Once again, US news provided a shocking reminder of the pain and devastation of losing a loved one in a shooting. Nothing can prepare you for what it feels like to leave your child at the school gates in the morning and never see him alive again. Twenty-six years ago, my family was forced to endure this. My five-year-old daughter, Sophie, was one of the victims of the massacre at Dunblane Primary School on 13 March 1996.
This is not the first time parallels have been drawn between what happened in a small Scottish town and what happened yesterday in another small town in the United States. The horror of the events is the same, but while Dunblane was the only shooting at a school in Britain, the same cannot be said of the events at Rob Elementary School in Uwalde. It was the latest in a series of mass shootings in the United States, often in schools.
After Dunblane, many in Britain, including the families of the victims, acknowledged that the most significant factor in the tragedy was the ease with which the perpetrator gained access to the weapons, in his case high-powered pistols. At the time, UK law allowed him to own these legally. The Dunblane and other families campaigned to ban guns, and we did not allow ourselves to be distracted by those who said gun ownership was not a problem.
It goes without saying that no matter what other factors are involved, the only thing common to all mass shootings is that the person in charge had a gun. Thanks to the overwhelming public support channeled through Dunblane’s families, other activists, the media and a significant number of politicians, successive Conservative and Labor governments passed legislation in 1997 and banned private gun ownership. This was despite the hostility of the arms lobby and many on the right, including the current prime minister, who has vigorously opposed any changes to gun laws.
The changes have not only reduced the availability of dangerous weapons, but also indicated the direction the United Kingdom wants to take, which minimizes the use and availability of weapons and always puts public safety at the top of the agenda. Since the late 1990s, gun crime levels in Britain have fallen sharply, gun killings have become rare and there have been very few other shootings.
At the time, many assumed that we were campaigning only as a way to deal with our loss, although it never felt cathartic at the time. But we knew that our voices would be heard because of what happened to our children, and it was my responsibility to do what we could. I remain extremely proud to be part of something that has achieved so much and made life safer for others.
The British experience proves that gun control works, but it’s a lesson Americans don’t seem to want to learn. Whenever in the years immediately after Dunblane I was asked to comment on the shootings in American schools, which were happening more and more often, I naively expressed the opinion that as soon as Americans understand what has been achieved after our own school shooting, they will be quick to accept such measures. I could not be more wrong, and as gun laws become even weaker, too many of their citizens continue to pay the price with their lives.
The numbers are shocking. There have been more than 17,000 gun deaths so far this year alone, thousands of which are homicides (only four gun killings were reported in the UK in 2022). In 2020, 999 children under the age of 11 were killed or injured in a shooting in the United States. Violence with guns remains one of the leading causes of death, truly leading among the under-20s.
International comparisons show a correlation between the level of gun ownership in a country and the number of deaths. In the United States, a gun at home makes it more, and no less likely, that someone in the household is killed with one. The more weapons, the more deaths. So, if the United States really wants to turn its thoughts, tears and prayers after each mass shooting into something positive, it must deal with the easy availability of firearms.
Too many are adhering to the second amendment to the constitution and how it supposedly gives everyone the right to own a weapon, an interpretation that many find questionable. Regardless of its correct interpretation, the founding fathers would certainly be horrified that their 18th-century words were used to justify arming teenagers with 21st-century weapons that have turned their own schools into battlefields and allow a teenager to pamper himself with a gift for his 18th birthday. of weapons, which he then used to kill young children.
After the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida in 2018, I wrote a speech that included the following lines: “We are always told about America’s love affair with guns, but from now on it looks more like a violent relationship that causes too much pain, unhappiness and death. Take the opportunity and change that connection now and allow your children to look to a safer future. ”
I am devastated that in the four years since then, there have been very few signs that a nation that is otherwise considered caring cares enough about the consequences of this love affair. As always, many people say that things will change after the events in Uwalde. Let’s hope so, but past experience does not make me optimistic. The victims and their families deserve much better than this and all the other shootings.
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to send a letter of up to 300 words to be considered for publication, send us an email at guardian.letters@theguardian.com
Add Comment