I am a gun owning liberal communications expert. The guns belong to my husband, but what’s his is mine and I have learned a lot about gun talk and ownership intentionally as we all live in the same house. I apologize to those of you who come here for beauty & health or parenting tips, but to be fair, the title of this blog is NO NICHE woman.

Last night I was stranded in Fargo, ND due to the horrific storms that swept through the South and Midwest. This unexpected overnight gave me plenty of time to scroll the comment sections on social media. This week, as you know, 6 people were killed by an active shooter in a Christian school in Nashville.

As we are quite used to this occurrence in the US, the social response is in its normal cadence and after several days of Instagram stories and Facebook posts filled with messages of outrage from Gen X to Gen Z, the amount of posts have settled down and the folks who are highly passionate around all sides of the issue of gun control are left battling it out in the comment section of shared news posts.

Before we dive in, if you believe that the solution to gun violence in the US is EITHER “Take all guns away” OR “Arm all citizens and teachers” you may not love this post. This post centers on listening, understanding and openness, not fanaticism or “othering” (more to come on that subject in my new book! stay tuned for more…)

It’s the way we argue, not the argument itself

While I am certainly passionate about my loved ones’ ability to live safely in public without the threat of becoming victims of a mass shooting, I have not historically had a true passion or loud stance on the multiple debates that surround gun violence.

I am definitely not trying to put anyone in their place, I am certainly not an expert, and I am not trying to be a symbol of any sort of “cause” in this space. What I am interested in however is my recent revelation that the maddening aspect of these debates, like many issues in the US right now, are the debates themselves.

While studying communications at Marymount Manhattan College in NYC in the early 2000’s we learned an incredibly important message coined by Marshall McLuhan in the field of communications as we learned about the newly budding art of media activism. “The Medium is the message”.

This claim explains that the way we communicate and through which technological platform we do so, IS what predicates the consequence of the communication due to the scale and nature of the platform itself.

A fancy way of saying, when you argue insultingly in the comment section of an Instagram reel, that is the message. You could be saying “Republicans are monsters and they only care about guns” or “Democrats are idiots and all they care about is killing babies” or “All toddlers are possessed psychopaths because they cry about stupid shit.” It doesn’t matter, the message you are sending is that you care more about being right and making the “other” person wrong without the goal of effecting change or understanding the other side, let alone landing any meaning behind your own statement.

Why can’t we get our point across?

As we live in a democracy with a defective structure of government that is currently centered around the career of the politicians than the will of the people, we understand and dread the difficulty of getting policy carried out while many have rights being taken away and others feel imposed upon. Due to the fear and hopelessness that surrounds this mindset, we feel the need to hold on to one side of any issue and fight for our lives. Solutions to problems are not that simple.

On the other side of your argument is an American human. Not a monster. If we don’t learn how to break these issues down differently, then we will never be able to effectively hold our government responsible for real change.

My proposal after sitting back and genuinely listening to all sides of the gun argument? Attempt to heal the way “we, the people” align on the issue of gun violence. We are closer than we think. On this issue, are we able to stop vilifying each other, and collectively go for all of it?

Who said you can only ever push through one piece of policy on any one issue? When did we decide that it’s either option a or option b and the rest of you are fanatic idiots? One could definitely argue that there some pressing issues there in our country right now which have clearly only 2 sides. The issue of gun violence in the US is multi-faceted. In many cases, coming from a “one or the other” mindset is the opposite of progress.

Granted, debate is necessary. The writers of the constitution spent 3 months straight debating ideas until smaller groups of appointed individuals put its decisions in writing. Then another small group of appointed individuals developed the final form of the Constitution, condensing 23 articles into seven in less than four days. The debate was necessary to get to the solution and create something great for the people they served.

The current state of the conversation

Columbine happened 24 years ago. We have been arguing ever since and have only allowed the issue of gun control to further divide our contort while politicians bicker like children and continue to collect funds from both sides and get re-elected to roles in which they are failing.

If we are going to take our power back in this country, we need to get out of the comment sections and unite on some of these issues where the majority of us ultimately agree on the core issue. There are more ways than one to create comprehensive strategy in any area of life.

The other day I challenged Gen X and Millennials on Instagram to figure out how to stop our babies from getting slaughtered in their classrooms. Some thought I was being facetious and some responded! Our politicians are struggling to get work done. I believe that we can figure this one out for them and as Gen Z bravely enacts their right to peaceful protest in the capital, we need to be the adults who have their backs.

Below is a collection of ideas based on the responses I have received from an open perspective on both sides. My intention here is not to pose what I consider THE solution or even my opinion, but to create a different way of approaching these conversations instead of letting them polarize our nation. I will not use the names of political parties in this conversation. Sides have done enough damage.

So how do we talk about guns?

We have created a complex culture in this country around the protection of our firearms over the past 250 years.

The issue is not assault weapons OR the number of guns in circulation OR inadequate mental health care OR lack of security in schools in response to the current threat OR universal background checks OR protecting the right to bear arms. It’s ALL OF IT.

From a national standpoint, the ISSUE is not one of the items above, the issue is gun violence in the US and the infringement on Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for ALL of us was suggested by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence.

The STRATEGY needs to be formed around gun violence in the US. The TACTICS we need to consider should be centered around all of the above.

Remember, politicians in partnership with the media are who have us convinced that we must pick one of these buckets as THE solution. If the writers of the constitution decided that freedom of press was the ONLY way to move forward as a free nation, we wouldn’t have made it a year.

Breaking it down:

My ask is that if you care more about getting to the other side of this debate than being right, that you read through all three of these buckets as a comprehensive solution to our current state around gun violence in the US. This is not THE answer. It is an attempt to change the approach of the debate.

Here are some objective facts to consider first:

US citizens have the right to bear arms

33 states require NICS checks for all firearm transactions

Some states also require a permit to purchase which is good for one year

There are an estimated 352 Million guns in circulation in the US

We have had 376 school shootings since Columbine in 1999

Therapy and psychiatric care costs on average $250 and beyond for an hour session

We have Citizens with current mental health diagnosis who are receiving what is perceived as inadequate care. (I am one of them).

American citizens across political parties are currently in favor of Common-sense gun laws

Gun Control:

Americans across parties widely agree on “common-sense gun laws”

We have the right to bear arms.

The comment often shows up in protection of guns that sounds something like “cars kill people, but we don’t make them illegal”. That’s true, however we do regulate cars. You cannot own a car without insurance, and you cannot drive one without a license which requires a permit period, written testing, field testing (driving test), and basic health screening. I our home, our children are required to obtain a gun safety certification which requires 4 hours of class time, a very in-depth test and field certification where they demonstrate their understanding of how to safely use a firearm. This level of basic certification is not required for any Americans to purchase a firearm.

A large majority of Americans are in favor of common-sense gun laws across varying policies. Universal background checks, permits for all gun owners (not just permits to carry) and basic demonstration of competence around the usage of a dangerous weapon would bring us to the same standard we hold our citizens to in the pursuit of private transportation.

This piece of needed legislation to many is a no-brainer. It also creates a bit to inconvenience to our citizens who are trying to quickly obtain weapons for the sole purpose of doing harm. It also helps to educate our current gun owners on what safe handling and ownership looks like.

Starting with these changes would drastically improve the pace of purchase on new firearms and the likelihood of safe usage for current owners.

It is also up for debate that assault style weapons and high-capacity magazines are completely unnecessary for civilians and should not be for sale or in possession for any reason. My husband owns one, he and I agree with this. More current gun owners may need to humbly align on whether the death of an unarmed American is worth the right to own a specific type of firearm. The argument is that the speed at which mass shootings could inflict damage would go down drastically if military assault rifles were taken out of the equation.

Armed Guards in Schools:

Many accusatory remarks show up in response to this suggestion that sounds something like (are you fucking crazy?? Your solution to gun violence is to add more guns??)

I was unable to find great evidence on how many school shootings since Columbine have accrued in schools without armed guards; however, I have seen comments on social that “NO school shootings have taken place in schools with armed guards since Columbine.” That may or may not be true- feel free to comment below and let me know.

We can deduct based on a handful of recent school shootings that armed guards in schools deter a shooter from entering. The result of the compounded gun culture in the US and inadequate mental health care among many other significant social issues is that even if gun control on any level passes, it will not stop school shootings. I understand that some of the resistance around this tactic is that it forces us to admit that our “normal way of living,” is no longer safe for our future. The way it used to be no longer exists and spaces that were once synonymous with safety are simply not as safe as they once were.

If there is a fire, you don’t take that moment to remove the candles from your house, evaluate your safe exit plan, and replace the smoke detectors in your home. You call 911, bring in the fire-fighters and put the fire out. Our emergency right now as it pertains to school shootings is that our children are being murdered in their classrooms. Changing half of the population’s mind about values they hold strongly and personally around guns which they legally possess and a right they possess that is protected by the constitution is not an effective step toward immediate change.

Yes, guns are the prevailing weapon of destruction, but even with regulation in place, there will not be a scenario where all guns disappear, everyone is happy, and the country is magically safe for the first time in history. It is important to be practical about the situation we face and protect our children. If the last 24 years are any indicator, this could continue to take some time. Funding protection for our teachers and students is a proven, logical way to deter mass shooters from entering schools.

Mental Health

According to an article by Ragy Girgis, MD, MS on Columbiapsychiatry.org titled Is There a Link Between Mental Health and Mass Shootings?

“Approximately 5% of mass shootings are related to severe mental illness. And although a much larger number of mass shootings (about 25%) are associated with non-psychotic psychiatric or neurological illnesses, including depression, and an estimated 23% with substance use, in most cases these conditions are incidental.”

According to Dr Girgis, mental illness (as it is accurately defined) as the primary cause to any mass murder is uncommon. As far as the social media debate, the perception around mental illness, mental health and mass shootings is also clouded. Some say it has nothing to do with the guns and everything to do with mental health. Some say that mental health is a need, and we need to fund it. Some say that while mental health is the cause, supporting it is not a human right and doing so would be a form of socialism. What’s interesting that all sides toss mental health around in some form of their argument and continue to come back to mental health and its big picture effect on the situation.

Even in Dr. Girgis’s article he goes on to say that although connecting mental illness with bad behavior is a false equivalence, that when specifically talking about school shooters,

“These perpetrators tend to be younger males who are often nihilistic, empty, angry, feel rejected by society, blame society for their rejection, and harbor a strong desire for notoriety. They want to make their mark on the world that will elevate them to the status they believe they are entitled to and deserve.”

He goes on to say that not releasing details about shooters after a mass shooting event is one of the fastest way to decrease the continued action. Hence #NoNotoriety.

What’s interesting to me about this position is that when I have shown characteristics that align with being nihilistic, empty, angry, feel rejected by society, blame society for their rejection, etc. I have had the privilege of working with a therapist and it has helped drastically. I have also been diagnosed with depression and take prescribed medication. From the psychiatric standpoint my example would fall into the category of a neurological disorder, not mental illness. It seems to me that in public debate we are confusing diagnosed mental illness, with overall mental health.

It is certainly easy to label these shooters as criminals, overlook mental health completely and rest easy in the idea that it’s their fault, but that is the least helpful solution when it comes to this part of the issue.

To be clear, I am not a doctor. SPECIFICALLY, I am not a psychologist, psychiatrist, or a licensed therapist ALL who need an IMMEDIATE seat at the head of the table on this conversation as rest of us sloppily apply their area of expertise to this complex issue. Many whom I’ve spoken to in these professions say that it’s horrific how off the entire debate is on both sides and how far away we are from understanding the state of mental health in this country.

This is my post however so here is a rough paraphrasing from the information and opinions on all sides I have absorbed.

Part of the issue is the society we have created. Social media, intense work culture, video games, prolonged Covid lockdown, lack of parental support (both for parents and from parents) on all fronts, cultural separation from spiritual health (immorality), and so on are all factors that contribute to the rapid decline of mental health in the US.

Inadequate access to mental health care undeniably effects all of us. Ask any woman who has been prescribed an anti-depressant/anti-anxiety medication from her OB without ever consulting a psychiatrist or psychologist. Mental health care in most situations, at best, looks like a questionnaire/screening that spits out a number which leads to a choice of medications and the strong recommendation for therapy.

If our bodies are made up of chemicals and genes, then incorrectly prescribed medication for something as “incidental” as depression or substance abuse can lead to disastrous effects including psychotic breaks. If that happens to you, you may then be referred to physician who specializes in mental health and pharmacology.

This is all to say that even if you can afford monetary and provider access to the inadequate basic level mental health care our country currently offers, it can still often result in several YEARS of self-advocacy in a mentally compromised state to get the correct care to reach an accurate diagnosis followed by a treatment that would be effective. Now multiply that by 50 million people.

Instead of using mental health to support the strategy around gun violence, perhaps we need to use gun violence as a supporting argument to the need for mental health access.

As one contributor to my challenge on Instagram stated:

“We should strengthen the law shielding the government’s access to mental health records while simultaneously drastically increasing mental health for all Americans.”

We know that healthcare is broken in America. Is there a way to separate and prioritize mental health in an effort to pursue Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? According to Mental Health America in an article titled Adult Prevalence of Mental Illness (AMI) 2022,

“19.86% of [American] adults are experiencing a mental illness. Equivalent to nearly 50 million Americans. 4.91% are experiencing a severe mental illness.”

With these statistics and the current availability of firearms and increasing number of mass shootings, prioritization around mental health deserves to stay on the docket.

What Now?

How does any of this help? What should we do with this document specifically? Not sure- perhaps utilize it to start more conversations like it. My hope is that it inspires us to protect our sanity by refraining to engage in the social media comment sections that lead to more hate and division around this issue. As someone who has a platform and loves communication, strategy, and debate, we can use the comment section on this post to show solidarity. This is a space for unification and additional perspective, NOT calling each other stupid, hurtful generalizations, or “othering” each other.

Our job is not to fight each other, it is to hold our politicians accountable to write policies and vote them into action which represent the perspective of their full constituency not just a handful of fanatics and major deep-pocketed lobbyists.

Maybe the demand of our employees – the government – on this issue is “ALL FOR ONE”. All tactics for one strategy, all people for one life, all citizens for the growth of one Nation. Let this comment section act as a petition and show up, add your insight if you have some, and have hope that we can get out of this 24-year nightmare at some point, together.