Pond James Pond
New member
I was looking through some reports that Al Jazeera produces. They are often very good and one caught my eye: Is Gun Violence in the US Infectious?
I thought: "Ok.... Here we go again..." expecting some more of the same, but it didn't seem that much the case.
Basically the report, based on research in Chicago (everyone's favourite in the gun debate), is by an epidemiologist who explained the patterns of violence followed the same spread as that of an infectious disease. That being exposed to, let alone party to violence made someone more likely to engage in it themselves later on.
It follows therefore that if it behaves like an infection it might be combatted like an infection albeit not with pills or drips.
Anyway, one thing that struck me, despite the title, was that the focus was not on guns (although they were the most frequent tool of violence) but rather on behaviours. This makes a refreshing change, to my mind, from the typical line of the tools being the problem, and therefore the solution, rather than the operator.
As an example, one interviewee stated how, within the gang culture, one argument between two people had snow-balled over time and eventually cost the lives of almost a 1000 people; all from that one disagreement.
When you think of that oft-touted total of 33,000 deaths from guns every year, that puts it in perspective!
Based on the conclusion of the report, the societal program that has been set up seems to be bearing fruit.
So, you have a city of highly regulated legal gun-ownership with a nationally high rate of violence (often perpetrated with guns, despite the gun control measures) where a community based program of mentorship and support has seen some areas not have a single violent death in the last year.
Perhaps, it would be cheaper and less controversial for the powers that be to invest in this, rather than further gun restrictions...
I thought: "Ok.... Here we go again..." expecting some more of the same, but it didn't seem that much the case.
Basically the report, based on research in Chicago (everyone's favourite in the gun debate), is by an epidemiologist who explained the patterns of violence followed the same spread as that of an infectious disease. That being exposed to, let alone party to violence made someone more likely to engage in it themselves later on.
It follows therefore that if it behaves like an infection it might be combatted like an infection albeit not with pills or drips.
Anyway, one thing that struck me, despite the title, was that the focus was not on guns (although they were the most frequent tool of violence) but rather on behaviours. This makes a refreshing change, to my mind, from the typical line of the tools being the problem, and therefore the solution, rather than the operator.
As an example, one interviewee stated how, within the gang culture, one argument between two people had snow-balled over time and eventually cost the lives of almost a 1000 people; all from that one disagreement.
When you think of that oft-touted total of 33,000 deaths from guns every year, that puts it in perspective!
Based on the conclusion of the report, the societal program that has been set up seems to be bearing fruit.
So, you have a city of highly regulated legal gun-ownership with a nationally high rate of violence (often perpetrated with guns, despite the gun control measures) where a community based program of mentorship and support has seen some areas not have a single violent death in the last year.
Perhaps, it would be cheaper and less controversial for the powers that be to invest in this, rather than further gun restrictions...