Firearms: let's get realistic when it comes to firearms and let?s demand the impossible

An exclusive article for the monthly newsletter, “En la mira - Observador Latino-americano de Armas de Fuego." Click here to subscribe and access the archive.

Boris Luis Rodríguez García *

Any endeavor that looks to find effective, long-lasting, and sustainable solutions to gun violence in Latin America, must face anthropological and systemic challenges.

The first challenge is that of a subculture in which possessing a gun is widely promoted in the societies of the region. This sociological construction is reinforced and supported by a Latin American modernity that legally allows civilians to possess guns, categorically violating the true meaning of human rights. Faced with an increase in crime and delinquency, many sectors of the Latin American society believe in the necessity to own a gun for the sake of defending themselves, their families and their possessions. This is in part due to the state’s deficiency in protecting the public.

Another aspect – a more systemic one – deals with the nature of the model of development that has prevailed in the region. Historic and market factors favor the expansion of a guns domestic market, incited by the increasing levels of poverty and inequality.

These two issues are practically off the [political] scope, or their importance has been sporadic. These however, must be part of the agenda to free societies from the burden of guns.

The debate about practical strategies to confront the humanitarian and social consequences of gun violence has been very technocratic. With the exception of very few avant-garde organizations that, amidst all odds have designed campaigns to abolish the right to bear arms, most NGOs in Latin America focus their attention on arms control and social awareness.

Though it is important to admit that the latter task is of utmost importance, it is necessary to reinsert in the debate the issues of legality and sociopolitical economic development. Also, civil society plays a crucial role in creating world social awareness in putting pressure on governmental actions. The best example is the International Arms Trade Treaty.

It is important to understand that, though necessary to decrease the incidence of illegal dealing, actions geared towards setting limits to the amount of guns that civilians may possess, along with strict licensing regulations, arsenal records, and intermediaries, are barely a solution to the core problem.

The civil society, as a norm, has worked with a possibilistic attitude to what seems to be a response to its historical dynamic. Before the impossibility of altering the correlation between the imperative market and cultural forces, social actors have opted for a set of measures with gradual impact wherever they can manage to do so. We must not forget that the state and the market are the predominant forces. However, those who choose not to fight to change everything, run the risk of changing nothing.

Starting with NGOs down to civil society, a strategic vision is needed amidst the framework of the rights to bear arms in order to abolish the possession of arms. If a strategic vision is not created, it would mean condoning the market’s modus operandi. This is why the only realistic and maintainable solution is the abolition of gun possession, together with the creation of just, all-inclusive societies that foster high levels of social development.

Many of the organizations that tirelessly work for this cause may come to feel daunted by the magnitude of the task and the feasibility of failure given the enormous challenges created by the illegal trade of arms.

So what must be done? How can we implode this reality? Where do we begin? In the first place, it is important to identify the social actors willing to put up the fight. One of the fundamental limitations when it comes to firearms is the monopolizing of the issue at the hands of a few organizations.  It is necessary to overcome exclusivity, include other local and regional actors, transfer the social movement’s struggle to the security front, win over the streets, position the debate of the right to bear arms in the social sector, create awareness, create alliances and a dialogue with the informal sectors, churches, base communities, and women’s and youth’s associations. The abundance of actions is endless.

One of the basic challenges is to efficiently socialize the impact of the possession of arms and show its implications on security matters. The experience of the Brazilian guns referendum shows democracy’s imperfections when the public is misinformed beyond the point where they act and make decisions that lead to their own doom.

It is vital for civil society to articulate a criticism of the market system. If the sacred right to bear arms is not openly antagonized, all efforts will be defeated. Producers and sellers of guns possess a great deal of marketing and advertising power with which they assure the promotion of their products. They work in multiple ways to reinforce the perception of citizen insecurity.  Their marketing technologies are “exemplary,” their credentials as socially conscious enterprises surprise us to the point of creating a mindset that security is a private issue - in   line with the most outdated individualistic, liberal philosophies.

The fight must be fought with ideas. It’s interesting to note that arms lobbyist use less than rigorous arguments to demonstrate, among other things, that the abolition of the right to bare arms automatically leads to an increase in criminality, and vise versa, without taking into account the multiplicity of determinant factors. The argument of an increase in criminality is the most commonly used to manipulate the public. It is done in such a way that they manage to convince many that their epistemological model of research on the matter is infallible and therefore has no need to proof its validity.

Guns, legal or illegal, only contribute to terror, death and desolation. A moral renovation is necessary along with a cultural revolution that brings back the faith in humankind and cultivates a love for live.

The social violence brought about by arms finds its greatest strength in the capitalist system, and the most vulnerable sectors of society face the worst consequences. Meanwhile, the most powerful sectors acquire more means of protection and security. It is a long and unequal fight that is fought one bullet at a time, and it is done with dedication, endurance, and strength in order to confront the campaigns, pressures, and threats presented by the powerful. The biggest mistake would be naïvete and lack of social consciousness.

Firearm politics must not be the art of the possible, but rather the art of making possible what apparently impossible.

* Sociologist, researcher at Centro de Estudios sobre América – La Havana, Cuba. [email protected]