Over years, “firearm related
deaths” has been given a variety of definitions from “scourge” to an
“epidemic”, a “disease “and, recently, a “global health problem”. It has been
reported that number of civilians owned guns worldwide is 650 million; 270
million of them were owned by American citizens in the US. India comes in the second
place followed by China, Germany, France then Pakistan. Such worldwide
distribution, strike the thought that it is a major global health issue that
should be combated.
The negative consequences of gun
violence are far beyond firearm related deaths. It is extended to involve fatal
injuries such as head and spinal cord injuries leading to a variety of physical
disabilities ranging from minor ones to complete paralysis. Such an issue has catastrophic
consequences financially and socially on the individual level in addition to
loss of the productivity of the individuals in their countries from a broader perspective.
On the social and community level, gun violence can destroy communities.
Feeling of insecurity will make people afraid to come out which may lead to depression
and unhealthy lifestyles with consequent increase in the rate of chronic diseases.
Gun suicide is also a crucial issue in this context. Although most of the
explanations of gun suicide are “psychological and mental illness”, I totally
disagree with that! Blaming people for their behaviors when they are not responsible
for them is neither fair nor ethical. Easy access to guns is the actual hidden
reason in my point of view.
All of these negative
consequences raise the most important questions, what is our role as public
health professionals? How can we combat this global problem? I believe that,
first; we need to expand the definition of this critical issue beyond the legal
and political considerations to the most important public health perspective as
a “PREVENTABLE public health problem”. The
role of public policy and legislation comes after that to regulate the burden
of gun ownership along with working on individual and community levels to
change individual behaviors and social norms in order to put a halt to this
global threat.
Graphs are retrieved from: The Small Arms Survey 2007. Cambridge University
Press.
http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2007.html
http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2007.html
A very controversial, but definitely a need to talk about, PUBLIC HEALTH issue. With the nearby election, this topic has gained some popularity, and people are taking sides. As public health professionals, I feel it is our responsibility to look into the policies and legislation behind gun access, like you mentioned. Like our Zika journal club last week, there are two sides: pro-gun control and anti-gun control. I was going to write some pros and cons to either sides, but actually found a really detailed website that compares the pros and cons to gun control for us! http://gun-control.procon.org/. Policy is hard to control, and no matter what decision is made, people will be unhappy. As public health professionals, we must deal with it as it is presented to us… as nurses, doctors, dentists…
ReplyDeleteI agree that guns are a little uncomfortably too easy to access, but I do know that at least some laws and regulations have been put out to make that access a little trickier. I hope that this issue gets solved quickly. I also hope that issues like “women need guns to protect themselves from abusers and rapists” and depression/suicide get solved on a deeper level than just their involvement with guns. It should be an interesting journal club!