Taking the glamour out of guns will save lives

The mass shooting at Umpqua Community College is just the latest in a seemingly unending litany of horror. The depressing frequency of these horrific events was noted by President Obama and has dominated media coverage and commentary. The responses are rote. One side reissues calls for more gun regulation and the other tsk-tsk's mental illness and dismisses the tragedy as the price of freedom. We need a new approach that makes guns less attractive to vulnerable minds.

From what we see on TV, you would think that guns are everywhere. In fact, they aren't. The number of gun owners is declining because fewer people are hunting. Just 32% of homes have guns; down from almost half three decades ago.

The $13 billion gun industry responded to a changing market by launching non-hunting product lines. Semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15, which were never used for hunting and frowned upon on the range, were rebranded as "sports rifles" to make them more marketable. They could also be tricked out with expensive accessories usually associated with military or police use like high-capacity magazines, flash suppressors and silencers.

Guns became sexy. There's even a term for it—"tacticool," with photos to match – assault-style guns like the ones SWAT teams use. This image is reinforced by movies and video games featuring cool-looking, deadly guns, often provided by manufacturers in coveted product placement deals.

In addition to selling the allure of guns, industry groups boost demand by spreading paranoid rumors about their imminent ban or confiscation. Famously, gun production rose 31 percent after Obama came to office because of the hype that he was coming for people's guns. Sadly, demand also rises after mass shootings. The result is a greater number of guns in fewer hands and a legislative stalemate that makes meaningful gun regulation seemingly impossible.

Clearly, the safety-based argument that we should restrict access to these powerful and inherently dangerous weapons doesn't connect with some people—especially those who value them specifically for their lethality. Full disclosure: I grew up in a home with guns and, as a child, achieved some level of NRA marksmanship with a .22 on the rifle range. I know how mastering something that can kill you can be a point of pride. I can also understand why some people resent restrictions on their freedom to enjoy guns as they like.

Instead of controlling guns by limiting access and supply, we can cut demand by blunting their seductive allure. If we make assault weapons and firearms uncool then disturbed young men—the predominant perpetrators of mass shootings—might find less destructive obsessions. We shouldn't glorify mass murderers by mentioning their names. Neither should we celebrate the tools of their mayhem.

Australia had a similar problem with young men enamored of risky behavior--they loved to speed. Public service announcements about the dangers of fast driving only reinforced the behavior. Instead, officials launched a multimedia campaign that implied speeders were compensating for a failure in their masculinity. The key image was a wagging pinkie with the slogan, "Speeding. No one thinks big of you." The results were a spectacular 46% reduction in young driver deaths.

In his just-published essay, Michael Maiello sees smoking, which has become largely uncool, as a model for changing public perceptions of guns. He also points out the striking similarity between the tobacco and gun industry responses to public outrage over their products.

We need a campaign to counter society's unhealthy obsession with guns. We need to make guns uncool—especially for young men looking to impress—in the way Australia and the U.S. redefined speeding and smoking as uncool and socially unacceptable behaviors.

To connect with their troubled kids and boost their self-esteem, the mothers of the Umpqua Community College and Sandy Hook shooters encouraged a gun fixation. Both of these young men were struggling to find their place in society. They built their identity around the idealized and highly promoted image of the gun slinger. Guns gave them power when they felt powerless. If they weren't warped by the gun glorification image, they may have found some other less destructive channel for their anger and frustration.

Yes, we can say that guns don't kill people, people do. But, the symbolic allure and actual power of the modern military-style weapons available to the public have become too great for many people who shouldn't have them. It's time to tone it down so less-stable minds don't embrace gun culture as a deadly personality trait.

-----

Have a health care question or frustration? Share your story »