Readers Write: Gun rights, domestic violence, nondisclosure agreements – Star Tribune

Report on Firearm Accessibility and its Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report analyzes the common gun control argument centered on enforcing existing laws for perpetrators while protecting the rights of “law-abiding citizens.” It concludes that this paradigm is fundamentally insufficient as it fails to recognize that any individual can transition from a law-abiding to a law-breaking status instantaneously. This policy gap directly undermines progress toward achieving key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most notably SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

The “Law-Abiding Citizen” Fallacy in Policy Discourse

The core issue with the argument to solely prosecute those who misuse firearms is its failure to address the point of transition. Every individual who intentionally perpetrates gun violence was, until the moment of the act, considered a “law-abiding citizen” in that context. The shift from lawful gun owner to unlawful actor requires no regulatory process and can occur spontaneously due to emotional reactions or as part of a premeditated plan. An indefensibly rigid stance against acknowledging this reality ensures that lethal weapons remain widely and easily available to individuals who may, at any point, cease to be law-abiding.

Implications for SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The widespread availability of firearms presents a significant obstacle to achieving SDG 16, which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies.

• Target 16.1 (Reduce Violence): The ease of access to firearms is a direct contributor to high rates of violent death, running contrary to the goal of significantly reducing all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.
• Institutional Efficacy: A policy framework that does not adequately control the instruments of violence cannot build the “strong institutions” required for public safety and justice. The continued, senseless deaths of people of every age, gender, race, and ethnicity demonstrate a systemic failure to protect citizens.

Impact on SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

Gun violence is a critical public health issue that directly impedes the progress of SDG 3.

1. The high rate of premature deaths and injuries resulting from firearm use is in direct opposition to the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all.
2. Beyond physical casualties, the societal prevalence of gun violence contributes to a climate of fear and trauma, negatively impacting the mental health and well-being of entire communities.

Broader Socio-Economic Repercussions and Related SDGs

The failure to address firearm accessibility has cascading negative effects on other development goals.

• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): Community safety is a prerequisite for sustainability. The constant threat of gun violence undermines the goal of making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.
• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): Firearm violence disproportionately impacts vulnerable and marginalized populations, thereby exacerbating existing inequalities and hindering progress toward a more equitable society.

Conclusion: A Call for Policy Alignment with Global Goals

While discussions on mental health and family structures are valid, they do not address the primary enabler of gun violence: the incredible, abundant, and easy availability of lethal weapons. To achieve meaningful progress on the Sustainable Development Goals, public policy must evolve beyond a reactive stance. Acknowledging the fluid nature of the “law-abiding citizen” status is the first step toward creating preventative strategies that limit the accessibility of firearms, thereby fostering safer communities and aligning national policy with global commitments to peace, health, and justice.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article directly addresses issues of violence, safety, and death resulting from the misuse of firearms. It discusses the problem of gun violence, the debate around gun control laws, and the tragic outcome of “senseless deaths.” This aligns with SDG 16’s goal to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, which includes reducing violence and death rates.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article’s focus on preventing deaths (“countless people will continue to die when they could have lived”) frames gun violence as a public health issue. It highlights premature mortality affecting people of all demographics. The mention of “mental health treatment” as part of the broader conversation also connects the issue directly to the goals of promoting health and well-being.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

     This target is central to the article’s argument. The author’s concern about how “countless people will continue to die” and the occurrence of “senseless deaths of people of every age, gender, race and ethnicity” directly relates to the goal of reducing violence-related death rates.

   • Target 16.4: By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime.

     While the article doesn’t specify “illicit” arms, its main argument revolves around the problem of weapons being “widely, widely available for pretty much anyone to very easily obtain.” This points to the broader issue of arms proliferation and availability, which is a core concern of Target 16.4.

2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

     The article discusses gun violence as a cause of premature death, stating that people die “when they could have lived.” Although gun violence is an external cause, it is a major contributor to premature mortality, which is the focus of this target. Furthermore, the author explicitly acknowledges the relevance of “mental health treatment” in the discussion, directly linking the issue to the well-being component of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• For Target 16.1:

  The article’s repeated references to people being shot and dying imply the need for an indicator to track such events. A relevant indicator would be:

  • Number of victims of intentional homicide. The phrase “anyone who has ever intentionally shot someone else with a gun” directly points to measuring intentional homicides, particularly those involving firearms.

• For Target 16.4:

  The author’s central claim that “these lethal weapons continue to be so incredibly, abundantly, easily available” implies a need to measure the prevalence and accessibility of firearms. An implied indicator is:

  • The availability and accessibility of firearms to the general population. This would measure the core problem identified in the article as the source of continued violence.

• For Target 3.4:

  The discussion of “senseless deaths” and people who “could have lived” points to the measurement of premature death rates from external causes. An implied indicator is:

  • Mortality rate due to homicide/gun violence. This measures the public health impact of the issue, aligning with the goal of reducing premature mortality.

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Source: startribune.com