J
ust this week, a horrific
mass
shooting
at
Michigan State University
shocked the nation and rocked
our campus, as many have
friends and relatives attending
the nearby university. Its close
proximity
and
the
hours-
long “shelter-in-place” order
had
many
feeling
anxious,
confused and angry. But most
significantly, the feeling of loss
was overwhelming: the lives
of Brian Fraser, Alexandria
Verner and Arielle Anderson
were taken in the shooting and
will forever be memorialized
by the community of East
Lansing and our own. Such
events also remind us of the
constant threat of gun violence,
and should be considered yet
another instance of why we
must overcome the mental,
ideological
and
political
barriers preventing this nation
from
working
towards
a
solution.
In 2022, there were 648 mass
shootings. Just a month and
a half into 2023, there have
been 66 mass shootings. This
constitutes an unfathomable
rate of more than one and a
half mass shootings per day on
average. At this rate, the U.S.
is on pace for a catastrophic
577 mass shootings by the end
of the year. The Gun Violence
Archive defines a mass shooting
as an event in which a shooter
kills or injures a minimum of
four people, not including any
shooter who may have also been
killed or injured in the event.
Even more worrying than this
data, however, is the fact that
it seems we, both the general
public and its lawmakers, are
growing numb to the ever-
rising tide of gun violence
deaths in the United States.
Columbine,
Sandy
Hook,
Orlando,
Las
Vegas,
Texas
First Baptist Church, Robb
Elementary in Uvalde and,
most recently, Monterey Park.
These are names ingrained in
the American consciousness
for their brutality and tragedy,
and are among the 25 mass
shootings since 1982 with 10
or more fatalities. But of all of
these events, who –– besides
those directly affected by the
tragedy –– can name a single
victim? As we are constantly
confronted with news of yet
more shootings, it becomes
increasingly
difficult
to
separate the raw numbers from
the humanity of the victims.
It wasn’t until Nov. 30,
2021 that the horror of such
an event became tangible to
me, something beyond simply
national news. I was in school
40 minutes away from Oxford
High School on the day that a
student murdered four of his
fellow students and injured
seven others. The fact that
something had occurred so
close to my home sent the
entire school, including myself,
into a state of shock. For those
less close — both physically and
emotionally — to the event, it
was yet another tragic mass
shooting, but to the high school
students just a county away, it
felt infinitely more visceral and
horrifying. Yet, many months
later, the event faded into
memory, just like all of the rest.
Indeed, how could it not,
in a nation which has seen
hundreds of mass shootings on
a yearly basis since 2010? With
gun violence inflicting so much
trauma and pain on the public
on practically a weekly basis, it
has been difficult to avoid the
risk of desensitization coupled
with such repeated events. In a
24-hour news cycle that thrives
on constantly churning out
stories and generating clicks, it
is difficult to consume so much
content without blurring out
individual events and instead
subscribing to less personal
overarching
narratives
or
statistics. We cannot allow such
a vicious cycle to continue. We
must begin to remind ourselves,
and Congress, that this level of
tragedy cannot be the norm.
We must oppose a reality in
which we dehumanize victims
of tragedy as simply a statistic,
and instead seek to remember
the victims as human beings.
Last year, Congress passed
its first significant gun reform
law after 30 years of continuous
gun violence. Having received
bipartisan support, the bill
seeks
to
impose
tougher
restrictions on buyers younger
than 21, allocate $15 billion
in funding for mental health
programs and school security
upgrades, funding to implement
red flag laws and denying gun
ownership to those convicted
of violent acts such as domestic
violence.
Even
still,
two-
thirds of the Republican party
opposed the bill, with Sen.
Ted Cruz, R-Texas stating it
wouldn’t curb gun violence,
but instead disarm law-abiding
citizens.
Across
the
aisle,
Democrats believed much more
needed to be done, and they
were right. Yet another mass
shooting made headlines on
July 4, 2022, just a week and a
half after the decades-overdue
bill was passed into law.
The
United
States
has
remained a worldwide anomaly
regarding gun culture, with
firearm ownership entrenched
in our Bill of Rights and
embedded in American society.
For many conservatives, the
right to own a firearm is as
inalienable as your right to free
speech, and in the framework
of the Constitution, it is. Any
proposed
restrictions,
even
for the sake of protecting the
general public from those who
intend to misuse their right to
bear arms, is deemed a direct
attack on personal liberties
by conservatives. Therefore,
for many Americans, there
is no way to address the
causes of mass shootings and
simultaneously retain the same
rights and freedoms guaranteed
by the Bill of Rights.
In a nation with more guns
than people, it is unsurprising
that the United States also has
the unenviable title of most
mass shootings in the world.
When considering the advent
of horrific mass shootings in
other countries, the immediacy
and ruthlessness of legislative
action immediately following
such
events
is
something
sorely lacking in our legislative
bodies. On March 15, 2019, a
radical gunman opened fire
on
worshippers
at
prayer
in two separate mosques in
Christchurch, New Zealand,
killing 50 people and injuring
dozens more. Three days later,
the nation’s Cabinet developed
a massive overhaul of their
existing gun laws, which had
been unchanged for more than
two decades — just like the
laws of the United States at the
time. The legislation included
a complete ban on “military-
style” weapons and was met
with
nationwide
support,
sentiments echoed even by gun
retailers.
In my once native Germany,
there
have
been
27
mass
shootings over the past 110
years. This is due to far stricter
gun laws than the United States.
These laws aren’t perfect, and
mass shootings have happened
— the worst of which at a high
school in 2002 in the city of
Erfurt, resulting in the death
of 17 people and the suicide of
the 19-year-old shooter. Even
with strict gun laws already
in place, the local and federal
government sought reform to
hopefully prevent such an event
from happening again. The age
at which one may legally obtain
large-caliber firearms for sport
shooting, such as a shotgun,
was raised to 21. In addition,
all prospective gun owners
below the age of 25 would
be subject to a psychological
evaluation. Police reform was
also enacted, so that they may
more effectively respond to
such events in the future.
Following
just
one
catastrophic
mass
shooting,
the governments of Germany
and New Zealand acted swiftly
and decisively to curb the
possibility of such an event
happening again, by reviewing
and greatly strengthening their
gun control legislation. The
United States is far beyond
the point of one catastrophic
shooting.
With
dozens
of
such shootings in its history,
it is clear that lawmakers
and the public are becoming
dangerously apathetic to the
tragedy of such events, and
are
unwilling
to
exercise
their power as a lawmaking
body to readily craft decisive
solutions which may curb the
swelling tide of gun violence
in our country. The fact that
thousands of people died over a
20 year period without Congress
passing any significant gun
reform legislation is absolutely
shameful.
It
represents
a
phenomenon of inaction and
apathy towards gun violence
which
rightfully
has
no
representation in any other
legislature in the world, and
should cease to have a place in
the United States.
What these stories of New
Zealand and Germany tell us is
that reform is not only possible,
but
that
shootings
should
never be considered part of our
reality. Simply put, there is no
other country on earth which
has suffered so greatly from gun
violence while doing so little to
combat its prevalence than the
United States. As a society, we
must look inward and evaluate
the fact that initial shock
followed by inaction can only
lead to acceptance and apathy.
Reform can only begin when
we refuse to accept our reality
of mass shootings. Without
such a reckoning, the victims
of
ceaseless
gun
violence
are forgotten — replaced by
a statistic, and their deaths
become
meaningless.
In
a
nation fraught with epidemics,
we cannot allow gun violence to
persist as yet another systemic
illness which ails the public.
I
like to think of my phone
as one of the many organs
that make up my body. I
realize that this sounds pretty
pathetic, but I swear I’ve tried
to establish boundaries with
my phone. No matter how hard
I try, it just doesn’t listen. Or,
maybe, I’m the one who doesn’t
listen. Whatever the case is, my
phone has me in a chokehold
I can’t seem to break free of,
no matter how hard I try. In
fact, as I was watching cyborg
anthropologist Amber Case’s
TED Talk, I picked up my
phone a total of five times, even
though the talk is only seven
minutes and 37 seconds long.
Case opens her TED Talk by
telling the audience, “you are
all actually cyborgs.” She goes
on to explain that every time
we look at a computer screen or
use our cellular devices, we’re
acting like cyborgs. According
to Case, cyborgs themselves are
“a new form of homo sapiens”
— a new species of human that
clicks on things and stares at
screens. She insists that, as
cyborgs, we have developed
a second self that we are now
responsible for.
Despite her insistence on
the
human
transformation
into
cyborgs,
Case
makes
sure to end her talk on a
positive
note,
explaining
that, although technology is
unconsciously forcing us to
develop this second self, “the
most
successful
technology
… lets us live our lives.” She
commends
technology
for
allowing humans to collaborate
and
transcend
geographical
limitations
to
communicate
with each other.
While
I
do
agree
that
technology contributes to the
development of more accessible
and
easier
communication,
I
sometimes
become
so
overwhelmed by it that I feel
like the cons outweigh the
pros. Sure, it provides for great
and effective communication
platforms, but there are multiple
issues that it brings, like the
fact that for every 10 minutes
of studying I get through, I feel
the need to reward myself with
half an hour of screen time.
Or, that every time my phone
vibrates, signaling the arrival
of a notification, I glitch. These
issues and more point to a
more pressing problem. They
signal to the increasingly pre-
programmed nature that is
negatively affecting our mental
health and intelligence, and
how it has become curiously
challenging to detach from
these
habits
due
to
our
destructive
dependence
on
technology.
Although I do think that
the
modern
reliance
on
technology arrived with the
digital revolution in the 1980s,
the COVID-19 pandemic has
unarguably
heightened
that
reliance to the point where
it
has
become
a
negative
dependence. It isn’t to say that
before the pandemic we didn’t
use smartphones to text and
call people, nor that we didn’t
use social media. It is to say,
however, that the pandemic
brought a global shutdown,
which resulted in a mind-
numbing
perpetuation
of
technology. Everything, from
work to social events and live
entertainment,
relocated
to
the digital realm indefinitely,
making
our
reliance
on
technology even more acute.
The
pandemic
also
had
severe effects on the global
population’s
mental
health.
According
to
the
National
Institutes of Health, a 2021
study demonstrated that “nearly
half of Americans surveyed
reported recent symptoms of an
anxiety or depressive disorder.”
To worsen the issue, 10% of
respondents mentioned feeling
like their mental health needs
were not being met.
This decline in mental health
was paired with an increase in
technology use in children, as
documented in another 2021
study by Pierpaolo Limone and
Giusi Antonia Toto. The study
mentions that child technology
use increased by 15% during
the pandemic. Not only did
this pose a threat to mental
health, but it puts physical
health at risk as well, with
the radiofrequency radiations
emitted by smartphones posing
possible brain tumor risks for
children.
Outside of the pandemic,
technology in and of itself is
known for having immense
negative
effects
on
mental
health. It can aggravate a
person’s mood, and spending
too much time online has been
tied to developing depression,
anxiety
and
feelings
of
loneliness. Particularly, a 2017
study found that adults who
engaged with online media for
more than six hours a day faced
a higher risk of falling into
depression. Even if technology
allows us to communicate with
people, the main mechanism
to avoid loneliness is to foster
genuine, intimate connections
that make us feel close to others.
These connections, as Dr. Gail
Saltz, a professor of psychiatry
at the New York Presbyterian
Hospital, explains, are only
possible to a certain degree
when done through a screen.
In
addition
to
having
negative
effects
on
mental
health, the question of whether
technology is making society
dumb is prevalent in modern-
day discourse. Our reliance
on digital technology has led
us to become more and more
automated,
implementing
restrictions on our ability to
think critically and pushing
us
into
echo
chambers
—
that
is,
environments
that
expose
us
to
information
biased to our own opinions
while shielding data that may
challenge
our
preconceived
notions. The introduction of
Artificial Intelligence has only
exacerbated our progressively
automated nature, given that its
increased capabilities worsen
our reliance on technology,
weakening our ability to think
and act in the absence of it.
Echo
chambers
have
specifically
led
to
the
development of a “chronically
online” culture that proves that
technology is, in some ways,
tarnishing our ability to truly
educate ourselves on pertinent
topics and issues. Surfing the
web through a “chronically
online”
lens
has
impacted
the way we communicate our
opinions to others. Many have
begun to employ buzzwords
to sound smarter, not knowing
what they truly mean, which
has taken a toll on clear
communication
driven
by
knowledge and accuracy.
All
the
aforementioned
information
sounds
very
scary, and that’s because it is.
Nevertheless, it still doesn’t
convince me to limit the time
I spend online. I definitely
don’t
want
technology
to
negatively impact the way I
educate myself, but it makes
me anxious to lose connections
I can only maintain digitally,
and it frightens many others as
well. I constantly wonder why
I feel like every day becomes
more monotonous, and most of
the conversations I have seem
repetitive. The answer lies in
the increasingly programmed
nature
of
our
modern-day
routines. And as much as I, and
many others, need a detox from
our digital routines, it feels
impossible to do so without
resorting to our newly bionic
nature.
I
’m scared of Tinder. I’m
scared of dating apps in
general, actually. My body
count is more than one but I’ve
never hooked up with someone
random, I already knew them
and had some sort of base
relationship with them. I also just
got out of a sort of situationship
(but unfortunately my feelings
aren’t gone) and my friends keep
saying I just need to hook up
with someone else to get over it.
What do I do?? (For context, I’m
a bisexual woman)-L
Dear L,
It’s totally chill to be scared
of dating apps, and you really
shouldn’t worry about meeting
someone new to get over a
previous relationship (I’m not
sure that’s how feelings work).
If your friends are suggesting it
and you’re interested in the idea
enough to ask about it here, I
think you should consider how
relieved you may feel about my
advice. This is sort of like when
you ask your roommate if you
should get the cherry or green
apple flavor of something, and
when she recommends the cherry
you instinctively think “NO!!!!”
I
don’t
think
it’s
worth
finding out if you like hooking
up with people you don’t have
a relationship with until you
actually feel you want to — not
when your friends think it would
be good for you. Don’t force
yourself into something you don’t
actually want to do, especially
if you already have feelings for
someone else. Write some poetry
and cry a little. Go on long walks
in the Arb. Only get on Tinder
or hook up with someone if
you — and only you — want to.
Otherwise, you will only ever
be comparing the new person to
your old situationship.
Your recommended reading is:
“Modern romance is dead, and
Tinder killed it” by Tate Moyer.
Hi, it’s J again. I found a new
roommate to replace the one who
ran off with the circus, but now
my new roommate thinks he’s
better than me. He walks around
the house like he owns the place!
I hate him. What do I do now?-J
Dear J,
It’s great to hear from you
again! Have you ever considered
that your attitude is the problem?
You
are
the
only
common
denominator of two supposedly
“bad” roommates. Try some self-
reflection before anything else.
If you come to the realization
that
you
are
still
perfectly
tolerable (but really are just
boring and have no future in the
circus), I think now’s the time to
introduce your new roommate to
a new career. Does he have any
special talents? Show him a video
on juggling — maybe he’ll run off
to the circus too. Considering
the speed at which you got a new
roommate, I doubt you’ll have
any trouble getting another!
On the other hand, you could
just tough it out. You are closer to
the end of the semester than you
know. Start sleeping in the living
room or kitchen and claim your
territory. Or maybe you should
get out of the house and make
some new friends so you aren’t
wasting your time worrying
about your roommates.
Your song recommendation is:
Tired of Being Alone by Al Green.
Dear Gilly,
I have a very early class twice
a week with required (*sigh*)
attendance. I haven’t gone to the
class yet, and I really don’t want
to go to it, especially since it’s
going to be really awkward when
I arrive for the first time and the
professor asks who I am.
To be frank, I am running
out of viable excuses. I started
with personal emergency, then
graduated to a pet emergency
(I do not have a pet). I tried
technical difficulties and I said I
overslept once, but I fear that the
professor is beginning to catch
on to my little game.
Can you recommend some
convincing excuses for missing
an early morning class? I don’t
want to hurt my attendance
record, but at the same time, I just
can’t bring myself to go to this
class. I would really appreciate
any advice you have to offer.
Thanks,Sleepless Student-F
Dear F,
Considering all of the effort
you have put into lying to
your professor, have you ever
considered just dropping the
class? If attendance is required
you may be destroying your grade
anyway. While I have no clue if
you have done any of the work
for the course, I think it would be
best that you commit to an Irish
goodbye. This way you will never
have to worry about the morning
class again.
It’s unfortunate, I know, but
there don’t seem to be any other
options. Drop it and move on.
Your song recommendation
is:
Disappointment
by
The
Cranberries.
I AM HAVING SIGNIFICANT
TROUBLE IN MY STUDIES DUE
TO INTERPERSONAL ISSUES.
TO
BE
SPECIFIC,
PEOPLE
SEEM TO THINK THAT I AM
BEING AGGRESSIVE IN MY
INTERACTIONS WITH THEM
WHEN WE ARE WORKING
ON
DOCS
TOGETHER
OR
EXCHANGING
EMAIL.
DO
YOU HAVE ANY ADVICE FOR
ME?
ALSO, UNRELATED, HOW
DO I TURN OFF CAPS LOCK?-N
Hey N,
I’m not surprised that your
classmates are off-put — I am
receiving some truly weird vibes
from you right now. I don’t think
that I am the one to help with
your caps lock problem, but that
may fix a lot of your perceived
aggressiveness. If it’s more than
that (and I assume it is) then
remember that it’s not like you
have to sugarcoat everything.
Just try to be friendly: crack
a joke, leave a smiley face, say
something positive in a Google
Doc comment. It will make a
huge difference and you might
even make some class friends!
Maybe try drinking some tea and
doing yoga, too — it seems like
you need it.
Your song recommendation
is: Green Noise For A Quiet
Mind (1 Hour) by Green Noise
Therapeutics.
Opinion
Stirring the Pot: Interpersonal issues
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
10 — Wednesday, February 22, 2023
Even in the age of mass media, we can’t get the message straight on gun violence
‘We are all cyborgs now’ — A look at our inescapable technology dependance
GISELLE MILLS
Advice Columnist
MAXIMILIAN SCHENKE
Opinion Columnist
GRACIELA BATLLE CESTERO
Opinion Columnist
Read more at MichiganDaily.com