This event is getting some attention because it goes against several liberal assumptions about gun violence. It happened in California, a state with some of the strictest gun control laws. An assault weapon wasn't used. Most of all, the suspect was a woman of color. (The words "female shooter" have appeared in nearly every headline; it is an anomaly.) The far-right switched tracks; the shooting is no longer a false flag to advance gun control legislation, it's now something that the media will ignore because it doesn't fit their progressive narrative.
To be fair, it doesn't. And as a liberal who read that "The boys are not all right" New York Times piece, the YouTube shooting is uncomfortable. However, the main reason this story won't get as much traction as, say, Parkland or Las Vegas, is because there weren't nearly as many casualties (as of now, it seems that only the shooter is dead, with three others injured). So let's not get too wigged out if the media doesn't spend every waking second talking about it.
However, this latest shooting is worth talking about because it deviates from our narrative. And it has me thinking about just that -- narratives -- and how we've come to seemingly exist on different planes of reality from one another.
It's human nature to seek out simplified narratives that explain the world around us. We then seek out anything that supports our worldview and ignore or explain away anything that negates it. When we're confronted with something that goes against our worldview, we experience cognitive dissonance, one of the most uncomfortable experiences you can have as a human. At this point you either have to do the hard work of accommodating new information and shifting your worldview (read: admitting you were wrong), or poke holes in the piece of new information so that you don't have to accommodate it.
So, relating this to gun control there are a few common narratives that people depend on to explain the chaos and violence:
1) Gun access is the problem.
2) Mental health is the problem.
3) [White] male violence is the problem.
4) Gun violence is inevitable and there's no way to stop it.
5) Good guys with guns will stop bad guys.
6) There is no problem. (more on this later)
Most people incorporate more than one of these narratives into their worldview, and that's important because it paints a more nuanced portrait. Personally, I think the first four points on that list contribute to the problem.
Having a more productive conversation
1) Gun access. Liberals are guilty of not defining this problem very well. Granted, I'm sick of the flak that pro-gun control folks get for not knowing every detail about guns. Just because someone doesn't know much about guns doesn't mean that they have no place in a conversation about public safety. A gun can still harm you even if you think the AR in AR-15 stands for assault rifle. But for our part, we should try to learn more about guns so that we can make meaningful statements.
2) Mental health. In my opinion, this is the great deflection in gun control debates. Of course mental health is a component, but it's one of the most difficult problems to solve because it's cultural. Part of it is access -- background checks. But it's more than that -- it's creating a culture where people, especially men, can ask for and receive health; creating a culture that's less violent and alienating, where people are meaningfully connected and supported. Even if we were somehow able to do that, people would slip through the cracks.
3. [White] males. Despite the most recent shooting, the majority of mass shootings are carried out by men (check out this Washington Post infographic). I don't think that specifying "white" men is particularly helpful or accurate (See: Pulse, Virginia Tech), but many people make this argument. The piece in the Times is gentle enough to not caused outrage, but I think we have to tread carefully. That being said, I've appreciated seeing this argument made in thoughtful ways, and there is a disturbing trend of mass shootings sparked by some domestic issue between men and women (most recently, the Maryland school shooting).
4) Inevitability. "Never Again" is a powerful rallying cry, but I think liberals would do well to admit that there's no way we can prevent shootings from happening again. "Less Often" or "Fewer Deaths" doesn't make a great hashtag, but we need to make that our stated goal. This is what we want when we push for a bump stock ban, for instance -- to try to limit the severity of shootings. And the bump stock ban has received a lot of support because it's specific and realistic.
5) Good guy with a gun. The Maryland school shooting in March was an almost triumph for "good guy with a gun" (one victim still died), but Parkland was obviously a disaster. I don't have the strongest opinions on this, but it's clear that it's not the end-all, be-all solution. But there isn't an end-all, be-all solution, so I'll admit: Trained, armed resource officers may be helpful in some situations. Arming teachers probably will not be. I'm not convinced that armed teachers or guards will deter potential school shooters, however: Many shooters either kill themselves or want the police to kill them.
6) "There is no problem." This is the puzzle that I've been stuck on. Maybe you've been lucky enough not to see the "false flag" conspiracy theories, but they are out there. There's a vocal contingent of far-right folks who believe that these mass shootings are planned and carried out by the government/"the Left" in order to further gun control legislation. Or there's a belief that these events haven't happened at all -- See Alex Jones' godawful stance on Sandy Hook.
Of course, these views are absolutely bonkers and wildly disrespectful to the people who have lost their lives or lost their loved ones.
But there's something about this view that almost -- almost -- makes sense. If you were that invested in your worldview (guns are good, government is bad), and mass shootings kept happening, you'd be experiencing a lot of cognitive dissonance. So, what do you do? Maybe you explain away the issue: Guns aren't the problems, it's actually xyz. What we need is more guns!
But an even more effective deflection: There isn't a problem. All these mass shootings are part of the government's evil plan to take our guns away.
What a comfortable lie to believe. There's no way to have a productive conversation with someone who's so immersed in their worldview that they believe false flag conspiracy theories.
What I want you to do right now
When you look at our political discourse this way, you can see how we've come to a point where we practically live on different planets. The fractured media landscape makes it all too easy. Look at right-wing and left-wing news and you probably won't even see the same news stories.
But you can do something about this! Yes, you! Monitor your reactions to news that both confirms and contradicts your worldview. I paid attention to my reaction to the YouTube shooting, to try to catch my own biases in action. There was a twinge of something when I read it was a female shooter. Another twinge when I read her name. I think it's important to be aware of these reactions and admit to having them.
The world is a complicated place, and there's no shame in trying to simplify it -- it's human nature. But sometimes you gotta admit that you have no idea what's going on; the world is chaotic and incomprehensible. Get used to living in the uncomfortable space of cognitive dissonance. Don't patch it up too quickly. Gun violence is an important, if messy, subject and it deserves a lot of careful thought. Pay attention to events that contradict what you believe, because it will help us come up with a better solution.
