Healthy relationships: Not talking about how to prevent gun violence is not an option

We cannot not talk about it. Between the May 24 shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and June 6, there were 33 mass shootings in the United States. Thirty-four people have been killed, 157 people have been injured. In 12 days. The number of dead does not include the 19 children and two adults who died in the rampage on May 24.

Less than 10 days before the horror in Uvalde, 10 people of color, mostly elders, were murdered in a Buffalo grocery store. Since May 14, 66 people have died in mass shootings in America as a result of gun violence. These are the mass shootings where four or more people died. Sixty-six people in less than a month. If we were to include the number of suicides by firearm, domestic violence and other interpersonal violence deaths by firearms during that time, the number would skyrocket. Not talking about gun violence and how to prevent it is simply not an option — not for me.

I have wrestled with this issue for years. I am not anti-gun. Many of my family members and close friends hunt and are responsible owners and users of firearms. But working to prevent domestic violence homicides — which has been my life’s work for the last 25 years — changes one’s perspective. Yes, domestic violence homicides would still occur if there were no guns. However, the reality that 63% of domestic violence homicides in Pennsylvania were committed by a firearm means that part of the solution to the problem must be a reduction in the access to firearms. It is, to be sure, not the only solution, but it is naive not to talk about reducing access to guns as part of solving the larger issue of domestic violence homicides.

So what are some ways to do this? There are several proposals that would, according to the research, reduce the likelihood of domestic violence homicides by firearm and possibly decrease mass shootings as well. One such proposal is to close the “boyfriend loophole.” Federal law prohibits domestic abusers from having guns, but only if they have been married to, have lived with, or have a child with the victim. It does not otherwise prohibit abusive dating partners from having guns, according to everytown.org. Prohibiting dating partners who have been before a court and found to be perpetrators of domestic or dating violence from possessing guns would increase the likelihood that a victim, no matter their marital status, could escape a violent relationship safely.

Reasonable red flag laws are another option to increase safety — both for those who would use firearms and those they would use them against. A red flag law that gives family members the ability to “flag” someone who has access to guns and has made homicidal or suicidal threats creates space to attend to that person’s crisis and possible mental health issues before an incident occurs. Threats, including threats of suicide, are often a precursor to lethal domestic violence.

Other suggestions under consideration — universal background checks and raising the age to buy assault weapons — could also reduce the number of domestic violence homicides as well as the number of mass shootings.

Inaction is not an option. Our children need us to be proactive about reducing gun violence. Domestic violence victims need us to be proactive about reducing gun violence. Our communities need us to be proactive about reducing gun violence. Sixty-six people have died in mass shootings in the past month and there are more whose deaths will never reach the national news. We must act.