Why have Harris and Trump sidelined the issue of gun violence?

Washington, DC — On July 13, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump survived an assassination bid while speaking at a rally in swing state Pennsylvania.

Trump sustained a minor injury, but a supporter was killed and two others wounded before the gunman was neutralised. The 20-year-old shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, fired eight rounds from an AR–15–style rifle from the roof of a nearby building, wounding Trump's right ear.

Barely two months later, Trump narrowly escaped another attempt as he was golfing in Florida.

Despite these incidents, gun violence has barely registered as an election issue, and Trump, unsurprisingly, remains steadfast in his defence of firearm ownership rights.

His Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris, strikes a similarly complex note: a gun owner herself, she acknowledges the troubling frequency of school shootings, and she oversaw the establishment of America’s first federal Office of Gun Violence Prevention.

Trump vs Harris: stance on gun rights?

Harris has largely shied away from making the gun ownership issue a campaign cornerstone. She has taken a measured approach to gun reform, highlighting the Biden administration’s achievements in passing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022.

This law empowers states to implement "red flag" laws, which allow firearms to be temporarily removed from individuals deemed a threat. The law tightens background checks for gun buyers under the age of 21, a demographic disproportionately involved in gun violence incidents.

On the other hand, Trump has been vocal in asserting that gun rights should remain unencumbered, framing gun violence as primarily a mental health issue rather than one requiring restriction on firearm access. In 2017, Trump signed a bill that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

Both the candidates favour the Second Amendment.

Missing 'firearms' in fiery debates

With gun violence in the world's most heavily armed society taking ordinary lives, shattering communities, and not even sparing top politicians, the epidemic is barely an issue in the current election.

Stacy Bannerman, an author and activist, laments the lack of meaningful legislative change. Bannerman's soldier-husband returned from the Iraq war, developed PTSD, and threatened her with an M-4 semi-automatic weapon.

"Obviously, the gun violence issue should be front and centre until it is addressed. The fact that it's not speaks volumes about where we are still as a nation in terms of really being willing to talk and pray about the issue of gun violence, but legislate it for the purposes of putting an end to it," Bannerman tells TRT World.

"If this country wasn't going to get it right after Sandy Hook and those children getting slaughtered in their classrooms, then, obviously, the country isn't going to be prepared to get it right for a long time."

Bannerman says that this election is a "referendum" on the consciousness that supports, creates and maintains that level of gun violence.

Weapon profiteering?

According to the Gun Violence Archive, over 436 mass shootings have occurred in the US so far this year, with more than 11,500 fatalities — an average of 47 people each day.

The effects are deeply felt by the youngest Americans: 199 children and nearly 1,000 teenagers have been victims of gun violence to date.

In a recent mass shooting in Washington state, a 15-year-old killed his parents, Mark and Sarah Humiston, and three siblings with his father's silver Glock handgun. His 11-year-old sister was shot but survived by playing dead.

David Swanson, an anti-war activist, tells TRT World that the American political landscape is one where Democrats blame Republicans for inaction while Republicans profit off weapon sales.

"The Republican candidates are mostly bought off by the gun profiteers. They don't talk about strengthening gun laws because they don't want to even pretend to favour that, and they don't talk about weakening them because that's unpopular," Swanson says.

"The Democratic candidates are generally the weakest, most unprincipled chameleons in the country, who would rather not talk about any issue they can avoid, and who can easily avoid any issue the Republicans are not talking about. Once in office, they are generally happy to say the Republicans are preventing them from doing anything," he adds.

Swanson says there is a connection between mass shootings in the US and foreign wars, as many of the shooters are suffering from PTSD and are veterans who are trained to kill.

Another reason why gun violence is being pushed to the side, compared to other issues, is the "media blackout" regarding it, he says. "Mass shootings don't make the news in the US in the way that the rest of the world might expect."

Gun violence ranks low on the rights spectrum

With gun violence emerging as the leading cause of death for American children, many had anticipated it would become a priority for voters.

David Rosenbloom, Professor of Public Health at Boston University, suggests gun violence remains a high concern, particularly for younger voters.

"It will be among the issues that affect younger voters' decisions but the economy, reproductive rights and fears about democracy will be more dominant," he says.

Not seeing any fit candidate to fix the issue, Swanson brushes off the idea that gun violence might play any role in the election.

"If we had decent candidates who wanted to get rid of the guns, then I would say voters should vote for them," Swanson says. He calls for a comprehensive rethinking: ending wars abroad, defunding the military, and even enacting a national gun buyback.

Rosenbloom suggests more targeted measures, such as reinstating a federal ban on assault weapons and lifting legal protections that currently shield gun manufacturers from liability.

In an election ostensibly about public safety, gun violence remains largely a political afterthought in the US.