In the shadow of a pro-gun rally in Killeen, Texas in 2018, the firearms industry commenced a study to uncover the best ways to converse the American public about the advantages of owning guns. The undisclosed findings revealed that citizens who are pro-gun could be swayed in favor of reforms that the gun industry, gun rights groups, and Republican lawmakers fervently resist. Suggested reforms include universal background checks, red flag policies, and even a registry of firearms. Pervasive myths purporting that such a registry could have facilitated the Holocaust are circulated with vigor despite lacking credibility.
The research entitled ‘Communicating With The American Public About Firearm Ownership’ was funded by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an organization constructed as a support for the firearms industry. Its member base comprises firearm manufacturers, sellers, and shooting ranges. Administrated online, the survey reached over 4,000 Americans and evaluated a total of 48 messages, half significantly pro-gun and the other anti-gun. The recipients of this survey were then categorized into various groups, including those who expressed a ‘positive feeling’ for gun possession.
In the wake of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting where students were mercilessly killed, the nation was stirred into a state of urgency for gun regulations. American youths, having grown up experiencing a proliferation of mass shootings, harbored distaste towards firearms, according to industry studies. This puts a damper on future prospects for the trade. Consequently, the need to articulate the importance of firearm ownership was more palpable than ever.
As detailed in the study, ‘The sports shooting industry invests significant funding and resources into communication campaigns to invigorate participation and appreciation for sport shooting and firearms. However, little dependable data points to the most viable messages and themes.’. On a bleak day in late August, a 23-year-old shooter, who had legally procured firearms, committed a horrific act of violence at a Catholic school in Minneapolis. The incident, where two children were killed and 14 injured, bore a haunting resemblance to the 2022 massacre in Uvalde, Texas.
President Joe Biden, in the same year, passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, a piece of legislation encompassing politically harmless reforms like the provision of funds towards mental health services and security in education institutions. It forces one to contemplate why this stance is taken by Republican lawmakers, given that, as per the study, many individuals with a favorable opinion of gun ownership appear more than willing to support greater reforms.
Those surveyed who felt positive about firearm ownership were asked to rank their top five arguments for and against. Most of the pro-gun arguments circled around individual rights, such as ‘Self-defense is a basic right’, ‘Americans have the right to own a gun’, and ‘Gun ownership is protected by the Constitution’. The third argument read ‘Owning and training with a firearm teaches essential skills, including responsibility, precision, safety in handling guns, self-defense, and strategies to prevent dangerous situations.’
Other than gun control regulations, the consensus among those surveyed was that the most compelling argument against firearm ownership was ‘Universal background checks for gun sales and transactions are backed by approximately 85 percent of Americans.’ Other persuasive statements included the need for firearm licensing akin to vehicles, implementation of state red flag laws, acknowledging the gun violence epidemic in the U.S., and closing the loopholes in current law to ensure public safety.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation argues that a registry would not deter criminals or impact violent crime rates. The clamor for red flag laws, also designated as Extreme Risk Protection laws, briefly received bipartisan support post-Parkland. These legislations permit individuals to petition for temporary removal of firearms from homes of people posing an immediate threat. Tragically, Republican lawmakers and gun rights champions withdrew their support, leading to legal battles aiming to make these laws unconstitutional.
It emerged from the study that the public’s perception of gun defenses is not as potent as gun rights groups would like to believe. Common arguments such as ‘The only defense against a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun’, ‘Criminal elements feel secure in gun-free zones, conscious that they alone are armed’, ‘Should guns be outlawed, only law-breakers will possess them’ were found to be less persuasive.
Of the 24 pro-gun statements, the least popular one clearly points out the critical fact that Americans separate firearms from other potentially lethal products, despite the industry’s attempts to blur this distinction. The phrase ‘Cars kill people, should we outlaw cars?’ epitomizes this thinking.
It would seem the firearms industry and its allies, including certain Republican lawmakers are out of touch with a significant portion of their base who appear to welcome further regulations and reforms. A disconnect exists between the actual desires of gun-supporting citizens and the narrative pushed by these influential groups. The results of this research open the door to a deeper conversation about how the firearms industry and society itself view gun ownership and the dialogue surrounding it.
However, as is often the case with these studies, the results were kept from the public and no further steps have been taken to bridge this divide. Instead of addressing the concerns and suggestions, the pro-gun groups have chosen to stick to their hardline stance, putting their interests above the wishes, and indeed the safety, of the very people they purport to represent.
The findings of this survey are a powerful reminder of how careful research can shed light on the latent desires of people, even those who are supportive of gun rights. There is a broad consensus among Americans about the necessity of common-sense gun laws and regulations. It’s disappointing, to say the least, that these perspectives don’t appear to somehow make their way into the policy stance of pro-gun groups and their Republican allies. Despite a clear appetite for change, the dogged insistence on ignoring these findings continues to jeopardize public safety.
The post Joe Biden’s Inadequate Response to Gun Violence Research Findings appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
