On the Peculiar Coverage of the Kansas City Shooting

By Charles C. W. Cooke

Friday, February 16, 2024

 

ABC reports that:

 

Two juvenile suspects have been charged in connection with Wednesday’s mass shooting at the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl parade that left one person dead and 22 others injured.

 

The two suspects, who are not being named due to their ages, are being held in Juvenile Detention Center on gun-related charges and resisting arrest, according to the 16th Judicial Circuit Court of Missouri’s Jackson County Family Court Division. Additional charges are expected as the investigation continues, officials said.

 

Moreover:

 

The shooting, which unfolded outside Union Station as Chiefs fans were leaving the parade and rally, appeared to stem from a dispute, police said.

 

It gets tiresome to have to repeat this stuff, but, if this report is correct, then we can reasonably conclude the following:

 

1.       That, by definition, the suspects were not legally allowed to buy, possess, or carry handguns. A “juvenile” is a person who is not yet eighteen. Under federal law, one cannot purchase a handgun until one is 21, and one cannot “possess” a handgun until one is 18 (unless one is hunting or target shooting, neither of which apply here). In Missouri, it is illegal to “recklessly” sell, loan, or transfer any firearm to a minor without parental consent, and it is illegal to carry a firearm either openly or concealed until one is 19 (18 if a veteran or in the military).

 

2.       That this was not a “mass shooting” in the way that that term is typically used, but was an argument between two illegally armed minors that turned violent. This isn’t pedantry; it matters. When determining what to do about crime, it is important to understand the nature of the crime in question. From what I can tell, the aim of the two alleged shooters was not to hurt or kill those around them; they just didn’t care if they did. That does not describe most “mass shooters.”

 

3.       That the characterization of this incident as being reflective of “weak gun laws” is ridiculous. Per NPR, “city officials” in Kansas City “have their hands tied by the state of Missouri when it comes to passing meaningful gun safety laws.” But, even if that were true, what could it possibly have to do with this crime? Every single thing that happened here was already illegal. It is illegal for juveniles to possess handguns. It is illegal for them to carry those handguns. It is illegal for them to shoot at each other in a public place. What law relates to this, exactly? That isn’t rhetoric; I’d like an answer. Absent banning and confiscating all firearms, it’s difficult to see how this is preventable with legislation. There are more than half a billion privately owned firearms in the United States.

 

Once again, the media is exhibiting a chronic lack of imagination in its coverage of gun-related crime, which is invariably marked out by a fanatical obsession with gun-control and a total lack of interest in anything else. Since Wednesday evening, I have read a hundred pieces about firearms — albeit not one featuring a single constructive suggestion — and read nothing whatsoever about parenting, juvenile delinquency, criminal-justice reform, or anything else. I have no interest in doing what I am criticizing here and jumping stupidly to my own conclusions, which is why I haven’t written anything blaming anyone other than the perpetrators for what happened. But others have, and I find it absolutely fascinating how one-tracked they are in their choice of villains. Apparently, the only thing that the American press can think of when looking for a potential solution is to pass a bunch of duplicative laws. It’s almost as if, instead of trying to help fix the problem, our media sees abominations such as these as useful cudgels, to be deployed against the usual enemies when convenient and then dropped as soon as they cease to be timely or politically effective.