The mass shooting in Arizona last weekend has left many of us stunned and concerned about the degree of political rhetoric with today’s up-to-the-minute news cycle and the prevailing unrest with the government.
The tragedy left six people dead and eight in the hospital. Among those in the hospital is Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the suspected target, who was shot as she was holding a meet-and-greet with the constituents of her district.
Giffords was shot in the head from point blank range and the bullet went completely through her brain. She miraculously survived and remains in intensive care while doctors measure her brain activity. They remain cautiously optimistic about her recovery.
With this event dominating the headlines in nearly every media outlet, many government officials, mostly left-wing, have looked to this tragedy as a spark for a debate about our current political climate, and others have called for changes in gun laws.
These lawmakers are met with opposition by mostly right-wing lawmakers and other government officials. They argue that since the killer’s motive is not yet known, it is wrong to turn this into a political debate at this point, and the discourse should be toned down.
Pima County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik, a ringleader of the group aiming to turn the shooting into a political debate, said that conservative commentators and news outlets have risen the political tone so high in recent months that something like this was bound to happen.
For the first time in a while, I’m going to have to side with some on the left on this issue. Political rhetoric may not have risen to an unsafe level yet, but this horrible tragedy should spark a political debate throughout our country.
However, the debate should not view this shooting as solely politically motivated; it is apparent that the alleged killer, Jared Lee Loughner, was mentally unstable and socially inept.
We should all begin to talk about our homeland safety and security. In just the past week, several explosive letters were addressed to government buildings and officials – including Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The letters spontaneously ignited and the authorities believe the multiple letters are connected.
Congressional security has also been a topic at the forefront of debate in recent days. With some congressional leaders calling for increased security and others arguing that this would distance them from their constituents, both sides have valid arguments.
Congress should refuse increased personal security. As congressmen, our elected officials have a duty to represent our values and opinions in government. Security would only place an uncomfortable barrier in approachability between the representative and the represented.
Not surprisingly, our nation’s current gun laws have also been called into question as a result of this tragedy. As a staunch supporter of our Second Amendment right to bear arms, I do not believe that guns should be any less accessible to qualified gun owners.
However, our current laws should be changed regarding reporting and cataloging of suspicious or unusual individuals that could potentially pose a threat to public safety.
Finally, we should also begin to ask ourselves what should be considered dangerous political discourse. Coming fresh off of a heated midterm election, there is no doubt that some citizens are outraged with the make up of Congress or the legislation they have recently passed. Even during the campaign season, we saw examples of extreme opposition to the members and views of both parties.
Media outlets and commentators from both sides have brought our political dialogue to a new level. One can only speculate the effect that the constant anti-Obama or anti-conservative rhetoric has on such a mass audience. What is considered too far? Let’s start the conversation.
No matter what side of the political spectrum we may find ourselves on, we must all begin to talk about issues and fallacies within our political system that have been called into question as a result of the Arizona massacre. No matter our differences, we must come together as Americans to protect a core value on which we pride ourselves – our freedom.
Austin Gaddis is a sophomore majoring in public relations and communication studies. His column runs bi-weekly on Fridays.
