Gun Culture, Globally
Image courtesy of M&R Glasgow via Wikimedia, ©2007, some rights reserved.
The United States has only 4% of the world’s population but owns 40% of civilian-owned guns globally. When attempting to understand why this particular country has such an extreme relationship to gun ownership, the obvious answer is the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment to the Constitution states that U.S. citizens have a legal right to keep and bear arms. This law has been an insurmountable barrier to attempts of gun reform and is largely cited as the source of the U.S.’ fervent gun culture. However, this doesn’t explain why the U.S. has not substantially changed its gun laws since the conception of the nation. Even after countless mass shootings, notably in school settings, the country still maintains its draconian laws. I would argue that gun culture influences gun laws, not the other way around. This becomes evident when comparing gun culture in the U.S. to other countries around the world.
The aspects of gun culture in the U.S. are multifaceted and extensive, but fundamentally they are rooted in a desire for freedom and for self-defence. Guns are symbolised as necessary features of the liberty America promises, inherently, the liberty to protect oneself against perceived threats. In addition, significant influence by gun lobbyist organisations, gun usage in recreational activities, and activism regarding the Second Amendment itself, all play a role in the U.S.’s gun culture, and result in the country’s disproportionate gun ownership (and gun violence) rates, as well as its inability to progress from its lenient gun laws.
For most countries, it does not take many mass shootings for the country to pass sweeping restrictions. Take the United Kingdom, for example. It only took two mass shootings (in 1987 and 1996) to motivate the U.K. to implement stringent gun laws. These were passed without much opposition, as public opinion overwhelmingly favoured banning civilian use of firearms. In Australia, one mass shooting in 1996 was sufficient to prompt mass legislation, including the banning of assault weapons and uniform regulations. The list goes on. By comparison, the U.S. has experienced nearly 200 mass shootings, under the narrow definition of four or more people killed by a lone shooter. Yet, this has not been enough to motivate policymakers to significantly reform gun laws. This demonstrates that in other countries, ‘gun culture’ is not as strong. People do not necessarily equate gun restrictions to an infringement on their inherent right to gun ownership.
A contrasting example is in the case of Switzerland. Switzerland has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world yet has strikingly less gun violence. Switzerland has strict gun regulations, including permits and licensing, high training in storage and weapons handling, and the banning of ammunition kept at home. In addition, Swiss gun culture is also vastly different to that of the U.S. The majority of gun ownership is due to Switzerland’s mandatory conscription for males; after serving, citizen soldiers store their guns at home. Furthermore, part of Switzerland’s national identity is the bond citizens form to jointly protect the nation and common good. Compared to Americans’ focus on personal protection, Switzerland emphasises collective security. This distinction is important both in the cultural aspect and its tangible impact on gun legislation – there is little disagreement over the importance of strict gun regulations because of the symbolic meaning of guns. Guns are simply there for protection, therefore laws ensuring the protection of citizens from gun violence are vital. Consequently, gun violence rates remain comparatively low.
The explanation for the U.S.’ infamous gun violence is not as simple as ‘the Second Amendment’. Nor does it explain why so many Americans choose to own guns. The answer, I believe, lies is America’s pervasive ‘gun culture’. America’s core identity of freedom manifests in many Americans’ desires to own a gun. A gun may represent mistrust of government to protect its citizens, or just an expression of the ability to freely own a weapon. In any case, guns have been normalised as a traditional aspect of many parts of American society. Consequently, many Americans defend the Second Amendment invariably and protest against any gun reform proposals. This is evidenced by comparing American responses to mass shootings to the responses of mass shootings in other countries. As exemplified, in the U.K., it took two mass shootings to trigger mass gun restrictions. In Australia, it took one. Even after hundreds of mass shootings of similar and larger scales, the U.S. has yet to make holistic reform and gun ownership rates continue to be the highest in the world. However, high rates of gun ownership do not equate to high rates of gun violence. This is evidenced by Switzerland. Despite the third highest rate of gun ownership in the world, Switzerland has relatively low rates of gun violence due to its tightrestrictions. Furthermore, these restrictions have been fairly easily imposed because of gun culture surrounding collective security. Unlike the U.S., guns are not used to express freedom and are not kept under the bed in case of home intruders. Culture is ultimately why gun legislation in the U.S. cannot get passed, and therefore why gun violence will remain high. As long as the private ownership of guns has such a strong, personal symbolic meaning, reform will be hindered. In the context of guns, culture will influence legislation far more than laws influences culture itself.
