The recent events in Boston have expanded the debate on gun control. (photo: unknown)
readersupportednews.org
The marathon bombs triggered a reaction that is at odds with last week's inertia over arms control.
he
thriving metropolis of Boston was turned into a ghost town on Friday.
Nearly a million Bostonians were asked to stay in their homes - and
willingly complied. Schools were closed; business shuttered; trains,
subways and roads were empty; usually busy streets eerily resembled a
post-apocalyptic movie set; even baseball games and cultural events were
cancelled - all in response to a 19-year-old fugitive, who was on foot
and clearly identified by the news media.
The actions allegedly committed by the Boston marathon
bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother, Tamerlan, were heinous. Four
people dead and more than 100 wounded, some with shredded and amputated
limbs.
But Londoners, who endured IRA terror for years, might
be forgiven for thinking that America over-reacted just a tad to the
goings-on in Boston. They're right - and then some. What we saw was a
collective freak-out like few that we've seen previously in the United
States. It was yet another depressing reminder that more than 11 years
after 9/11 Americans still allow themselves to be easily and willingly
cowed by the "threat" of terrorism.
After all, it's not as if this is the first time that
homicidal killers have been on the loose in a major American city. In
2002, Washington DC was terrorised by two roving snipers, who randomly
shot and killed 10 people. In February, a disgruntled police officer,
Christopher Dorner, murdered four people over several days in Los
Angeles. In neither case was LA or DC put on lockdown mode, perhaps
because neither of these sprees was branded with that magically
evocative and seemingly terrifying word for Americans, terrorism.
To be sure, public officials in Boston appeared to be
acting out of an abundance of caution. And it's appropriate for Boston
residents to be asked to take precautions or keep their eyes open. But
by letting one fugitive terrorist shut down a major American city,
Boston not only bowed to outsize and irrational fears, but sent a
dangerous message to every would-be terrorist - if you want to wreak
havoc in the United States, intimidate its population and disrupt public
order, here's your instruction booklet.
Putting aside the economic and psychological cost, the
lockdown also prevented an early capture of the alleged bomber, who was
discovered after Bostonians were given the all clear and a Watertown
man wandered into his backyard for a cigarette and found a bleeding
terrorist on his boat.
In some regards, there is a positive spin on this -
it's a reflection of how little Americans have to worry about terrorism.
A population such as London during the IRA bombings or Israel during
the second intifada or Baghdad, pretty much every day, becomes inured to
random political violence. Americans who have such little experience of
terrorism, relatively speaking, are more primed to overreact - and
assume the absolute worst when it comes to the threat of a terror
attack. It is as if somehow in the American imagination, every terrorist
is a not just a mortal threat, but is a deadly combination of Jason
Bourne and James Bond.
If only Americans reacted the same way to the actual
threats that exist in their country. There's something quite fitting and
ironic about the fact that the Boston freak-out happened in the same
week the Senate blocked consideration of a gun control bill that would
have strengthened background checks for potential buyers. Even though
this reform is supported by more than 90% of Americans, and even though
56 out of 100 senators voted in favour of it, the Republican minority
prevented even a vote from being held on the bill because it would have
allegedly violated the second amendment rights of "law-abiding
Americans".
So for those of you keeping score at home - locking
down an American city: a proper reaction to the threat from one
terrorist. A background check to prevent criminals or those with mental
illness from purchasing guns: a dastardly attack on civil liberties. All
of this would be almost darkly comic if not for the fact that more
Americans will die needlessly as a result. Already, more than 30,000
Americans die in gun violence every year (compared to the 17 who died
last year in terrorist attacks).
What makes US gun violence so particularly horrifying
is how routine and mundane it has become. After the massacre of 20
kindergartners in an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, millions
of Americans began to take greater notice of the threat from gun
violence. Yet since then, the daily carnage that guns produce has
continued unabated and often unnoticed.
The same day of the marathon bombing in Boston, 11
Americans were murdered by guns. The pregnant Breshauna Jackson was
killed in Dallas, allegedly by her boyfriend. In Richmond, California,
James Tucker III was shot and killed while riding his bicycle -
assailants unknown. Nigel Hardy, a 13-year-old boy in Palmdale,
California, who was being bullied in school, took his own life. He used
the gun that his father kept at home. And in Brooklyn, New York, an
off-duty police officer used her department-issued Glock 9mm handgun to
kill herself, her boyfriend and her one-year old child.
At the same time that investigators were in the midst
of a high-profile manhunt for the marathon bombers that ended on Friday
evening, 38 more Americans - with little fanfare - died from gun
violence. One was a 22-year old resident of Boston. They are a tiny
percentage of the 3,531 Americans killed by guns in the past four months
- a total that surpasses the number of Americans who died on 9/11 and
is one fewer than the number of US soldiers who lost their lives in
combat operations in Iraq. Yet, none of this daily violence was
considered urgent enough to motivate Congress to impose a mild,
commonsense restriction on gun purchasers.
It's not just firearms that produce such legislative
inaction. Last week, a fertiliser plant in West, Texas, which hasn't
been inspected by federal regulators since 1985, exploded, killing 14
people and injuring countless others. Yet many Republicans want to cut
further the funding for the agency (OSHA) that is responsible for such
reviews. The vast majority of Americans die from one of four ailments -
cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and chronic lung disease - and
yet Republicans have held three dozen votes to repeal Obamacare, which
expands healthcare coverage to 30 million Americans.
It is a surreal and difficult-to-explain dynamic.
Americans seemingly place an inordinate fear on violence that is random
and unexplainable and can be blamed on "others" - jihadists, terrorists,
evil-doers etc. But the lurking dangers all around us - the guns, our
unhealthy diets, the workplaces that kill 14 Americans every single day -
these are just accepted as part of life, the price of freedom, if you
will. And so the violence goes, with more Americans dying preventable
deaths. But hey, look on the bright side - we got those sons of bitches
who blew up the marathon.
No comments:
Post a Comment