Discussion Forum 2 – CULTURE IS STRONGER THAN LAW
Response to post
Directions:
COMMENTING – comment intelligently on the two threads below. Comments should be at statements like I agree will not gain you points, comments must show some engagement with ideas and independent thinking in order to receive points. As a rough guideline, your answer to each thread-post question should be at least 12 sentences. And please realize that comments on students’ threads such as – I agree, or good job, or I disagree – will net you zero points. A comment has to engage with the thoughts posted by student in order to receive points.
First Thread
Culture’s true dominance over law by David Lu
Prompt 1
In the US, the phrase “culture is stronger than law” can easily be seen in the context of War on Drugs as drug use has been present for centuries and that limiting drug use as a whole is essentially impractical and impossible. Thus, it has only become an avenue for those dominant groups in society to oppress subordinate groups arbitrarily. Furthermore, the use of guns in the US is just as prevalent. As Professor Kane mentioned in the video, contrary to popular belief, the NRA is largely funded by its members rather than large corporations, highlighting how deep the gun culture is in the US (BBC 2020). Guns are also an essential part of the US culture as indicated by its contribution to the US economy. In the US, guns are culturally and symbolically important. Many Americans value hunting and the traditions of guns, as well as the security and protection that weapons may bring. Furthermore, guns also have an economic importance as hunting is a significant driver of tourism in many states, employing many of those as shooting range operators and equipment suppliers (Siegel 2018).
One example of culture being stronger than law is the instances of child marriages. In many countries, child marriages have continued for generations and are ingrained in the culture. From an aspect, child marriage orignates from the patriarchal power culture in many Asian societies (Kalimbuka 2020). Another aspect of causes of child marriage is due to poverty: many families and sometimes even the girls themselves see marriage as an opportunity to have financial security and reduce the financial burden for their own family (UNICEF). This also stems from the patriarchal nature of society which limits their education and ability to escape poverty. Even though in many Asian countries there are strict laws regarding underage marriage, instances of child marriage are still prevalent. In India, if an adult man over the age of 21 marries an underage bride, the man and the girl’s guardian along with those that officiate the marriage violate the law can be sentenced for up to two years in prison and/or to pay a fine of $1,300 (Pathak and Frayer 2020). However, even given these relatively harsh laws, there is almost no way of controlling child marriages in many impoverished areas, resulting in there still being an estimated 1.5 million underage girls in India who get married each year (UNICEF). Moreover, during the pandemic, the issue of child marriages has also worsened due to the increased financial burdens (Dasgupta 2020) .
In contrast, an example of an instance when law is stronger than culture is people having to wear masks in the pandemic. Culturally, some countries are more open to wearing masks in comparison to others. However, in the pandemic, due to legal restrictions and power control from the government, everyone was required to wear a mask when the pandemic was at its worst. Thus, it can be argued that during that certain period, the law was stronger than culture. However, it could also be argued that eventually as people got vaccinated, people returned to the default culture of not wearing masks.
Prompt 2
From the perspective of society’s overall community benefit, the War on Drugs could have never benefited. As professor Kane mentioned, the culture of drugs is ingrained in the culture of the US. When laws against these cultures are imposed, it creates a highly effective systematic tool to arbitrarily oppress those who are marginalised or a threat.
The use of coded terminology in the War on Drugs was an effective way to oppress minority/subordinate communities and maintain white supremacy in society. In addition, the use of scapegoating for race baiting, such as by portraying the poor black and brown communities as root causes for all drug issues in society when affluent white communities were also proportionately also drug users, damaged the narratives surrounding the African American communities (Breed 2021).
The criminalisation of drug users allowed politicians to use the supposed fact of enforcing law and order to target and purposefully damage the African American community. In the Nixon era, Nixon also heavily focused on the ‘war on crime’, which was just a cover in his attempts to fight back against the civil rights and anti-war movements. This led to an era where American society approached the issue of drug addiction as a crime issue rather than a health issue (Regino 2017). This not only allowed the white republicans to gain power but also suppressed and disrupted the black societies by throwing many of them into jail (LoBianco 2016). This dog whistle eventually becomes integral to the southern strategy where he attempts to persuade poor and working-class whites to join the republican party by appealing to them by talking about the chaos unleashed by the civil rights movement.
Furthermore, tough policy decision makings on crime and drugs were also prevalent in the politics of the presidential election between Dukakis and bush. Bush focused on the case of Willie Hortons and created a primitive fear as he was portrayed metaphorically as the black male rapists of the time after slavery. Bush essentially won the election by utilising the already present stigma to instil even more fear around black men as criminals (Sherman 2016). Through the multitude of methods of suppressing African Americans and sending them into prison, where they were unable to reintegrate into society, the white effectively maintained their power, undermined the black community and removed the threat of reintegration. In addition, the fact that many African Americans were sent to prison further criminalised African Americans and perpetuated the narrative that African Americans were a threat in society, further dehumanising them.
Like professor Kane mentioned, the US is starting to behave like an Oligarchy. Thus, the War on Drugs continues in order to benefit those in power and involved in the prison business. For example, a bill allowed the CCA to gain a large amount of profit from contracts with states where the states were required to keep the prisons filled even if nobody was committing a crime. The fact that these large corporations have the great power concentrations to implement social control through regulations is alarming as there is no concern for the detrimental effects that their bills could impose as long as they profit. Since there is a lack of regard for the perverse effects a bill could generate, many CCA bills have essentially sacrificed and incarcerated large portions of the African American communities just so that large corporations which are part of ALEC can profit (Elk and Sloan 2011). In addition, these laws increase the wealth inequality between communities, further increasing racial segregation.
Prompt 3
These terms apply to the War on Drugs due to the intrinsic fact that drugs are part of the American culture and almost any other culture. Thus, when an imposed law attempts to remove, oppress, or change part of the culture, it is inherently ineffective in its purpose. Historically, the use of drugs was prevalent in the general American community and not only poor African American communities. In the 1950’s, especially in clubs where drug use was prevalent, there was a lot of mixing between races, which was considered to be very problematic. In addition, after the war, more movements for black equality gained traction. American having a history of racial segregation and white superiority met with these new phenomenons were afraid that they would lost their dominance in society (Granderson 2021). From the perspective of white supremacists, these civil rights movements and marginalised communities were now a threat to the state. Furthermore, marginalised groups were an effect of de-industrialisation as manufacturers realised that outsourcing the production line was cheaper and more cost efficient. This resulted in great numbers of unemployment among those uneducated, which during then mostly comprised minority groups such as African Americans. Thus, these groups from a certain aspect revealed America’s failures in social support and equal treatments among races. As politicians, the most effective way of shifting the blame was to scapegoat these communities and/or blame themselves for what they faced (Lopez 2016). Thus, they thought that making drugs illegal under the commerce clause could help them arbitrarily oppress these marginalised communities (McCoy 2021). For example, there was a lot of use of race-baiting and coded terminology such as “scourge of heroin”, which triggered fear among those privileged whites and created political momentum for those candidates which promised to tackle this problem.
These terms also apply to the future War on Guns as there are roughly 120 guns per 100 people in the United States (Ingraham 2018). Furthermore, American civilians own 100 times as many firearms as the US military and 400 times as many as law enforcement officers (Gutowski 2018). Thus, this highlights the impossibility of the government in heavily restricting firearms in general. However, that is not to say that the government can pass laws restricting the use or possession of firearms for particular groups. For example, those who are a threat to the state in a War on Guns would be those that most effectively know how to use guns and have battled/trained for Guerilla warfare: Veterans. Thus, this is not applied to everyone in general by a law but is decided arbitrarily and imposed onto oppressed/subordinate groups.
Prompt 4
In general, the biggest disagreement in the US is about the true effects of different gun laws and regulations. Since the US has so many states, each with different regulations, analysing the outcomes in each state is also difficult. However, most agree that gun violence is too prevalent in society. Furthermore, as professor Kane explains, analysing gun violence through statistical analysis is impervious. This might also be due to the fact that there are so many factors that contribute to gun violence and that isolating variables is difficult, resulting in spurious relationships. Most Americans all agree that gun violence in the US is a serious issue but mainly disagree on how this gun violence can be mitigated. For most, it is simple to think that more gun controls means less gun violence in general. However, as professor Kane explained, this is most likely logical but does not encapsulate the idea of violence in general. Thus, as a person viewing articles with headings like this, it is easy to just support and say that gun control is necessary. Furthermore, there is evidence suggesting that many types of gun control might not be effective. One would think that given that the five highest-casualty mass shootings in modern American history all had semiautomatic weapons, that regulating semiautomatic weapons which would be particularly impactful for large scale shooting would be effective. However, in 1994 when congress passed legislation to outlaw the sale of certain types of semiautomatic guns and large-capacity magazines, the effect was unimpressive (Gebelhoff 2018). Gun homicide rates declined during the ban, but they also fell after the ban expired in 2004. Koper (2004) found that the effect on violence was insignificant because it was full of loopholes. Another common example of gun legislation that many people might think is effective is lifting its minimum age for purchasing a gun from 18 to 21. While this may sound effective, it probably won’t be effective in combating gun violence as handguns account for 90% of homicides in 2016 and Walmart only sells handguns in Alaska (Gregory and Wilson 2018). In addition, the Rand corporation (2020) also highlights the challenges of studying gun violence. They mention that even for outcomes which have been studied more, such as suicides and homicides, there lack studies that meet their criteria for providing evidence of a policy’s effects (Pew Research Center). Furthermore, many studies often provided inconclusive, contradictory, or otherwise limited evidence.
While articles often provide more regulations as a method to reduce gun violence, I believe that changing the culture surrounding guns is the most important method. For example, instead of just focusing on the statistical analysis of how the number of gun violences and the strictness of legislation, we could also focus on other factors such as the root causes of different categories of gun violence should also be considered. For example, many school shootings are a result of today’s fast paced culture and lack of acceptance, creating large validation deficits. Most importantly, once a child is so neglected by society and feels it themselves, the hatred and inner fear cannot just be fixed by implementing stricter gun policies as violence can be caused by other means too. Even with stricter gun regulations, it is also only a matter of time until violence is once again stirred up. Thus, I believe that there should be emphasis on creating conversation regarding the root causes of gun violence. That is not to say that I don’t believe that stricter gun controls are necessary, especially when they may be relatively practical to implement. For example, many articles such as Burrus (2017) and Gregory and Wilson (2018) agree that buying a gun should be more like buying a car: require every buyer to obtain a license that includes a registration of all purchases and a training program.
However, implementing these policies and creating change culturally is difficult. Given that the gun culture is ingrained in the US, many people might reject facts that contradict their community’s entrenched beliefs, especially when the beliefs have become central to their community identity. Moreover, changes in cultures are more hidden and as politicians, it is hard to see instant change and provides little incentives for politicians to pursue it. Thus, while I hope that more conversation is sparked about gun violence in schools and communities, I recognise that governments may not prioritise it.
References
BBC. “US Gun Control: What is the NRA and Why is It So Powerful?” BBC News. Last modified August 6, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35261394.
Breed, A. “Nixon Launched the War on Drugs 50 Years Ago. Who Won?” NBC News. Last modified July 21, 2021. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/nixon-launched-war-drugs-50-years-ago-won-rcna1476.
Burrus, T. Forbes. Accessed July 24, 2021. https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorburrus/2017/10/06/what-if-we-treated-guns-like-cars-then-we-might-be-able-to-enact-truly-common-sense-gun-laws/?sh=2077a27f2c73.
DASGUPTA, DEBARSHI. “Child Marriages on the Rise in India Amid the Covid-19 Pandemic.” The Straits Times. Accessed July 24, 2021. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/south-asia/child-marriages-on-the-rise-in-india-amid-the-covid-19-pandemic.
Elk, M., and B. Sloan. “The Hidden History of ALEC and Prison Labor.” The Nation. Last modified June 29, 2015. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/hidden-history-alec-and-prison-labor/.
Gebelhoff, R. The Washington Post. n.d. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/gun-control-that-works/.
Granderson, L. “Column: The ‘war on Drugs’ Was Always About Race.” Los Angeles Times. Last modified July 21, 2021. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-07-21/the-war-on-drugs-was-always-about-race.
Gregory, S., and C. Wilson. “6 Real Ways to We Can Reduce Gun Violence in America.” Time. Last modified March 22, 2018. https://time.com/5209901/gun-violence-america-reduction/.
Gutowski, Stephen. “Report: Nearly 400 Million Civilian-Owned Guns in America.” Washington Free Beacon. Last modified June 20, 2018. https://freebeacon.com/culture/report-nearly-400-million-civilian-owned-guns-america/.
Ingraham, C. “There are more guns than people in the United States, according to a new study of global firearm ownership.” The Washington Post. Last modified June 19, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/there-are-more-guns-than-people-in-the-united-states-according-to-a-new-study-of-global-firearm-ownership/.
Kalimbuka, B. “The Very Traditions That Support Child Marriages in Malawi Can Be Used to End Them.” World Bank Blogs. Accessed July 24, 2021. https://blogs.worldbank.org/youth-transforming-africa/very-traditions-support-child-marriages-malawi-can-be-used-end-them.
Koper, S. Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence. U.S. Department of Justice, n.d. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf.
LoBianco, Tom. “Report: Nixon’s War on Drugs Targeted Black People.” CNN. Last modified March 24, 2016. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html.
Lopez, German. “Nixon Official: Real Reason for the Drug War Was to Criminalize Black People and Hippies.” Vox. Last modified March 23, 2016. https://www.vox.com/2016/3/22/11278760/war-on-drugs-racism-nixon.
McCoy, A. “The War on Drugs Is 50 Years Old.” The Nation. Last modified July 8, 2021. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/anniversary-war-on-drugs/.
Pathak, S., and L. Frayer. “Child marriages are up in the pandemic. Here’s how India tries to stop them.” NPR.org. Last modified November 5, 2020. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/11/05/931274119/child-marriages-are-up-in-the-pandemic-heres-how-india-tries-to-stop-them.
Pew Research Center. https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2013/05/firearms_final_05-2013.pdf.
RAND Coorporation. “Redirecting.” Google. Last modified April 22, 2020. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/key-findings/gun-policy-in-america.html&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1627127905739000&usg=AOvVaw3S0pAaNPv_ilJcmh4fSMsl.
Regino, A. “The Problem With Wars on Drugs, From Nixon to Duterte.” The Diplomat – The Diplomat is a Current-affairs Magazine for the Asia-Pacific, with News and Analysis on Politics, Security, Business, Technology and Life Across the Region. Last modified January 31, 2017. https://thediplomat.com/2017/01/the-problem-with-wars-on-drugs-from-nixon-to-duterte/.
Sherman, E. Forbes. Accessed July 24, 2021. https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues/?sh=2ec4e3e542c8.
Siegel, Michael. “How the Firearms Industry Influences US Gun Culture, in 6 Charts.” The Conversation. Last modified February 23, 2018. https://theconversation.com/how-the-firearms-industry-influences-us-gun-culture-in-6-charts-92142.
UNICEF. “End Child Marriage.” UNICEF. Accessed July 24, 2021. https://www.unicef.org/india/what-we-do/end-child-marriage.
Second Thread
Gun Culture & The War on Drugs by Brook Brown
Prompt 1
The statement “culture is stronger than law” means that the law is difficult to enforce due to resistance by the people because of deep-rooted culture. I believe the social order to shut down California due to COVID-19 is a good example where culture proved to be stronger than law. While most businesses were ordered to shut down, many Americans continued to earn a living. Things like hair salons became the modern-day speakeasy. Other business, such as restaurants chose not to be as discreet about being open for business. If they were willing to open, people did not hesitate to show up. The order to stay home was defied and resisted by the people making it difficult to enforce. While shutting down businesses and staying home proved to be impossible with Americans, wearing a mask did not. Having to wear a face covering in public was not a social norm for the American culture. There was much resistance in the beginning. However, as time went on more and more people began to abide by it. Regardless of how ridiculous many Americans found the idea.
Prompt 2
As long as there is addiction in this world, the War on Drugs will never be won. Many Americans don’t fully understand what it means to be addicted. Those who suffer from addiction, tend to struggle with their sobriety for their entire lives. Some might believe the War on Drugs was lost when marijuana became legal, and dispensaries began opening up. If this is your idea of losing the war, then the war should have been lost when tobacco and alcohol hit the markets. Making a substance legal does not mean the war is over. Substance abuse is going to happen weather a substance is legal or illegal. Needle exchange programs are a perfect example. While the substance remains illegal, and abused by many Americans, we offer them clean tools to use with. I don’t believe the War on Drugs is meant to be won. It is a fight that must continue simply to maintain balance between good and evil. They say that money is the root of all evil, and there is much money to be made in a world filled with addition.
Prompt 3
Over time, there have been many arbitrary laws made against marginalized groups that have been viewed as a threat to the state. President Nixon’s declaration of a War on Drugs in 1971 is a good example of this. He increased the size of our federal drug control agencies and passed a no-knock warrant policy. Once this policy was in place, they began to target black communities and criminalizing them. President Trump’s attempt to build a wall to keep drugs out of the country is another example. Trump is clearly implying that the Hispanic community is responsible for the drug problem in the US. This is not going to solve America’s drug problem. With many drugs being needed for medicinal purposes, it’s nearly impossible to keep drugs, both legal and illegal, out of the hands of Americans. Gun control in America comes from a long history where guns were used to maintain racial order. Today people believe that gun control will help to reduce crime in America. I think it’s important to think about the problems we will encounter from banning guns. History could possibly repeat itself.
Prompt 4
I feel that, not just High Schools, but all schools should have increased security standards. Most schools require some kind of visitor check in, but what are they really checking? With the convince of cell phones, how many times have you as a parent walked right past the office and to your child in between classes. I know I have, and never once have I been stopped or questioned. We send our children to school every day trusting that the staff on campus will keep them safe. Most of the staff we have never even met. At the same time, we teach our children not to talk to strangers. These two ideas are a good example of a social paradox. After 9/11 airlines responded with increased security checks before boarding a flight. The same should stand true for our children’s schools.
In a 2018 NBC News report, an Indiana High School reportedly implemented a security system should an active shooter enter on campus. Teachers are provided a fob panic button to trigger the system and the system is equipped to notify their local sheriff’s department for help. Cameras have been installed throughout the hallways giving the sheriff’s department a live visual in the event of an emergency. They even have what they refer to as hot zones that will cover the hallways in smoke to disorient someone that is a threat to the students. I feel increasing school security is definitely constitutional. Not only do I feel its constitutional, but it seems more obtainable and effective than trying to pass and implement gun laws in a culture that is so divided and gun crazy. Do I feel increased security will correct America’s violence problem, no, but neither will taking away guns.
In the lecture video on gun culture, Professors Kane suggest purchasing insurance to own a firearm. While I don’t agree with having to purchase insurance, I do feel it would be within reason to be required to obtain some level of knowledge and safety training before being able to own a firearm. We are required to go to Drivers Ed. and pass an exam before we can apply for a driver’s license. Driving a vehicle is a huge responsibility, so is choosing to own a gun. Unfortunately, I feel many people do not understand the responsibility of owning a gun. Along with thorough background checks and safety training, showing proof of safe ownership should also be required. If you can’t properly secure your weapons, you shouldn’t own any. Even if you hold a CCW permit, there are places where carrying is still not permitted. You will, at some point, need a secure place for it to be stored.
https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/inside-the-safest-school-in-america-1166029891710
The post Discussion Forum 2 – CULTURE IS STRONGER THAN LAW Response to post appeared first on PapersSpot.
