Recent controversy over which actual weapons were used at Sandy Hook, including MSNBC’s report as to whether an assault weapon was used at all, is likely to have no impact on the government response moving forward.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Similarly, the fact that the government told us 9/11 was perpetrated by Saudi citizens trained in Afghanistan, that didn’t get in the way of an Iraqi invasion. As Gen. Colin Powell basically testified at the UN: Iraq basically deserved an invasion on their own merit. Stepping away from the causal link between Sandy Hook and forthcoming reactions, let us take a look at likely results:
The 18th Executive Order signed by President Obama is to provide incentives (and funding) for schools to have police oversee the children. This will create results. Of all the other items concerning background checks and manufacturing specifics for future guns, there is no clear indication that there will be any tangible differences. Gun violence will continue with the 300 million guns in America, and millions more throughout the world. Some people who legally bought guns and have no criminal record or mental health issues will lose their mind and commit a crime. Whether we consider this an acceptable number or not depends as much on the media frenzy as on actual statistics.
School police, known as “Resource Officers” (perhaps for easier digestion) have been key builders of the School to Prison Pipeline. The fistfights and the joint in the bathroom do not result in detention or suspension anymore: now they are imprisonment, expulsion, and an often insurmountable mountain to climb towards any “normal” adult lifestyle. A 2011 report by Justice Police Institute, Education Under Arrest: The Case Against Police In Our Schools, would lead one to believe that the overall damage to a community is not justified by the vague possibility that the school is safer. In fact, there are indications that the police actually lead to increased violence in schools.
Fortunately, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Advancement Project, and others aremounting a campaign to let the President know what he is doing.
President Obama would like to spend $4 billion to put 150,000 more cops on the street, further transferring public safety from the traditional role of states to the federal government. These cops are not likely to be deployed in Newtown, Aurora, Littleton, Blacksburg, Red Lake, Killeen, San Ysidoro, or any locations similar to past massacres. Nor will they be deployed in such white collar businesses and institutions that have been the site of these tragedies. Instead, they will likely be patrolling the public housing areas of urban centers, looking for drugs among mostly Black and Latino boys. Just as in NYC, where an officer’s job is justified by how many Stops, Questions, and Frisks they conduct, any new officers will be under the same pressures to “produce.”
Prison Expenditures will Rise
Children have been the fastest growing segment in the industry of prisoners. They are a commodity justifying the building of a prison and hiring those who will guard them- even those who would try to teach them in these environments so non-conducive to learning. Industries do not deal well with stagnation or reduction. Thus, an ever growing number of children and young adults are needed to continue fueling an industry that has yet to be reduced in all the history of American prisons.
More cops requires more prosecutors to process the cases, along with more public defenders, judges, sheriffs, stenographers, interpreters, clerks, and everything else that happens after an arrest. All on the taxpayer dime at a time when most “American” corporations are multinational and manage to avoid taxes around the globe. These budgets are already bursting.
Putting police in our schools, and 150,000 police in low income communities of color, will certainly increase the front end of this industry during an era when states have been struggling to make reductions. Spurred by the Bush Administration’s Second Chance Act, a secondary industry of “Rehabilitation” has expanded to attempt a reduction of prisoners on the back end. One roadblock to this latter attempt is public perception, and media frenzy, (at times instigated by prison guards themselves) against “coddling criminals” or the perceived dangers of releasing someone who committed a violent crime decades ago.
The Future Economy
President Obama certainly knows that we currently have an economy of excess labor. Several decades after outsourcing and technology eliminated our manufacturing base, people in Obama’s shoes are tasked with the dilemma of what to do with tens of millions of unnecessary people in our economy. There is no indication that this trend will be reversed (not to say that it cannot be, but I have yet to hear any proposal that involves a massive new sector requiring human labor at Living Wages). In the short term, the Prison Solution provides a small consolation, albeit with considerable human cost.
Once labeled as “Criminal,” there can be no moral demand for living wage jobs, education, and affordable housing- at least not in our current culture, where those making such demands represent an increasingly vocal minority. Those who are labeled are often shut down with the phrase, “You should have thought about that before you became a criminal.” Yet we are labeling them before they are even old enough to drive a car, vote, serve in the military, or sign a valid contract. Furthermore, our society cannot even respond to similar demands by non-labeled people.
Non-labeled people from the lower classes can join the ranks of half-a-million prison guards, and twice that in the overall Prison industry. As the labeled are released from prison, they are expected to have lower expectations, to be happy with a GED and a job that pays $8 per hour. If we can create a nation where 10 million people are satisfied earning that pay, another 10 million are incarcerated, and another 10 million are watching over them… we may create some stability in our economy. It will require a relentless Drug War and a massive tolerance for racially imbalanced outcomes. Such a dystopia will likely require a repeal of the Civil Rights Act.
As a chess player it is important to think many moves ahead for yourself and your opponent. Naturally, a chess player expects their opponent to think several moves ahead, perhaps five or six, at least. Sometimes even if you think 20 moves ahead correctly, you still cannot see the victory; you may only see that all the pieces are dead except for the King… but you still must make a move.
This article originally appeared in Unprison.
This is one of the few clearly reasoned pieces I’ve read on the subject. The hysteria surrounding this is reminiscent of that leading up to the Iraq War. Few have mentioned that the assault weapon ban that was not renewed in 2004 was part of the larger Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which has had a devastating effect on the portion of the population most affected by gun violence. No one becomes motivated to do anything until someone is killed in a suburban grammar or high school, suburban shopping mall, suburban movie theater, etc. It’s almost as if we’re punishing the poor for the crimes of the well to do. I think that’s what this amounts to.
I’ll condemn the posturing of people on the right like Ted Nugent and Wayne LaPierre while remembering all the harmful legislation Joe Biden has been behind over the years. Biden wrote the VCCLE with its “truth in sentencing” laws, expansion of the federal death penalty,etc., along with similar legislation over the years. I find it very disconcerting Joe Biden was chosen to lead Obama’s gun control task force. I really think there should be voices from the progressive end of the spectrum challenging some of the assumptions being made in order to press for new legislation to combat gun violence. I also think there should always be a moratorium of 1 year after a tragedy like Newtown before considering legislation relating to such tragedies.
As far as the assault weapons ban is concerned, sniper John Allen Muhammed was able to get an assault rifle legally just because it had a couple of components missing from it during the period when assault weapons were banned. What will all this lead to? Seems like deja vu all over again.