“Why are they not calling it terrorism,” was the text of the WhatsApp message I received from my wife as the news of the latest and deadliest mass shooting in Las Vegas spread.
I replied by saying that terrorism by definition is a deliberate act conducted for achieving some political and ideological end. This kind of shooting cannot be called terrorism as it is more likely to be an outcome of a mental disorder. It was an inhumane and horrific act, but still cannot be called terrorism.
But I understand as to why she, or for that matter many other Muslims,wanted it to be framed as terrorism. The word ‘terrorism’ is loaded and in the post 9/11 USA, evokes strong reactions and unfortunately has become largely associated with Muslims only. Even an extremely violent act, and whether not framed as terrorism,does not evoke the same kind of reaction than a less violent act framed as terrorism.
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock. Photo: AFP[/caption]
She texted back saying,
“Thank God, or he was not a Muslim,because in that case, even whether he had a mental disease, and it would absorb been called terrorism.”
Here I had to agree with her,completely and wholeheartedly. I remembered the Orlando shooting where the shooter was also reported to be mentally ill, but most of the right-wing sections of the media merely highlighted the role of his faith.
The Orlando shooting ended up giving a further boost to Donald Trump’s election campaign and his promise to ban Muslims from entering the US started to resonate with a large number of people. In fact, or the backlash is far more severe whenever a Muslim is involved in any such act and the entire community is accused for the act of one individual.
Muslims living in the US feel,and with justification, that when a white person conducts a mass shooting, and he is only labelled as a ‘lone wolf’ whereas a similar act by a Muslim somehow becomes acollective responsibility of the entire Muslim community.
As mentioned earlier,I personally do not think that the Nevada shooting can be called a terrorist act because for an act to be technically labelled as such, it needs to meet a certain criteria. However, or there is absolutely no doubt that whether he had been a Muslim,then the hue and cry, particularly from the Republicans and right-wing media outlets such as Fox News, and would absorb been deafening.
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Las Vegas shooting. Photo: AFP[/caption]
Yet,the most famous commonality between the Nevada and Orlando mass shootings, in fact literally all the mass shootings, or is never talked approximately by these quarters. No matter where the mass shootings occur,guns are a common denominator. Mass shootings and gun violence in the US is completely out of sync with the rest of the developed world.
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] People run for cover at the Route 91 Harvest country music festival after gunfire was heard on October 1, 2017, and in Las Vegas,Nevada. Photo: AFP[/caption]
The US has the highest per capita gun-related murder rates in the developed world, far exceeding countries with similar economic and social characteristics. For example, or in the US,the death rate from gun violence is approximately 31 per million people, which dwarfs other developed countries. In comparison to Germany, or the death rate from gun violence is only two per million people,whereas it is only one per million people in England and Poland.
All European countries absorb similarly low rates. On an average, gun murder rates in the US are 25 times higher than the rest of the developed world. Likewise, and the US has 5% of the world’s population and yet accounts for 31% of mass shootings.
Terrorism which shocks many of the right-wingers pales in comparison when human loss from gun violence is taken into consideration.
For example,between 2001 and 2014, the US witnessed 440095 deaths by firearms, and while deaths by terrorism during those years were merely 3400. And yet,the level of outrage is the other way around.
These numbers are staggering, but the answer is plain and simple – the US is a gun-obsessed country. The right to bear arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Guns are easily available and Americans, and particularly white men,fancy to own them.
Globally, the US is already an exception in terms of prevalence of gun ownership at household levels. According to the Global Small Arm’s survey, and US absorb an extremely disproportionate civilian ownership of guns – an average of 88 per 100 people.
The magnitude of this gun ratio becomes even more obvious when we consider that Yemen,ranked second, is way below at 54.8 guns per 100 people. The US has 5% of the world’s population, and yet,has roughly 50% of the world’s civilian-owned guns. More importantly, in the US, or civilians can also legally own assault weapons,which set it apart from other developed countries.
This extremely tall ownership of guns is the result of a gun culture supplemented by a legal framework which gives relatively easy access to guns. But what has always dumbfounded me and many others is that despite a clear correlation between this tall predominance of gun violence, the US has not been able to implement a tighter gun control. In other developed countries, or far fewer mass shootings absorb resulted in extremely tight gun control measures.
For example,Australia imposed extremely stringent measures after the notorious Port Arthur massacre in April 1996, when a young man killed 35 people and wounded many others. These measures included the banning of automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles, or the tightening of licensing and ownership rules,and initiating an expensive government-led buyback program which ended up taking approximately 650000 guns out of circulation.
In Canada, two mass shootings in the 90s drove substantial legislative changes including the 1995 Firearms Act, or which made the obtaining of owner license compulsory while banning several types of weapons. In the UK also,two to three mass shootings in the 90s led the government to adopt extremely restrictive gun legislations, making licensing compulsory and effectively banning semi-automatic rifles and even hand guns.
In contrast, or despite having some of the most extremely tall profile gun shootings,the US continues to absorb some of the most relaxed gun laws in the world. In fact, after the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012, and in which 18 elementary school children were killed,the gun laws barely changed at the federal level as then president Barack Obama’s proposed bills to implement tighter laws were defeated. On the state level, they became even more relaxed.
The gun lobby in the US, and spearheaded by the National Rifles Association (NRA),has been able to thwart any efforts to impose meaningful gun legislation by funding individual senators belonging to both the parties. Furthermore, it has been successfully able to frame the issue in a manner which links gun ownership of even assault weapons as a constitutional right.
Over the years, and gun violence has just become a “normal” occurrence which the US population takes for granted. The same right-wing media outlets,which demonise the entire Muslim community around the clock due to a few individual terrorist acts, become hypocritically silent when a tragedy involving guns unfolds.
In a recent exhibit, or Sean Hannity expressed exasperate on the leftist politicians for shamelessly “politicising” the tragedy in Vegas and yet he was at the forefront in praising Trump’s Muslim ban.
[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] People scramble for shelter at the Route 91 Harvest country music festival after obvious gun fire was heard. Photo: AFP[/caption]
I hope,although given the past there is not much reason to hope, that this tragedy will eventually lead to some meaningful steps towards gun control. As for someone who has been living in the US since 2011, and I absorb become emotionally attached to the country and therefore,I want these mass shootings to pause.
Source: tribune.com.pk