“GOOD MEN PROJECT” (My Foot)
Author thinks inanimate objects are more of a problem than those with evil intent
Gary Whittenberger, Reducing Gun Violence in the United States
Gary Whittenberger is a retired psychologist and freelance writer known for his thoughtful contributions to discussions on psychology, philosophy, science, and religion. Holding a doctorate in clinical psychology from Florida State University, he worked as a psychologist in federal prisons for 23 years. Whittenberger is an active member of the freethought community and co-directed the Tallahassee Freethinkers’ Forum. He has authored several works, including God Wants YOU to be an Atheist, and has written for Skeptic Magazine, Free Inquiry, and other publications. His articles often tackle complex topics such as personhood, free will, and gun violence prevention.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Quick backdrop questions, what have the work in clinical psychology, in federal prisons, and freethought activism, taught about the American culture’s psyche around guns–the heart of the matter?
Dr. Gary Whittenberger: Scott, I want to thank you for this opportunity to talk about my article “A Comprehensive Program for Reducing Gun Violence in the US” which appeared in the October/November 2024 issue of Free Inquiry magazine. Also, I compliment you on the great work you are doing with The Good Men Project. We need more journalism, analysis, and commentary like that.
Turning to your question: I think Americans have an obsession with guns which is unhealthy. I think it has roots in the founding of a new country, exploring and settling the western frontier, and rebellion against old governments, all of which occurred a few centuries ago. Fear and anger at levels higher in our country than what are found in other countries stimulate the ownership, purchase, and use of firearms. Part of the solution is to lower these emotions and part of it is to reduce the access to and the number of firearms in the country.
Jacobsen: In the Uvalde case, what were the failures of law enforcement?
Whittenberger: Law enforcement officers failed to confront the shooter as soon as they could have and should have. In my opinion, whenever there are at least two officers who have firearms on the scene, they should call for backup but begin to engage the shooter. This response needs to be stipulated in policies, laws, and training. Officers who do not have the willingness or courage to act to defend others in stressful situations should not be in law enforcement.
Jacobsen: How can gun regulations balance with Second Amendment rights?
Whittenberger: As I said in my article, the Second Amendment needs to be amended. Although American citizens should have a right to possess, own, and use guns, this right should not be absolute. The right should be regulated, restricted, and limited for the common good, especially to minimize unjustified aggression. I have suggested that ordinary citizens be limited to three firearms. Nobody needs an armory. I think “military type” guns should be held from the public. I believe that five different groups of persons should be prohibited from having guns. Any ethical, well-trained, and responsible firearms user has no good reason to oppose these reforms.
Jacobsen: What is the importance of considering mental health in approach reduction of gun violence?
Whittenberger: I think it is extremely important, but I don’t agree with the more conservative pundits who think it should be the only approach to reducing gun violence. The more guns there are in a society, the more unjustified gun violence there will be. The more guns are accessible to people likely to misuse them, the more unjustified violence there will be. Yes, treating mental health problems is necessary, but not sufficient. We need to identify, diagnose, and treat mental health problems early, during childhood, and this is why we need so many more social workers, counselors, and psychologists to work with children in our schools.
Jacobsen: What community intervention efforts can mitigate gun-related violence?
Whittenberger: I think politicians, office holders, nonprofits, and all citizens of a community should strongly advocate for and support gun control policies, as I have outlined in my article. We all need to commit ourselves to slightly reducing our freedoms to possess, own, and use guns in order to reduce gun violence and promote the common good. Give up a little in order to gain so much more! I support buy-back programs conducted by cities and counties.
Jacobsen: What other training or preparedness might help law enforcement agencies?
Whittenberger: Law enforcement agencies need to improve both their employee selection procedures and their training. Officers need to use their agency-issued firearms in a prudent, rational, ethical, and legal manner. Over-use and under-use of firearms by officers are both problems which need to be corrected. We saw in the Uvalde situation that officers took up to 75 minutes to mount their counter-attack, which was way too long. On the other hand, we have seen in other kinds of situations that officers are too prone to use their firearms too quickly to resolve a situation.
Jacobsen: What other reasonable and unreasonable approaches to the reduction of gun violence are being proposed other than, for example, pray?
Whittenberger: I think I have mentioned most of the reasonable approaches in my article. Banning firearms for private citizens in the US would be an unreasonable approach. I think more than half the citizens do have legitimate uses for the ownership of firearms for protection, hunting, and target practice, but ownership of firearms by some citizens, of military-grade guns, and more than three guns is not reasonable.
Jacobsen: What would be a reasonable estimate of efficacy of these proposition to reduce gun violence?
Whittenberger: I think full implementation of the practical steps I have recommended would reduce gun violence by 90%.
Jacobsen: What might be some criticisms of your approach?
Whittenberger: A common criticism is “Implementation of your recommended gun regulation program would lead to the banning and confiscation of guns among private citizens.” This is a slippery slope argument which is used to scare people and arouse resistance to gun regulation. My approach is a common sense and gradual approach which would not be fully in place for about 75 years. And yet, reductions in gun violence will gradually dissipate over that time period. Responsible users of firearms should be willing to sacrifice just a little of their freedom for the common good which comes from a reduction of gun violence in our society.
Jacobsen: What might be barriers to implementation at the state of the federal level?
Whittenberger: Extreme selfishness, fear, the NRA, and owners of large numbers of guns would be barriers to implementation.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Gary.
Whittenberger: You are welcome. And thank you for bringing wider exposure to my article and my many ideas about gun control. Gun violence is rampant in our society and we need to solve the problem! “Thoughts and prayers” for victims just don’t cut it. Please continue your excellent work with The Good Men Project.