I want to save lives. You want to save lives. Thankfully, the vast majority of all people, conservative Republicans, liberal Democrats, even NRA members, want to save lives. But there is a problem with our focus on the tools used when lives are taken. While our emotional response to guns is entirely understandable and a solution focussed only on guns seemingly self-evident, it is imperative that we remain objective and focussed on saving lives. To do this, whatever our respective positions on gun regulation, we must understand the available research and focus on actions that are supported by data. Surprisingly, the research shows that the single most important thing we can do is to ban publicity for perpetrators and the second most important thing we can do is to initiate programs in schools that ensure everyone feels a sense of belonging and purpose.

I ask, whatever else you support or pursue, please demand these two solutions be actioned by your elected officials.

The data and research support the conclusion that we are motivated by belonging and status above all else. Until the notoriety and status conferred by these events is eliminated…they are likely to continue and get worse irrespective of any change to gun regulation. So please read on below and, whatever else you do, demand a ban on the publication of perpetrators names or likenesses in any media.

The data in relation to gun regulation

Australia and UK are often cited as examples supporting the prohibition of firearms. Neither, however, supports the conclusion that gun legislation saves lives.

In Australia, suicides were higher in 1997 the year following the gun buyback (in both absolute and per capita terms). More homicides occurred in 1997, 1999, 2000, and 2002 than in 1996. In 1999, a full 3 years after the legislation was enacted, homicides were nearly 10% higher. Importantly, higher in both absolute terms and on a per capita basis (see Australia Government Statistics http://www.crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/and Fact Check — https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated/).

The UK data shows a similar disconnection between gun-related legislation (1996/7) and murder, suicide, and mass killing events. Even after corrections and a consideration of anomalous events in the UK homicide statistics, an upward trend is recorded in UK homicide rates in the years following its gun legislation through to a per capita peak from 2002 to 2005 (https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/40701) (https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40697/did-the-uk-homicide-rate-go-up-after-handgun-ownership-was-banned).

While sustained downward trends in both per capita homicides and suicides have been observed in the UK and Australia over the last 20 years, in Australia these trends began prior to the gun legislation and are mirrored by similar declines in multiple other countries that had no change in gun-related legislation. In the UK and Australia (as well as the USA), these downward trends are most significant after a period of higher relative rates of murder and suicide that occurred in the early 2000s compared to the rates recorded immediately prior to legislation being enacted. As such, these reductions can only be attributable to factors other than the gun legislation.

Finally, there have been multiple mass-killing events in both the UK and Australia since the gun legislation was put in place. While those in the UK might be discounted as terrorist activities, in Australia there have been two mass murder or mass murder attempts in just the last year, both involving cars (2017). In China, which arguably has the most restrictive gun laws, there have been a long series of mass stabbing events.

The data makes clear that gun-related legislation in isolation has little or no effect in reducing murders, suicides, or mass killing events. Perpetrators simply used different methods.

Tragically, and dangerously, the downward trends for both suicide and murder since 2002 along with the reduction in the number of deaths attributed to the use of a gun are cited frequently without any consideration of scientific veracity.

Stopping the Events from Occurring and Addressing The Root Cause

Most reject the idea of arming teachers. At best, by enabling the perpetrator to be stopped more quickly, it might reduce the severity of the incidents that occur. Research on the perpetrators of mass murder shows that the vast majority are methodically planned and prepared for suggesting that “hardening the target” will not substantially reduce the occurrence only alter the target or execution. These are not impromptu actions. As such, it is unlikely to serve as the desired deterrent. Arming teachers also introduce new risks. Most importantly, it does not address the root cause and thus reduce or prevent the events from occurring in the first place.

Legislation to restrict access to guns, at first glance, might appear more logical. Again, the data shows this is not the case. In the vast majority of cases involving perpetrators who prepare and methodically plan a crime, restrictions on one set of tools simply motivate the use of others. Most importantly, as with arming teachers, any such legislation would fail to address the root cause of these actions and thus simply ensure those root causes finds expression in some other form or using other tools (such as the Oklahoma City bombing, Unabomber, the use of trucks to drive through crowds, or mass stabbings in China).

What is imperative is that we address the root cause. In this case, these actions are predominantly pursued by individuals and groups seeking status through notoriety and news coverage. They would rather have infamy than anonymity. (Reference below.)

The human drive for status is well documented and known to prompt a broad variety of self-destructive or “maladaptive” behaviors from binge drinking and participation in extreme pranks to suicide bombing. A review of the collective evidence on mass murder events and the behaviors motivated by our drives for relative status and belonging make it clear that the combination of an unmet need for belonging and a perception of futility in regards ever obtaining positive status are the primary causes for many mass killings and especially those involving schools. (Reference below.)

The Solution

Mass shootings are a plague upon us. Inaction equates to complicity. But gun legislation will not work in isolation. Research, including my own, suggests quite strongly that gun regulations would not only be ineffective, it would likely make such events worse. (Reference below.)

The science does, however, point to a pragmatic solution. I would respectfully request that, along with any other position you support, that you demand the following of your elected officials:

1. Make it illegal to publicise the names and images of the perpetrators of mass shootings and other crimes pursued for notoriety in any media (news, social, other). Note, this is not a restriction on news coverage of any event or political speech of any kind. It is the prohibition of any inclusion or use or a perpetrator’s name, image, or likeness.
2. Request the department of education and all schools create programs specifically designed to build a sense of belonging and encourage students to find their sense of purpose…..And, if you are so inclined:
3. Repeal or modify the “Dickey amendment” preventing additional research associated with violent crime by the CDC (or any other federally funded research body) and specifically fund further research.
4. Make illegal the easy stuff such as Bump Stocks and 11+ round magazines. Bump stocks are a transparent and blatant attempt to circumvent existing regulations associated with fully automatic firearms. Magazines or clips with a capacity greater than 10 serve no purpose in the absence of fully automatic rates of fire. Note, many states already have regulations in place limiting the number of rounds a firearm can have when used for hunting.

Everyone should demand these actions for the following reasons:

1. Most importantly, academic and scientific RESEARCH supports the conclusion that these actions would have an immediate and substantial effect. They will save lives! Available research (including my own) shows that the first two of these actions would likely do more to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of school-related mass killings and mass shootings in general than any other legislation (including any changes to or enforcement of gun laws).
2. LAW Enforcement agencies agree with these actions (including the FBI, International Police Association, the organization of Major City Chiefs, and International Association of Police Chiefs).
3. They can be actioned now. 80% of individuals from BOTH SIDES of the gun legislation debate AGREE or do not object to these actions. They have no discernible downsides. They would be very low in cost and do not infringe on anyone’s personal liberties. They also avoid any reluctance to support the solution based on the slippery slope argument.
4. These actions do not trigger a constitutional or personal liberties issue. Legal precedent already provides for a prohibition against the publication of a minor’s name in a variety of situations as well as for speech that is likely to cause violence. Prohibiting the use of the perpetrators’ name or likeness does not inhibit any or all other reporting or the expression of ideas. It does not deny the liberties of any minority group. Providing and enabling notoriety, on the other hand, incites further acts of violence.

The four together will produce the greatest immediate and long-term benefits. I ask anyone who really wants to reduce gun deaths and save lives to focus on these pragmatic actions…so that we can make a difference now.

Research defining the root cause of such behaviors (sample of):

1. A Deeper Truth: The New Science of Innovation, Human Choice and Societal Scale Behavior. by Tim Stroh et al. Amazon Link: http://a.co/57hruuo
2. “Dominance, status, and social hierarchies” by Denise Cummins. (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Denise_Cummins/publication/228380735_Dominance_status_and_social_hierarchies/links/0c9605272d5c4810c5000000/Dominance-status-and-social-hierarchies.pdf)

Research on banning the publication of perpetrators names and likenesses as well as engendering a sense of belonging having the most significant impact on such events:

1. A Deeper Truth: The New Science of Innovation, Human Choice and Societal Scale Behavior. by Tim Stroh et al. Amazon Link: http://a.co/57hruuo
2. Here’s the disturbing new evidence on how the media inspires mass shooters by Mark Follman in Mother Jones (https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/10/media-inspires-mass-shooters-copycats/)
3. How Not To Cover Mass Shootings by Ari Shulman in the Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-not-to-cover-mass-shootings-1510939088)
4. “Ban Guns? Research suggests that would make things worse!” by Tim (https://medium.com/@TimStroh/ban-guns-research-suggests-that-would-make-things-worse-f055d1640631)

Groups set up by victims families and law enforcement, including the FBI, advocating these solutions:

1. No Notoriety: www.nonotoriety.com
2. Don’t Name Them: www.dontnamethem.org