Introduction: The Issue of Gun Violence and Poverty
Gun violence represents one of the country’s major public concerns, as gun-related traumas and fatalities occur regularly. It is widely accepted that stricter gun control policies are instrumental in alleviating the problem, as they are supposed to reduce the rate of firearm-related deaths, limiting gun access to individuals at-risk of participating in gun crimes. Nevertheless, strict gun control might not be the ideal solution for this problem since it ignores the root causes. Looking at the origins of gun violence seems instrumental for the issue’s in-depth understanding and resolution. Such contributors as poverty and lack of opportunities seem to be neglected, yet addressing them instead of limiting firearm ownership might be more significant.
Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods and Gun Accessibility
Gun control might not be as efficient in preventing gun violence as it is expected. Firearms obtained legally constitute only a part of the arsenal to which a resolved shooter or a criminal can have access. For instance, California has stricter than in other states firearm-related regulations and vigorously controls firearm retailers. Despite the idea that more stringent gun laws help reduce gun violence, its levels are consistently high in the state’s largest city, Los Angeles. In the city, a well-functioning illicit gun market provides high-risk individuals with an opportunity to obtain a weapon. Unlawful ways firearms are obtained additionally include trafficking, thefts from gun owners or legal gun retailers, and rogue retailers (Chesnut et al. 226).
A study performed by Chesnut et al. among detained gun offenders suggests that their weapons were mostly of illegal origin, gifted, or bought from third out-of-law parties (229). Even though stricter gun laws complicate access, they do not prevent impoverished individuals from owning guns, as legal weapons are only one type that can be found in the country.
On the country’s East Coast, the situation is not that different. Like Los Angeles, gun policies in New York City are distinguished by their strictness, while willing individuals can still find and abuse firearms. This state has exceptionally strong policies and low ownership rates, but gun-related injuries constitute a significant danger for the city residents and, in numerous cases, even fatal danger. It is logical to suggest that, primarily, the illegal market contributes to the problem.
Stolen guns are a sizeable part of the illicit gun market, as it is estimated that around 250,000 guns are stolen yearly in the country (Braga et al. 4). Additionally, the movement of firearms is “governed by high-volume gun brokers, middlemen who facilitate routine access to gun runners, and individuals who make episodic low-level acquisitions from straw purchasers in other states” (Braga et al. 11). Such measures as universal background checks could somewhat alleviate the problem, reducing gunshot deaths and injuries. Nonetheless, additional steps and restrictions only scratch the surface of the problem.
Social Circumstances of Gun Violence
As it can be seen based on the examples of Los Angeles and New York City, gun accessibility might not be the sole cause behind gun violence, as firearms are not the root of the issue. Some population groups are more likely to become involved in gun violence due to socioeconomic circumstances in which they are forced to live, pushed to the country society’s outskirts. Gun control ignores the role of racial and social disparities that propel the problem, and instead of resolving the social challenge, it strives to manage its consequences. According to Swanson, “black men under the age of 30 comprised 3% of the U.S. population and 28% of the victims of firearm homicide in 2018” (4).
Ethnicity is not the only factor determining one’s likelihood of becoming a victim, poverty being the essential element. It is suggested that living in impoverished neighborhoods heightens the chances of becoming a victim or precipitator of firearm violence (Braga et al. 1). Hence, the fundamental problem that needs resolution is not gun accessibility but poverty, the growing gap in incomes, lack of opportunity, and prejudice that push people towards guns.
The suggestion that gun violence primarily stems from poor social conditions and not from the lack of regulations seems to be widely-supported by research. For instance, a study performed by Miller indicates that gun homicide is strongly linked to the absence of social mobility (Noonan para. 1). The lack of opportunity to succeed, climb the social ladder and being stuck in poverty for the rest of one’s life push people towards criminal activities, frequently resulting in firearm injuries and deaths.
Miller concludes that “in U.S. counties where social mobility is higher, gun homicide rates are substantially lower than in those where movement up the ladder remains stagnant” (Noonan para. 1). Thus, being poor without a prospect of changing the situation is the primary risk of being subjected to or being a precipitator of gun violence. The county’s policymakers should address this contribution of poverty to firearm-related death and injuries instead of making gun laws stricter, which addresses the symptoms, not the illness.
The Swizz Example
Switzerland is one of the most exemplary countries in gun control-related matters. Gun ownership is commonly practiced there: 2 million guns are privately owned, while the population is only about 8.5 million people (Brueck para. 2). This ubiquity of gun ownership makes Switzerland’s population highly armed. Firearm violence can be expected to become commonplace in the country with such a high number of guns per capita.
Nevertheless, while in the United States, mass shootings are almost a daily occurrence, in Switzerland, there was not any for nearly two decades (Brueck para. 1). The latter country does have specific regulations on gun use. On the other hand, the difference in violence rates might stem from distinctions in populations’ quality of life and poverty rates as well as in gun culture, gun education, and prevalent beliefs. Switzerland is one of the wealthiest and happiest countries globally, bypassing the United States in this regard (Brueck para. 30). It seems that the major distinction driving the two countries with high gun ownership rates but extremely different gun-related violence rates are not the strictness of gun policies but differences in poverty levels and population wellness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, gun control does not seem like an effective or indispensable method of addressing the public health challenge of gun violence. People stuck in the cycle of poverty will find an opportunity to acquire firearms, as an extensive black market of weapons exists in the country, as well as other illicit methods, including but not limited to firearm theft. To truly resolve the gun violence issue, the lack of social mobility, poverty, and population well-being should be improved. Gun restrictions and policies appear as merely corrective measures, scratching the problem’s surface.
Works Cited
Braga, Anthony, et al. “Underground Gun Markets and the Flow of Illegal Guns into The Bronx and Brooklyn: A Mixed Methods Analysis.” Urban Health, 2020, pp. 1–13.
Brueck, Hilary. Switzerland has a Stunningly High Rate of Gun Ownership – Here’s why it Doesn’t Have Mass Shootings. Business Insider. 2019. Web.
Chesnut, Kelsie, et al. “Not an “Iron Pipeline”, but Many Capillaries: Regulating Passive Transactions in Los Angeles’ Secondary, Illegal Gun Market.” Injury Prevention, vol. 23, no. 4, 2016, pp. 226–231.
Noonan, David. Gun Homicide Linked to Poor Social Mobility. Scientific American. 2019. Web.
Swanson, Jeffrey. “The Color of Risk Protection Orders: Gun Violence, Gun Laws, and Racial Justice.” Injury Epidemiology, vol. 7, no. 46, 2020, pp. 1–6.