In recent months, shootings and related crimes have gripped the nation’s attention and flared tempers across the country. With the death of several young, unarmed individuals has come a surge of retaliation against legislation regarding everything from arms and ammunition to self-defense rights and insanity pleas. Along with these retaliations are equally heated supporters of the current legislation. What has been lost, however, is the attention to the basic humanity of the horrendous crimes, and in this loss lies the true threat of our future.
While anger and action are natural responses to crises, it seems that as a whole we have lost our ability to differentiate between productive, motivational anger and blind rage. When learning of the loss of a young person’s life to an adult’s hand, it’s intuitive that one would want to cry foul at the laws that allow this individual to bear arms. By extension, one may also begin to question the laws that permit anyone to carry firearms. When a young man kills children in a preschool and then pleads insanity, it’s human nature to seek a punishment that fits the crime and generalize that no such plea should exist. We cannot allow these tragedies to be played out in such a way that they become the posters for either side of a political debate. The loss of a life, particularly that of a child, is nothing short of traumatic, and should be treated as such. A grieving process takes place as parents lay their children to rest, leaving a void that can never be filled and a family left in limbo.
What might look like a hate crime to some and an expression of self-defense to others is irrelevant when a family sits down to dinner with one less place to set. A change of law won’t bring back a mother’s son, nor will it ease the pain of a father who won’t have the chance to walk his little girl down the aisle.
By no means do I intend to suggest that laws and regulations should not be reviewed and changed in wake of these crimes; I simply mean to suggest that we must remember and respect the human suffering that comes from loss. We cannot allow political debate to take away from the personal grieving of the families and friends of the victims. We cannot allow victims’ names and photos to be used in debate, as each and every mention salts the wound left by their passing.
We must disassociate individual crimes from blanket legislation in their honor, not despite their loss. A day in court will never match the magnitude of the day a parent lays their child in a grave. When we fail to recognize the ultimate suffering of those who feel the full impact of living without a daughter, best friend or brother, we are free to desensitize ourselves to the point of valuing argument over empathy. A law may help prevent future crimes, but it won’t bring back the victims.
