Of Causation & Consequence: The Manifestation of Isolation in Social Media & Gun Violence
By Mercedes Moore + Loretta Tuider
Introduction
Although most Americans can name at least one mass shooting from their lifetime, there is a lack of consensus on what constitutes a mass shooting. The preeminent definition is the killing of at least three or four people—not including the shooter—in a brief period. When rooted in discriminatory ideologies concerning race, religion, etc., a mass shooting can also be defined as an act of domestic terrorism. The brief takes into consideration events of people driven by such beliefs, for example, the Buffalo Tops Friendly Markets shooting (2022), or mental health issues, as seen with the San Ysidro McDonald’s massacre (1984).
This brief will also examine the differences between shootings in the 20th century versus the 21st century, with a special focus on the emergence of social media and a spotlight on mental health. These distinct situational contexts reveal possible root causes of mass shootings—highlighting areas where changes can be made to prevent these horrors from reoccurring. As is often incorrectly purported, the goal is not to eradicate any of the fundamental rights established in the Constitution. However, there must be both supervision and boundaries placed for the protection of both potential perpetrators and victims.
Preventable Tragedies
There are clear markers of abnormal behavior and mental illness. However, it is much more difficult to identify when an individual presenting symptoms poses a legitimate threat to society. This becomes clear when one examines the life of James Huberty, who was responsible for the San Ysidro Mcdonald’s Massacre on July 18th, 1984. During childhood, James was left without parental guidance and peer support as his parents divorced, and he struggled with making friends. There was some semblance of normalcy: he went on to college, where he met his wife, Etna, and they settled into a middle-class lifestyle with their two daughters. Soon afterward, James became obsessed with apocalyptic ideas concerning the fall of the United States, which led him to assemble his personal artillery filled with guns, ammunition, and non-perishable foods. If his homemade shooting range was not concerning enough, he would also go out on his front porch and aim his rifle at his neighbors, then laugh before returning inside. This behavior highlights defining characteristics of abnormality; James also exhibited threatening behavior, violating both the implicit and explicit rules of society. James was, on all accounts, a probable threat to the community. Given that mass shootings were not nearly as common in the 80s as they are now, the severity of the issue was not realized and authorities were not alerted.
Matters eventually escalated further within the home, and while Huberty’s wife, Etna, attempted to seek mental health support for her husband, her attempts fell short. In 1983, the year before the shooting, James lost his factory job in Canton, OH. Soon after, Etna found him in their living room with a revolver to his head but successfully pleaded with him to not pull the trigger. In the face of economic hardship, James decided it would be better to move his family to San Ysidro, a district in San Diego near the US-Mexico border, taking his slew of weaponry with him. Despite the relocation, James once again lost his job and experienced even more dissatisfaction than before. This prompted him to call San Ysidro Health Center, but the receptionist misspelled his name and he never received a call back or further treatment—an egregious failure on the behalf of society. The day of July 18th marked James’ breaking point. After a family outing to the San Diego zoo, a defeated James clearly stated to his wife that he was going “hunting for humans” as he left the home with a semiautomatic pistol, a carbine, a shotgun, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition. He went on to commit one of the deadliest mass shootings in American history–killing 21 people and injuring 19 more before being sniped by a SWAT officer.
Laws and regulations—or lack thereof—allowed James Huberty to slip through the cracks. While it would be easier to deem him a monster, there were stressors in his life that would take a toll on many, and insufficient support from the social infrastructure around him. Though there have been vast improvements in mental health counseling (virtual counseling, national helplines, mental health apps/websites, and improved health center websites and portals) and social connection via the internet, the problem of insufficient social infrastructure and inadequate mental support remains and, once again, has reappeared in more recent mass shootings. Additionally, Huberty posed a legitimate threat as his family and neighbors were well aware of his interest in and usage of guns—from target practice on his front porch to moving several guns and thousands of rounds of ammo across several state lines. However, there was no statute in place allowing authorities to intervene or stop his obsession with weapons from manifesting.
Just this year, on May 14th, 2022, 18-year-old Payton S. Gendron shot and killed 10 Black people, injuring 3 others at a Tops Friendly Markets in Buffalo, New York. Social media played a considerable role in the events leading up to this tragedy. Gendron displayed an array of symptoms of mental disorder throughout his time in both high school and college: quiet and withdrawn socially, exhibiting idiosyncratic behavior like wearing a hazmat suit to class and making troubling comments, threatening other students at his high school; suicidal ideation, self-doubt, expressing a desire to commit murder-suicide. There were two recorded interactions with psychiatric institutions, once in May 2021, which was recorded in Gendron’s personal chat diary where he described staying in the emergency room after announcing his plans to commit murder-suicide, and then once again that year in June, when Gendron was investigated for making threats against fellow students at his high school and later referred to a hospital for a mental health evaluation. These two events, much like the progression of Huberty’s story, reveal the inadequacy of America’s psychiatric infrastructure, as neither interaction provided meaningful intervention for Gendron. The shooter even admitted that his time at the hospital was, in fact, a “very negative experience that encouraged him to take action." His hospital experience following his threats at school was much of the same, as he was attended to in the hospital for roughly a day and a half before being released.
Though these were the most recent recorded instances of mental distress, Gendron exhibited a long history of isolation and oftentimes turned to social media to attempt to alleviate his desolation. Shortly after the shooting, authorities found a 673-page online diary believed to have belonged to Gendron. The author of the diary himself admitted to being socially isolated:
“I would like to say that I had quite a normal childhood (<18) but that is not the case… it’s not that I actually dislike other people, it’s just that they make me feel so uncomfortable I’ve probably spent actual years of my life just being online. And to be honest I regret it. I didn’t go to friend’s houses often or go to any parties or whatever. Every day after school I would just go home and play games and watch YouTube, mostly by myself.”
This reliance on social media to alleviate feelings of loneliness was not inherently nefarious, but it did lead Gendron down a dangerous path–he found social solace in a /pol/discussion board on 4chan. The anonymous image-board site that hosts a variety of topics has been subjected to controversy after hosting illegal and offensive content and being linked to virtual pranks and harassment. He went on to develop “American neo-Nazi, antisemitic, eco-fascist, ethno-nationalist, populist, and white supremacist views” and credited 4chan online communities and The Daily Stormer (an American far-right, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, misogynist, Islamophobic, antisemitic, and Holocaust denial commentary and message board website) for his dramatic change in views. His reliance on social media continued to escalate quickly. Gendron would go on to use a Discord (chat platform) account to contain the following: the aforementioned 673-page online diary, a private chat room containing to-do lists for his planned shooting, and another dedicated to the discussion of weaponry. On another platform, Google Docs, he composed a 180-page manifesto detailing the attack that would later occur in Buffalo on May 14th. Following this recounting of events, it’s close to impossible to deny the dangerous ways isolation and mental illness tainted Gendron’s social media use. The 18-year-old shooter himself even identified these dark websites as a considerable influence and expressed remorse in going down this path, stating,
“if I could go back maybe I’d tell myself to get the fuck off 4chan… and get an actual life.”
In this age of technology, social media has innovated social infrastructure, especially helping with emotional connections by compensating for diminished face-to-face interactions — thus, allowing individuals to connect with one another despite physical separation, and strengthening already existing social networks. When used correctly, social media excels in being an outlet for expression and a shield against complete loneliness and isolation (though it should be noted that social media is not a complete replacement for meaningful human interaction). Social media is neither the hero nor villain in this story, but a factor to consider since this brief juxtaposes two different time periods. The absence of social media in James Huberty’s case and its supersaturation in Payton S. Gendron’s shows us the wide range of possibilities: would Huberty find social support through social media platforms whilst waiting for psychiatric support, had Gendron not been connected to 4chan, would he still succumb to violent tendencies, or is there an unknown third variable? Though we may not know the answer to these questions, their discussion reveals to us that the best solution is not extreme, such as banning or placing heavy surveillance on social media. Instead, our goal is to enforce protocols that facilitate a healthy environment for digital discourse as we simultaneously tackle gun violence prevention in America. Remember, the radical ideas conjured in the minds of mass shooters would remain intangible without a physical means of prosecution.
Policy Recommendations
The latest changes in gun ownership screening processes, mental health awareness and support, and monitoring of social media language and hate speech are all steps in the right direction, but to address the recurrent gun violence in America, the problem must be approached from multiple angles to produce systemic change. The tragedies explored in this paper were the result of failures in greater social systems and social infrastructure:
(1) inadequate psychiatric care and the indisputable brokenness of the mental health system in America
(2) limited face-to-face communication and weaker interpersonal relationships
(3) increased reliance on social media for meaningful connection and social media’s inability to adequately fulfill this need
(4) incubation of hate speech and radical rhetoric on social media
(5) inadequate hate speech regulation and reporting on social media platforms
(6) ineffectual background checks for the purchase of guns and ammunition
(7) ability to purchase overpowered semi-automatic weapons.
These elements can and have been assessed in greater detail to note their complexities, but the time for assessment is over. The U.S. has observed hundreds of mass shootings within the past 30 years, so many that we now have enough information, recurring patterns in shooter MO (the way in which they perform a certain action), and research to highlight the contributing factors to these devastating shootings. Though there are more changes we can make to infrastructure as a whole to put an end to gun violence altogether, the increasing frequency and severity of mass shootings in recent years require immediate action until more long-term solutions can be implemented. We believe that the quickest way to prevent heightening gun violence in America is to address three core matters: the U.S. mental health crisis, social media’s ability to amplify isolation and hate speech, and ineffectual gun control protocol. This list of suggestions targets these three areas and is suggestive, meaning there is room to improve other tenets of society and can be expanded upon by the U.S. government on both the federal and local levels, local community organizers, and other change-makers.
1: Flag and report posts for warning signs of mental health issues such as depression, addiction, and suicide
Many social media platforms already have moderation for comments, direct messages, and posts. However, the responsibility mainly falls on users to report the content of other users. Although there have been strides with hate-speech censorship, more can be done in terms of flagging users who exhibit signs of severe mental illness. With enhanced moderation and direction to trusted mental health professionals or resources, troubled users can be circumvented to reliable external resources that are more adept at addressing the root causes of emotional instability. For example, if a user’s messages and posts contain frequent mentions of suicide and self-harm, the platform’s AI software can flag their account for warning signs of mental health issues, share their contact information with a local crisis center, and they can receive a comprehensive check-in.
2: Prioritize social-emotional development through K-12 education by providing more mental health resources and procedures for students
As a consequence of the greater problem of underfunding K-12 schools in America, education professionals are under-equipped to provide adequate support to students experiencing mental health crises. This is disastrous for our society, as a whole, as half of all mental health conditions begin by age 14, and K-12 education is the main institutional provider for youth outside of their families; schools and their faculty are usually safe havens for students facing issues at home. Though not their primary function, schools can identify students that are struggling, and intervene to prevent the escalation of mental distress. Increased budgeting for counselors, integration of social-emotional learning into the core curriculum for all grades, and streamlined procedures for mental health crises can all contribute to greater psychological support for students and hopefully mitigate severe consequences of untreated mental illness.
3: Redefine the general public’s relationship with social media by improving social infrastructure and encouraging community engagement
America’s social infrastructure is underdeveloped, with limited public spaces for the social congregation (libraries, playgrounds, community gardens, etc.), and therefore, limited opportunities for creating community relationships face-to-face. Constraints on social infrastructure (along with recent isolation as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic) have contributed to a dependence on social media for forming interpersonal relationships–with 70% of the population reporting their social media use increasing in recent years. Though this is an amicable adaptation, social media cannot replace the innate human need for physical social interaction, and inadvertently can worsen mental health, and/or lead users down a dark path Investing more of city budgets into community development projects, such as community centers, concerts, marathons, etc., will improve social infrastructure and, therefore, reduce the need for socialization online.
4: Implement and enforce findings/regulations from hate crime laws into social media platform policy guidelines
The U.S. does not have any legislation directly regulating hate speech, meaning there is no existing national legislation for social media platforms to follow. Rather than allow social media companies to comprise their own rules on harassment/hate speech/etc., existing international legislation should be codified and integrated into social media policy agreements. Notable decisions to draw inspiration from include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), Article 19(3) and 20(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the UK’s Article 10 of the Human Rights Act of 1998. Using international legislation to create a universal, suggestive, code of conduct for social media corporations could help alleviate the current uncertainty regarding online hate speech regulation in the U.S.
5: Blacklist malicious websites that host hate speech and enable violent radicalization
Due to the U.S.’s lack of hate speech legislation, there are currently no ways to moderate/block websites that host hate speech and/or violent radicalization. However, deep/dark websites are reliant on larger online platforms and web companies to exist online. In order to limit traffic to problematic sites such as 4chan and 8chan, governments can implore mainstream services and websites to blacklist these websites to prevent everyday users from being able to access these sites through more accessible, public-facing sites like Google, Reddit, Discord, etc. By partnering with mainstream sites, governments can prevent internet users from falling into extremist online communities without over-surveilling.
6: Raise the federal legal age to purchase a firearm to 21
A recent analysis of the demographic makeup of mass shooters revealed that about a quarter of mass shooters were younger than 25, suggesting there is substantial risk in allowing 18-year-olds to purchase firearms. Increasing the federal legal age to purchase a firearm also allows more time for mental health intervention–especially if an individual is purchasing a firearm to harm others–as the global onset of the first mental disorder for many occurs before age 25. The U.S. federal law allowance of 18 years of old age to possess a firearm, then, is substantially risky and we could eliminate this risk by raising this minimum age.
7: Ban civilian use of semiautomatic assault weapons
Though U.S. federal law currently requires individuals to be 21 years of age or older to purchase semiautomatic assault weapons, the case can be made that no one should be able to purchase these kinds of guns. The 1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act attempted to ban semiautomatic assault weapons but was easily maneuvered by the U.S. grandfather clause, semiautomatic weapons already circulating, and manufacturers evading regulations. The act expired in 2004, but decreased mass shootings and an overall crime rate suggest that this act did diminish gun violence in America. Government leaders can learn from the mistakes of the first firearm protection act and use this to pass stronger, more succinct regulations to ban semiautomatic assault weapons. This will not completely eliminate the problem of gun violence, but it can greatly reduce the severity, lethality, and frequency of mass shooting events.
8: Modify the process of purchasing a gun by strengthening background checks and creating additional screenings for those with mental health records
Variance in the process of purchasing a gun has allowed many individuals to purchase a firearm despite violating owner preconditions or exhibiting troubling behavior. Universal background checks, revision of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, required mental health checks, and enhanced screening for first-time buyers are all methods that can reinforce the screening process. Though these methods could still be maneuvered, their implementation will strengthen our current process of getting a firearm significantly and reduce loopholes for questionable buyers.
Conclusion
In summary, this brief highlights the ideological war regarding access to guns and freedom of speech within the United States of America. The First Amendment prohibits infringement on the right to exercise free speech, followed by the Second Amendment, which protects the right to keep and bear arms. One can argue that these two amendments are some of the most celebrated and relevant freedoms in American culture. These freedoms, however, have become a double-edged sword. The accessibility of guns in the U.S. is widespread, and as a result, so is gun violence. The country’s limited restrictions have allowed for weapons to fall into the hands of individuals with questionable motives. Additionally, the rise of social media has completely revolutionized the usage of free speech. Anyone on any side of the sociopolitical spectrum can now share their ideas, theories, conspiracies, and more, creating a volume of information and communication mankind has never seen before. These two trends have combined in disastrous ways, with perpetrators of mass shootings being emboldened by communities on social media platforms that support and encourage radical hate speech and violent actions.
