2017
October
03
Tuesday

Monitor Daily Podcast

October 03, 2017
Loading the player...

The Las Vegas shooting reopens a lamentably familiar debate over gun violence in the United States.

At issue is a sense of security. The left, seeking personal safety, wants to limit gun ownership. The right, seeking personal safety (and having little faith in government) sees gun control as eroding the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

Since the 2012 Newtown, Conn., shooting, liberals have felt a deep sense of despair over the political impasse, notes one Monitor editor.

But perhaps we need to look more closely at the nature of the problem. Gun violence in America isn’t primarily a mass shooting problem. Almost two-thirds of the 33,000 annual gun deaths in the US are suicides. Or to put it another way, the same number of Americans fatally shoot themselves each day as died in Las Vegas on Sunday.

If the goal is really to reduce gun deaths, we’d focus on preventing suicides and gang violence. Those are two different problems with different solutions. The steps that would prevent mostly older white men from killing themselves aren’t likely to be the same steps that would prevent mostly young minority men from shooting each other. And there are firearms dealers working on stopping suicide by gun, as we’ve reported.

Yes, Las Vegas is another tragic example of America’s mass shooting problem. But the nation has a much bigger gun-death problem that may actually be more solvable.

Now, we've selected five news stories that illustrate trust, generosity, and collaboration at work.  


You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Today’s stories

And why we wrote them

President Trump has a trust issue with American Latinos. Could the federal response to the devastation in Puerto Rico mark a shift in that distrust?

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/AP
Shirley Connuck, right, of Falls Church, Va., holds up a sign representing a district in Texas, as the Supreme Court hears a case on possible partisan gerrymandering by state legislatures on October 3.

Is extreme gerrymandering – using big data – undermining American democracy? Why the US Supreme Court is reviewing this practice of redrawing voting districts.

SOURCE:

US Census, PennLive, Michigan Radio

|
Jacob Turcotte/Staff
Ahmer Khan
Rohingya refugees line up for food aid at a distribution point for food at the Balukhali refugee camp in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh.

At a refugee camp in Bangladesh, one of the world’s poorest nations, we find a wealth of generosity, empathy, and hospitality.

President Trump’s EPA chief appears to be using a Reagan-era playbook in reshaping the agency, including big budget cuts and a series of small, targeted rule changes. How’s that working so far?

Courtesy of C. Henze/NASA Ames Research Center
A simulation shows the gravitational waves emitted by the merger of two black holes. The colored contours around each black hole represent the gravitational amplitude, the blue lines represent the orbits of the black holes, and the green arrows represent their spins.

The Nobel Prize in Physics goes to scientists who opened a whole new way of peering into some of the impenetrable recesses of space. It also underscores the power of collaboration.  


The Monitor's View

Reuters
Actor and former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger speaks outside the Supreme Court Oct. 3 after oral arguments in the Gill v. Whitford case and to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering in electoral districts.

On Oct. 3, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could produce the most important ruling of its term: Can a state legislature, dominated by one party, draw voting districts with the intent to ensure election victories for that party? 

From the questions asked by the justices, it is clear why the high court has long avoided a ruling that would put it in the business of deciding how legislators should group people into political communities. They differ widely on this core aspect of democracy.

The court has already ruled that states cannot create districts according to race, a negative bias that is clearly unconstitutional. But what is a “workable standard” to divide up voters using neutral or positive criteria, such as party affiliation, geographic proximity, school districts, employment patterns, or other shared interests?

The justices could again decline to rule on the common practice of partisan gerrymandering, as they have in the past. The courts may not be the best branch to define the intimate contours of each society in particular states. That could easily lead the high court to act as a referee in many disputes between Republicans and Democrats.

In a democracy, citizens retain the right to determine their collective identity by promoting candidates for office and then electing the ones that best define the common good. Some states let a “citizens commission” draw up districts using criteria such as the compactness of a district. But in most states, voters still prefer to elect legislators who draw the voting boundaries after each census.

At heart, elections are really an invitation for voters to confirm the bonds of community and imagine a different future together. “No society can survive,” writes British philosopher Roger Scruton, “if it cannot generate the ‘we’ of affirmation: the assertion of itself as entitled to its land and institutions.”

The ballot box is the best way for Americans to create and affirm their values – and determine how to draw voting districts. And those values should include a respect for the views of other citizens, a humility to listen, and an honoring of the democratic process. If more voters elected representatives with those values, the Supreme Court would not be faced with such a hard decision.


A Christian Science Perspective

About this feature

Each weekday, the Monitor includes one clearly labeled religious article offering spiritual insight on contemporary issues, including the news. The publication – in its various forms – is produced for anyone who cares about the progress of the human endeavor around the world and seeks news reported with compassion, intelligence, and an essentially constructive lens. For many, that caring has religious roots. For many, it does not. The Monitor has always embraced both audiences. The Monitor is owned by a church – The First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston – whose founder was concerned with both the state of the world and the quality of available news.

At a time when a lot of humanity’s focus is on how homes are being destroyed by hurricanes, violence, or personal tragedy, it’s helpful to not lose sight of what makes a house worth being called a home in the first place – love. Mary Baker Eddy, who founded Christian Science and this news organization, sheds a new light on the 23rd Psalm by considering God as Love – as the Bible says. She renders it this way, “I will dwell in the house [the consciousness] of [Love] for ever.” Expressing love ourselves and looking for ways to help and heal others as Christ Jesus did can heighten this spiritual sense of home. A hymn by Rosemary Cobham from the “Christian Science Hymnal: Hymns 430-603” puts it this way: “We go to meet our neighbor’s need,/ And find our home in every place.”


A message of love

Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP
The US Capitol dome serves as a backdrop for flags flying at half-staff in honor of those killed in the Las Vegas shooting as the sun rises Oct. 3 at the foot of the Washington Monument on the National Mall.
( The illustrations in today’s Monitor Daily are by Jacob Turcotte. )

A look ahead

Thanks for joining us. Come back tomorrow: We’re talking to Nevada gun owners and dealers about the national conversation that needs to happen to help prevent mass shootings.

More issues

2017
October
03
Tuesday

Give us your feedback

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.