How we can reduce gun violence
We must counter media clichés and be ready to offer jobs, writes Sulaimon Giwa.
Ottawa police Chief Charles Bordeleau has called for a community-wide effort in response to the spate of shootings and gun violence in the city. His letter, written as an opinion piece for the Citizen, was a call to action and a reminder of our collective responsibility to each other.
From the horrors of gun and gang violence has emerged an important realization: Ottawa is at a crossroads, where critical decisions need to be made about the way forward.
The solution is neither the sole responsibility of the police, nor that of its partner organizations. As Bordeleau highlighted, the community as a whole, including individual citizens and businesses, has a role to play in addressing and preventing gun-related fatalities.
To reduce gun violence, we need to create new paths of success for those at risk of joining gangs by recognizing this is everyone’s responsibility, changing the media’s portrayal of these individuals and encouraging businesses to hire them so they have the chance to start over.
Through the citywide gang strategy, important work is being done with early intervention, prevention and enforcement. However, this is but one avenue for improvement.
We must have a cultural shift toward an understanding of the difficult life circumstances that lead certain people to commit crime or become involved in gang activity. These repeated but preventable shootings (some of which police believe are related to gang activity) are associated with a set of collective and cultural traumas that we should not become desensitized to. Specifically, isolation, the need for belonging, and intimidation and protection are often contributing factors. The socioeconomic dimension of crime involvement, therefore, must be factored into any solution.
While there is compelling evidence of the relationship between crime and socioeco- nomic status, the very factors that pull individuals into gangs prevent their access to legitimate opportunities.
Low-income and racialized communities are prime targets for criminal activities. Economic disenfranchisement and the lure of quick money are powerful forces for criminality. For those with past ties to gang activity, very few opportunities exist to help them turn their lives around, especially among the older demographic. In the absence of legitimate options, these individuals may return to a life of crime.
Who benefits and who loses when segments of the population are denied these opportunities? While I don’t dispute the need to suppress gang activity in Ottawa, I do believe in creating opportunities for those motivated to change for the better.
One obstacle to establishing such change is the media’s portrayal of stereotypical gang activity. We have been programmed to believe that people involved in them are callous and undeserving of a second chance. They are stripped of their humanity and consigned to the periphery.
These are incomplete rep- resentations of those involved in these subcultures. Our ideas and actions, however, are influenced by them to the extent that a business may decide to not hire someone with a criminal past.
On one hand, the rationale for not doing so is understandable. On the other, there are costs to this action that defy the shared responsibility articulated in the chief’s letter.
The truism that both businesses and individuals with past criminal ties are part of our community escapes our awareness. The danger of an “us” and “them” mentality is that everyone loses. Businesses can play a powerful role in rewriting this one-dimensional narrative by enabling those seeking change to create their new beginning. Our approach must see the humanity in all people.
This is a tall order, but one I am confident we can achieve.