This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Jan. 11, 2011 - The Beacon asked sources in our Public Insight Network to share how they solve political disagreements, in light of the shootings in Tucson, Ariz., of a U.S. representative, a federal judge and others. The written responses came in quickly and from people from diverse political perspectives.
Several raised questions about the mental health of Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected shooter, and suggested that more attention to be paid to his mental state rather than focusing on what role politics may or may not have had in this case.
Responses have been edited for length and clarity.
Carole Bannes of St. Charles said: "I spend lots of time with those with whom I disagree politically, since I am far to the 'left' of most of our friends here in St Charles. I do not believe that one should associate only with those who have only similar beliefs.
"Local, state and federal citizens should be clamoring to pay taxes to take care of the mentally ill and get them off the streets where they are a danger to themselves and to others -- but that ain't gonna happen! The right will point to the left and say it's their fault for coddling the poor; the left will point to the right and say it's their fault for suggesting Second Amendment rights might solve the country's problems and for de-funding social services. They are both correct; they are both wrong. Unfortunately, with heightened individual rights comes heightened individual responsibilities. And Americans are not big on accepting responsibilities."
Teah Sloan of St. Louis said: "These shootings were the result of a man who was mentally disturbed. It was not about differing political opinions or disagreements. I believe there are those involved in political discourse who are attempting to stir up controversy in the political arena, pitting right against left. However, I believe most American citizens will not let these conversations affect them. I can think of nothing they [government officials or agencies] can do. This is the result of a madman. I believe it is very difficult to discover the plans of a madman. Perhaps they should pray."
Jaci Winship lives in the St. Louis area and describes herself as a social conservative activist who works for the Missouri Faith and Freedom Coalition. The "shootings were a random act of violence by a person who appears to be mentally unbalanced. Despite immediate and unfounded finger-pointing, this does not appear to be an escalation of political disagreement," she said.
"This act of violence, like the Kirkwood City Hall shootings, was carried out by a disturbed person. The last thing we need is politically motivated, kneejerk reactions. Should public officials take reasonable precautions? Yes."
Rodney Cook of St. Louis said: "The shootings may temper some moderate groups, but for the most part I have concerns that this will empower more shooters. School shootings started out as random incidents, but then snowballed. Since so much media attention has been given to this shooter, I have concerns that more shootings will begin.
"Agencies really need to rethink the reduction in funding to mental health services and the FCC should look closely at the speech that some groups are using. Granted, it will be difficult to cross the line into censorship, but ... the public has to demand more from public figures and when it comes time to look at media outlets renewing licenses, we need to voice concerns about the type of programming offered."
Rick Isserman of Maryland Heights said: "We are starting a dialogue group at Central Reform Congregation, which will rotate among a Catholic church, a mosque and our synagogue in hopes that this will encourage open discussion among the faiths. We hope that these open discussions can show even though there are difference we can achieve a common purpose."
Thomas Harvey of Bel-Nor said: "I hope that the shootings will serve as a reminder that words have meaning and that responsible people will tone down the (political) discourse. I also hope that people such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, who routinely distort information for their own purposes, will back off a little bit and start contributing to the national discussion in a serious way. While this may indeed happen 'on both sides,' it occurs nightly and daily on a much more widespread basis on programs hosted by Beck and Limbaugh than it does anywhere else. I would hope that access to high-powered automatic weapons would be curtailed, especially in the case of the mentally unstable."
Regarding the suspected shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, Harvey said, "There's been a concerted effort to emphasize his mental-health problems. I would like to know what kind of services he could have accessed and how much it would have cost. Did he have health insurance? Did it cover mental health? Did the community college offer any type of coverage? Just how possible would it have been to address the mental health problems he had?"
Peggy Kruse of Florissant said: "I will attempt to look for some good in the public officials and others with whom I disagree. I would really like to have a nuanced conversation with others in which each of us can acknowledge we can agree on a lot. Don't see that happening though and even if some of us could do that, I don't think it will change anything in the world. I used to be a dreamer but no longer am."
The status quo will soon return, Kruse thinks: "I have little hope that after a brief flurry of mea culpas that anything will change. Rush Limbaugh and others won't attract audiences if they are reasonable, so they are not about to change. It would be wonderful to see a few Congress people stop repeating the party line and say what they really think, but I'm not expecting that. There will be some talk, but nothing will be done."
Michael Osborn of La Vista, Neb., said, "Because everyone's afraid of the National Rifle Association, they're not willing to address the real problem: the availability of guns to any nut that wants one. What you have to do as a representative is accept the reality any soldier does: I could die today in the service of my country and I must rely on my friends to protect me. And what we as a people need to do is realize that guns are just a tool, and that giving any level of constitutional protection to a tool shows you do not have your priorities straight.
"I'm not against taking reasonable precautions: public events for representatives should now be held indoors and behind metal detectors and have some law enforcement presence. If reps wants to hire their own security, then fine, but not at taxpayer expense. What state and local officials do is pretty much up to them: reasonable police presence at public events and private security if they think it's necessary."
Carol Wright of St. Louis said: "We talked about it a little at work today and we don't talk about politics at all because we have such radically different viewpoints. I think that some people are probably pretty angry and want to blame the right or the left for the shooting. However, it seems that the man was mentally ill and had a paranoid attitude toward the government, which caused him to behave the way he did. The shootings may affect discourse in a negative way, with all the blaming going around.
"I think that they should emphasize the mental condition of the man and downplay any party affiliations or political blaming. I would also think that they should ask people in the media to report objectively and not distort the facts or try to get people riled up. This incident is a terrible tragedy to take place in a democracy; I believe that it is an isolated incident."
Bunnie Gronborg of Festus said, "I was in Jefferson City for the first time during the last session and was shocked to see that I did not have to pass through security to see my state senators and representatives. Immediately, all state officials should elect to install metal detectors in the state Capitol building, and have several local police officers stationed by the detectors. Much smaller court houses around the state have protection for the employees and visitors. This is important protection for our legislators and for citizens who visit."
Barbara Martin of St. Louis said: "I was encouraged when I began seeing legislators come out against violence; and they even asked that we dial back the negative rhetoric. But, as quickly as I bathed in the tub of encouragement, I was drowned by the voice of a Tea Party leader who said that their rhetoric would not change. I had to quickly say a little prayer to gain my composure. For many, the political discourse will change because Americans are basically God-fearing people. For some, I don't think they want the negative political discourse to change.
"For me, the straw that broke the camel's back was Sarah Palin's crosshair map. When I saw the map, I said to myself: Someone is going to get hurt. Sadly, I wasn't wrong. Yet (some) supporters of Palin are still in denial saying that the map had nothing to do with the shooting. How do they know that to be a fact?
"The political discourse must change again because several people are lying dead -- including a 9-year-old girl."
Moritz Farbstein of Maryland Heights, said: "This shooting has absolutely nothing to do with political disagreements, and to insinuate such is not only an abrogation of investigative duty but also hate mongering designed to fan the flames of controversy to sell news.
"Don't be ridiculous, no one is going to change how they interact because of this. Find out the true cause of the violence. I guarantee it has nothing to do with political disagreement. Most senseless violence like this is the result of side effects from psychotropic drugs. I predict it will be found that the perpetrator had either taken or withdrawn from psychiatric drugs known to cause violence."
