By MARK JOSLYN
KU Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Political Science
Why did this happen? How can it be prevented from happening again?
These are the questions asked after gunfire erupted at the conclusion of the Kansas City Super Bowl parade that left one person dead and dozens injured – including 11 children.
Citizens turned to the government for answers.
Yet the solutions proposed by elected officials differed along partisan lines.
Most Democrats consider guns a primary threat to safety. They cite thousands of gun deaths and injuries as evidence, including horrific mass shootings. To mitigate risks, and safeguard the well-being of everyone, stricter regulations that control gun ownership are required.
Most Republicans consider guns crucial for self-defense. Responsible gun owners can protect themselves and others from those who intend harm. Making access to firearms easier, not harder, empowers law-abiding citizens and contributes to a safer society.
These radically different approaches frustrate anxious citizens, fuel partisan discord, and often result in legislative paralysis.
READ MORE: INSIGHT KANSAS: Kansas needs affordable housing, not a football stadium
It’s in fact astonishing how few politicians grasp the value of collaboration after such traumatic events.
Party agendas come first.
If gun laws are modified, it’s typically due to the legislative dominance of one party. For example, six months after a deadly mass shooting in Maine that resulted in the deaths of 18 people and injuries to 13 others, the Democrat-led legislature passed various guns measures including 72-hour waiting periods for gun purchases, expanded background checks, and a ban on devices that convert guns into rapid-fire weapons.
After a school shooting in Iowa, where a school principal and sixth grade student died and several more injured, Republicans passed a bill allowing trained teachers and staff to carry guns on school property. It also required large districts to have an armed security officer at each high school – unless the school board opted out. Polling in Kansas and Missouri suggests strong support for gun measures including criminal and mental health background checks and requiring people to be 21 or older to purchase a gun. There’s also modest support for teachers with proper training to carry firearms.
Both legislatures failed to give these measures serious consideration.
Now is the time for a new path forward. Research shows most gun violence is spatially concentrated, arising from structural disadvantages such as poverty, densely crowded housing, high unemployment, lower educational attainment, as well as poor mental health, exposure to violence, and drug/alcohol abuse.
Addressing these disadvantages requires improving economic opportunities, renovating environments such as dilapidated housing and vacant buildings, developing more parks and community centers, and strengthening civic infrastructures so people can learn ways to mitigate gun violence and establish organizations to partner with police and mental health professionals.
By focusing on structural factors, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle can embrace a politically viable and arguably more effective approach.
So, when the unsettling pattern repeats – gun violence, partisan squabbles, and frequent stalemate, keep in mind gun violence has multiple causes, and existing gun laws are just one piece of a very large and complex puzzle.
"Insight" is a weekly column published by Kansas Farm Bureau, the state's largest farm organization whose mission is to strengthen agriculture and the lives of Kansans through advocacy, education and service.
The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Salina Post or Eagle Communications.
The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.