Home Viet Nam Human Rights » home » political-social » U.S. gun violence: A human rights failure (Part I)

U.S. gun violence: A human rights failure (Part I)

30/10/15


Part I: Gun politics and mass shootings
In 2014, the United Nations pseudo-“human-rights” bureaucracy released another report attacking Americans’ self-defense rights, “Stand Your Ground” statutes passed at the state level, and the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protection of the people's God-given right to keep and bear arms without government infringement. Agreeing with the Obama administration and the most extreme anti-Second Amendment members of Congress, the UN “Human Rights Committee” also claimed that the U.S. government needed to expand the unconstitutional background-check regime to include even private firearms sales.
The United Nations Human Rights Committee has given the U.S. a series of failing grades on human rights, including failing to meet international human rights standards on gun violence; the uneven implementation of controversial Stand Your Ground laws; violating personal privacy; and doing a poor job of caring for victims of gun violence.
“We have such easy access to guns, instruments that can easily take a human’s life. Gun violence, and the ways it plays out especially around Stand Your Ground laws, has disproportionately impacted people of color…particularly Black communities. In some places, it’s easier to buy a gun than a fresh vegetable,” said Ejim Dike, executive director of the U.S. Human Rights Network, a national network of organizations working on a variety of human rights issues in the United States.
Gun politics is a controversial area of American politics that is primarily defined by the actions of two groups: gun control and gun rights activists. These groups often disagree on the interpretation of laws and court cases related to firearms as well as about the effects of gun control on crime and public safety.
Since the 1990s, debates regarding firearm availability and gun violence in the U.S. have been characterized by concerns about the right to bear arms, such as found in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the responsibility of the government to serve the needs of its citizens and to prevent crime and deaths. Gun control supporters say that broad or unrestricted gun rights inhibit the government from fulfilling that responsibility.[2]:1–3[3] Gun rights supporters promote firearms for self-defense, hunting, sporting activities, and security against tyranny.[4]:96[5] Gun control advocates state that keeping guns out of the hands of criminals results in safer communities, while gun rights advocates state that firearm ownership by law-abiding citizens reduces crime.[6] A 2003 study by the Centers for Disease Control called for further study because there was insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws with regards to violent outcomes.
The public policy debates about gun violence include discussions about firearms deaths - including homicide, suicide, and unintentional deaths - as well as the impact of gun ownership, criminal and legal, on gun violence outcomes. In the United States in 2009 there were 3.0 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants. The U.S. ranks 28 in the world for gun homicides per capita.
With 5% of the world's population, U.S. residents own roughly 50% of the world's civilian-owned firearms.[162] According to the UNODC, 60% of U.S. homicides in 2009 were perpetrated using a firearm.
Port Arthur, Aramoana, Erfurt, Hungerford . . . for many people, these names still bring back chilling memories of violence and bloodshed. As senseless massacres committed in Australia, New Zealand, Germany, and England (respectively), each of these tragedies led to new gun control laws. Generally, this is the case in the developed world, with one exception. The US is the only advanced nation to respond to massacres by relaxing gun laws.
While the Hungerford and Port Arthur massacres caused the UK and Australia to become two of the most restrictive societies for gun owners, the contemporaneous 1991 Texas diner massacre had the opposite effect. In the Texas tragedy, a local man crashed his pickup into a diner, stepped out of the vehicle, and gunned down 22 people. Instead of restricting gun usage, the state responded by pushing through concealed carry laws. In the immediate aftermath of Sandy Hook, 27 states passed 93 laws allowing citizens to do everything from carry firearms in churches and schools to use guns in self defense while drunk.
A few days before the Virginia TV shooting, US criminal justice researcher Adam Lankford released the results of his study on global mass shootings, a term defined by the FBI as at least four individuals killed in a single spree that isn’t related to gang violence. Lankford’s study analyzed 171 countries and 292 mass killers operating between 1966 and 2012. His findings showed that mass shootings are as American as apple pie.
There’s one unassailable truth about living somewhere with more guns. It makes you much more likely to die from a gunshot wound. Multiple studies have found that living in a country with liberal gun laws increases your chances of both being murdered and dying during a suicide attempt.
Before the 1996 Port Arthur massacre triggered stricter gun control laws, Australia averaged one mass shooting a year. Since the laws were enacted, there have been no mass shootings. Homicide and suicide rates have also plummeted 50 percent.
Although the media tends to focus on homicides, suicide is the number one type of firearm-related death, far outstripping homicides, mass shootings, gang violence, and accidents. Studies have shown that states with stricter gun control laws have lower rates of suicides using guns. Surprisingly, these states also have fewer suicides overall, suggesting that the people who killed themselves with guns might not have used other methods if those guns had not been available. (to be continued)
Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 10 ]


erica black 31/10/15 15:04

the US often criticizes other countries for human right violations while this country cannot guarantee human rights

Unknown 31/10/15 15:06

many cases of serious human rights violations have arised in the US

Funny Day 31/10/15 15:10

the life of the people in the US is always threatened by the freedom of using guns

Unknown 31/10/15 15:13

unlike America, many countries in the world stricly control gun use, so the society is more stable and better.

Unknown 31/10/15 15:18

the American are wrong when want to show their democracy through freedom of gun use

Unknown 31/10/15 16:02

it's very difficult for the US to give up rights of gun use beacause profits that are made from gun are big

Anthony Jones 31/10/15 16:07

surely, some politicians who get profits from gun companies will disagree with gun control

Unknown 31/10/15 16:14

we witnessed many mass shootings arised in schools and public areas, which led to loss of many lives

Elizabeth Green 31/10/15 16:16

it's very panic and worry!

Evans David 31/10/15 16:19

I see living in the US has many good conditions, but unsafety

Your comments