The Tombstone of the U.S.
After the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, what will really change in America?
The fallout for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the friends and family of the six killed and 13 others injured by a lone gunman in Tucson on Saturday has been devastating.
Giffords' condition remains critical but stable — half her skull has been removed after being shot point-blank in the head, but doctors say her ability to respond to simple commands is the best possible outcome for her injuries and remain cautiously optimistic. (Her husband, Houston-area-based astronaut Mark Kelly, remains at her side and released a statement of thanks for the support Giffords has received.)
As a shocking crime recedes to vigils, grief, medical updates and murder charges, it's becoming clear that the consequences of the massacre in Tucson will be far-reaching. Here's what the tragic shooting may portend for American politics and policies:
Toning down the rhetoric in Washington.
One thing that everyone seems to agree on is that the level of vitriol in the political discourse has gotten dangerously high in recent years. Between Sarah Palin's map of Democrats illustrated with gunsights, congressmen yelling "You lie!" at the president during the State of The Union, Rep. Michele Bachmann telling her constituents she wants them "armed and dangerous," and Senate candidate Sharron Angle's prescription of "second-amendment remedies" to get a response from Congress, we've gotten too accustomed to violent imagery masquerading as raised enthusiasm.
The leadership from both parties is urging care and consideration in speaking out over the next few days, but it will be difficult for the militant Tea Party rhetoric (about the tree of liberty and the blood of patriots) to return without serious backlash.
A renewed focus on mental illness
Though the original take on the shooting was that it must have been the result of a violently polarized political climate, new insight into the mind of the alleged shooter Jared Lee Loughner makes the political scrutiny less important.
Loughner'sYouTube videos and reading list display less of an ideological viewpoint and more of the ramblings of disturbed person who distrusted government, focused on grammar, currency, mind control and lucid dreams. Various media sources are describing Loughner as schizophrenic, and the Washington Post has published e-mails from a community college classmate of Loughner's that made plain she felt he was disturbed and feared that he would become violent as early as June, weeks before Loughner was kicked out of school for disruptions, with "clearance from a mental-health professional that indicated his presence would not present a danger to himself or others," as the condition for returning.
What's unclear is whether Loughner was seeking mental help — or if anything could have been done to compel him to do so before he hurt himself or others. If the Andrea Yates case created a dialog around post-partum depression, perhaps this will lead to people asking if we don't need to be more proactive in compelling dangerously disturbed people to get help.
Gun control returns to the spotlight
If Loughner is insane, the obvious next question is what he was doing with a gun. According to the Associated Press, Loughner purchased his gun legally from a licensed dealer in Arizona last year, passing an instant background check and given permission to conceal and carry it nearly everywhere even without a permit according to new Arizona law.
"Arizona is the Tombstone of the United States of America," Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said at a press conference Sunday at his headquarters, when asked about the state's laws concerning weapons. "I have never been a proponent of letting everybody in this state carry weapons under any circumstances they want. And that's almost where we are."
Lately it seems like bombs, not guns, have been the weapon of choice for inspiring fear and making a statement, but this shooting could change that. The 33-round clip that Loughner used to shoot into the crowd was illegal under the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004, and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy is already planning to bring forth legislation to restrict the sale of high-capacity magazines.
Gun control activists will probably seek other ways to restrict guns from the hands of those who have been documented as disturbed.
The end of Sarah Palin for President?
The shooting in Arizona had nothing to do with Sarah Palin. There's no evidence that the suspect, Jared Lee Loughner, has ever supported her or visited her website. And yet Palin, more than any other political figure, is being associated with the violent rhetoric in the current political climate.
It's a fate she pretty much brought upon herself: If you create a map of Democrats with gunsights over their names and districts and one of them gets shot, some people might perceive you as getting what you asked for. It doesn't help that Giffords herself objected to the image during the campaign. It assuredly wasn't made with violent intent, but it was careless and irresponsible, and it would be smart for Palin just to admit it.
Instead Palin is in full damage control mode, with an aide now claiming that the "bulls-eyes" were never gunsights or crosshairs but actually surveyors' marks. As Jezebel noted, next Palin will be saying that her mantra "Don't retreat — RELOAD" actually means "reload your surveying equipment into the truck so that it does not get damaged as you survey the land for ways that you could improve it."
Palin will always have her admirers (just a look at her Facebook wall confirms it) but with renewed scrutiny into irresponsible political speech, it might be only a matter of time before people wonder whether this refusal to admit error (aside from the admission implied in taking down the graphic) and the ludicrous denials are not a bridge too far, coming from someone who's made a career of throwing rhetorical fireballs and then playing the victim.
Of course fortunes have been made and lost betting on Sarah Palin's demise, but this feels like a palpable shift away from her brand of with-us-or-against-us identity politics. Let's just see if it lasts.