US preaches human rights but fails to protect its citizens’ right to life

You know the old cliche that it’s not news when dog bites man, but it is when man bites dog. That’s why this made headlines around the world: “Dog shoots owner dead”. In late January, a man in the US state of Kansas was killed after his American pit bull terrier accidentally stepped on the trigger of his rifle in the back of his car.

Meanwhile, an elementary school teacher is suing her school in Virginia after a 6-year-old boy shot and seriously wounded her when she tried to confiscate his gun. America is so saturated with private weapons that even a misstep by a dog or the action of a naughty child could get someone shot or killed. Of course, these stories have been eclipsed by back-to-back mass shootings in California that left 24 dead during the Lunar New Year and other similar tragic events since.

Time and time again, the United States government has proved unable to protect its own citizens from gun violence. Indeed, it actively enables this domestic curse because of its much-touted Constitution with its guarantee of life, liberty and gun ownership. When a substantial segment of the population equates owning guns with being free, life or liberty (guns) look increasingly incompatible.

Contrast that with the safety of Asian societies whose culture has sometimes been labeled Confucian. China (including its Hong Kong Special Administrative Region), Singapore, Japan and South Korea all have the lowest violent crime rates around the world. It’s not only because they all have strict laws that prohibit gun ownership; their governments consider their primary duty as the protection of their citizens’ lives. As a government, if you can’t prevent people from shooting and killing each other, you have failed at a fundamental level. Ironically, it’s always Washington that lectures Asian countries, especially China and its HKSAR, on human rights. But shouldn’t the right to life precede every other right?

The latest mass killings in California are especially tragic for Asians living in the country. The Lunar New Year is their biggest annual holiday and celebration. But at a dance studio frequented by patrons of Chinese descent near Los Angeles, a lone gunman went on the rampage and killed 11 while injuring nine others before shooting himself. Soon after, another alleged killer gunned down seven former co-workers at a farm outside of San Francisco.

There have been 40 shootings, defined as those involving three or more victims, in the US in January. Last May, after the mass murder of 19 children and two teachers at a school in Texas, new restrictions were passed into law the following month. Many activists, among them US President Joe Biden, think tougher gun control — such as a ban on the sale of military-style assault rifles and high-capacity magazines — is the answer. California, a die-hard “blue” Democrat state, has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. Yet, the grim news continues.

Many activists blame the gun lobby. The truth of the matter is that many Americans support gun ownership as a legally protected right. They are not wrong. The Second Amendment under the US Constitution fully guarantees it. Rightly or wrongly, many Americans believe owning guns is the only way to deter the “tyranny” of the federal government.

While the rest of the world looks on in horror and disbelief, gun rights activists — and their political representatives — have come to regard such deaths as no different from traffic fatalities — an unavoidable, if horrific, consequence of everyday life.

Indeed, every year, roughly 40,000 Americans are killed by guns, which is about the same annual rate of traffic deaths on US roads. These include suicides, which take up more than half of the deaths, and all sorts of killings. More than 100 Americans are killed in gun violence, and 200-plus are wounded, every day. Meanwhile, US police killed more than 1,000 civilians, often in routine encounters.

In any other country, a government would have quickly moved to impose restrictions or ban guns outright. But as a symptom of this social sickness, politicians feign compassion and sadness, and then it’s business as usual. After a particularly sensational mass shooting, gun stocks usually go up as more people buy guns. The reasoning is that you need to buy guns now before “they” — the politicians in Washington — take that right away from you.

But it is also not completely irrational. If no one but the police and military own guns, then everyone can feel safe. But if everyone can own one, you would want one to protect yourself and your family; otherwise, you would be at a disadvantage.

While a majority of states in the US have some restrictions, at the most local level, more than 61 percent of counties across the country have declared themselves “gun sanctuaries”. This means local officials, including police officers from the sheriff’s offices, have vowed not to enforce either federal or state laws on gun control. And when they are sued or taken to court, they are frequently supported by sympathetic local judges. In the last analysis, taking guns away from Americans is like banning them from driving cars.

The rest of the world should be glad that parents can take their children to school and they themselves can go out without the constant fear of being gunned down by unhinged strangers.

The author has been a senior writer for a number of leading publications.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.