Commentary: What if Sutherland Springs had no ‘good guy with a gun’?

The fact that a bystander armed with his own rifle chased and shot the perpetrator in Sutherland Springs crucially transforms the terrain of the political interpretation of the shootings.

The presence of an armed citizen “shooting in the opposite direction,” as President Donald Trump put it in the hours after the killings, activates partisan attitudes about guns in Texas that advocates and political leaders can use to stifle discussion of adding even the mildest restrictions to guns. That’s because the thought that the best antidote to gun violence is good people with guns resonates sufficiently with the right audience of Republicans.

RELATED: How Austin ‘good guy with gun’ case highlights gun control debate

Broadly speaking, this “good guy with a gun” approach to prevent mass shootings comes from hybrid roots that include diffused-but-questionable readings of history projected onto the present by political leaders, decisively debunked social science research, and, of course, a nontrivial but also nonrepresentative set of anecdotes. The essence of the proposition is simple: The best thing for stopping a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

Faith in the efficacy of packing self-protection is evident in the attitudes of Texas Republicans. In a University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll last month, we asked Texas voters this question: “If more people carried guns, do you think the United States would be safer, less safe, or would it have no impact on safety?”

Overall, 38 percent of Texas voters polled said the U.S. would be safer; 41 percent said it would be less safe. Beneath this close division in attitudes, there are sharp partisan differences: 66 percent of Republicans said it would make us safer, and 75 percent of Democrats said it would make us less safe. Among tea party identifiers, who have helped drive the loosening of gun restrictions, including the push in the Texas Legislature in 2015 to allow open carry, 85 percent said it would make the U.S. safer.

The fact that an armed bystander engaged the Sutherland Springs perpetrator leads one to expect this line of response to supplement, if not entirely supplant, the habitual recourse to mental health in long-term responses to the latest episode.

CONTINUING COVERAGE: Sutherland Springs sanctuary reopens as solemn memorial.

In strictly pragmatic terms, the frequent emphasis on mental health has obvious political benefits for opponents of any legislation on gun access or ownership: It fits into people’s — and especially Republicans’ — preconceptions about the causes of mass shootings. At the same time, it remains faithful to the fact that GOP voters are generally opposed to stricter gun control laws — especially when mobilized.

Ironically, this incident highlights the potential limits of Republican elected officials’ usual reliance on invoking mental health policy as an alternative to modifying gun laws to deflect action until public interest and attention drifts to another subject. It doesn’t take long at all.

In our October poll, conducted less than a week after the concert shooting in Las Vegas, only 6 percent of Texans thought gun violence was the most important problem facing the country. Nonetheless, the frequency and visibility of mass shootings could eventually contribute to calls for solutions that might involve more thorough screening of gun purchases — something anathema to Second Amendment proponents.

Herein lies the political value in the current moment of the good guy with a gun narrative: It transforms the problem into its solution, even as it reduces the chances of backsliding into politically distasteful discussion of regulating gun ownership.

Any discussion of curtailing gun rights can be swiftly met with a simple retort: How much worse would this have been if there hadn’t been a good guy with a gun? So, while this tragedy may lead some Texas Democrats and liberals to think that the mass murder in Sutherland Springs might tilt the state’s conversation on gun control and gun ownership, the opposite is more likely.

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER: Viewpoints delivers the latest perspectives on current events.

Moving forward, we should expect the presence of an armed civilian returning fire and its narrative of a good guy with a gun to drown out discussion of even relatively minor adjustments to gun ownership practices — even those that might fit within the usually reliable mental health narrative.

Henson is the director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas. Blank is manager of polling and research of the project.

Reader Comments ...

Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: ‘Daily Me’ undermines ability to understand ‘other side’

We live in two Americas. In one America, a mentally unstable president selected partly by Russia lies daily and stirs up bigotry that tears our social fabric. In another America, a can-do president tries to make America great again as lying journalists stir up hatred that tears our social fabric. The one thing we all agree on: Our social fabric is...
Herman: Hey gov, who’d you vote for?
Herman: Hey gov, who’d you vote for?

You know what’s kind of weird, I mean in addition to the fact that there’s a fruit called the grape and an unrelated fruit called the grapefruit? It’s kind of weird when our elected leaders tell us for whom to vote but won’t tell us for whom they voted. It happened again Tuesday at the Randalls at Slaughter and Brodie lanes...
John Young: It’s time for a 9/11-style culture shift on guns
John Young: It’s time for a 9/11-style culture shift on guns

A 19-year-old drove a killing machine right through a Florida high school the other day, killing 17 and injuring many more. It just shows you that no matter what traffic laws we have, people will die. So let’s all agree to do nothing. It’s pointless. Well, all right. The killer tore through Marjory Stoneman Douglas High with an AR-15, not...
Commentary: Three thoughts for Texas on spending emissions settlement
Commentary: Three thoughts for Texas on spending emissions settlement

It’s time for Texas to score big on the economic and environmental fronts — and here’s my playbook to make it happen. Consider this an open letter to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. The background: German automaker Volkswagen was caught cheating on emissions tests and settled for $16 billion, with $2.7 billion going...
Commentary: Why the U.S. should strengthen SNAP, not add restrictions
Commentary: Why the U.S. should strengthen SNAP, not add restrictions

The Trump administration has proposed an overhaul of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps. Called “America’s Harvest Box,” the overhaul was presented as “a Blue Apron-type program” where you receive food instead of cash. This is a misleading comparison. Blue Apron delivers...
More Stories