though I do not belong to a well-ordered militia. I allow the National Rifle Association to massage my head until I subscribe to its gospel that more guns will lessen violence because law-abiding citizens would be there on the scene to shoot a Jared Loughlen before he could kill or wound a second victim.

The fact is that a man was there at the shopping mall who was carrying a gun. He reports that his first inclination was to draw and fire. But he hesitated because he feared he would be seen as an accomplice of the shooter and be vulnerable to others’ gunfire in the panic and mayhem of the moment. With so many people going to hear Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, the crossfire would have killed or wounded more.

At this point, do I have to quote the U.S. bishops and their call for gun control made decades ago? I doubt that any pro-gun Catholic would so much as listen. They would likely dismiss the bishops as incompetent to speak about such secular, non-religious subjects. They would defer to the NRA, whose position epitomizes the individualism of the Wild West cowboy, gun-slinging his way through our entertainment and our thinking. That’s much sexier than ferverinos about collective responsibility.

Another reason why more outbreaks of gun violence are assured is our corresponding American lust for violence. Our movies, TV and video games program users to more easily accept violence against people, especially if we have decided that they are different from us, jihadis or minorities, for instance. Psychologists describe this as desensitization. They know that even in military training it is hard to get a trainee to actually kill another human. So they emphasize how different and how un-American the target is. Repetitive training achieves some degree of success.

Our national budget demonstrates our love of violence. How else do you explain that the U.S. spends more on military needs than do all the other nations of the world combined? Our defense budget annually exceeds 60 percent of the discretionary money we have to spend, something even communist China scorns. It’s a sure financial truth that where we put our money is where our values lie.

It does not dawn on us that neighboring Canada, with one ninth of our population yet with proportionately as many guns or more, requires screening that seems to work. But for us, that offends our individualism. It likewise fails to register that other countries outlaw handguns and still enjoy a great amount of security, with fewer gun fatalities in a year than some of our cities have in a week.

We reap what we sow. We sow unchecked individualism and lust for violence. We harvest Tucson. Why is anyone even mildly surprised at such basic cause and effect?