Emergent Characteristics and Behaviors
There is a phenomenon which affects clusters of similar things in a way that doesn’t impact the individuals which make up the group. It is called Emergent Behaviors (or characteristics.)
In the simplest terms a single brain cell exists, is alive and can replicate itself. It doesn’t however exhibit consciousness. It takes some minimum number of cells all synaptically connected for that to happen. Two or three cells don’t reach the threshold but when the threshold is reached consciousness can become emergent.
Bee and ant populations act in similar ways. Put enough bees in a location and they suddenly and without education construct a hexagonal matrix of hive cells, promote a member to Queen, go out to collect pollen to make honey. Below the threshold population individual bees just die.
Feral dogs act to obtain food, sleep safe and select mates. This is pretty much the same for domestic canines. But even the fluffy friendly ones can act differently when they get together outside and form a pack. The pack behavior emerges from somewhere deep in their genetic history.
Inanimate objects seem to be able to elicit emergent characteristics and behaviors too. We are watching AI enabled computers and algorithms at the dawn of their existence. Where they will go is a complete unknown. Whether they will follow our human examples or avoid our failings is yet to be seen.
That which the inanimate objects ultimately exhibit is highly dependent on our human interactions. Here is where this concept will rile up a portion of the people who read on. Another portion of the readers will see the premise and agree.
A gun is just a gun, a tool for intimidation and killing. It can be used to kill animals for food, protection and sport. It can be used to intimidate, deter crime and kill people. How it is used is up to the person whose finger is on the trigger. That person may be a “good” person, a “bad” person or a combination of those extremes.
Individually, each firearm is an innocent object which can be used in a multitude of ways. Collectively, they exhibit one of those emergent characteristics as mentioned above.
Although the choice of model is made by a human, some models have a nature which is irresistible to specific age groups, gender and culturally specific types of people. The model which seems to exude to strongest affinity is the semiautomatic long barrel gun with high capacity bullet holders.
Various psychologists, criminologists and laymen assert that the blame for the carnage resultant in mass shootings is solely the result of the individuals who perpetrate the crimes. Some people try to blame the weapons.
The truth lies in between those extremes. The firearms themselves hold no malice. They cannot load themselves, choose targets or fire on crowds. The human perpetrators handle those actions. Those humans could not do any of those things if the weapon itself was not so freely available.
The single rifle has a different character than a long rack of similar weapons displayed on the wall of the gun shop. Something emergent this way comes. There is a latent behavior in the egos of young men whose brains have not yet fully developed. When those latent behaviors get in close proximity to the weapons, an emergent behavior can manifest.
The functional test of how this works rests in the fact that there are hundreds of thousands young (predominantly white) men in this country. Some portion of them have societal grievances and most of them never act out on them with lethal firepower.
The actual numbers of mass shooters seem to be attracted to the same weapon. Many potential mass shooters are stopped by their inability to access the “correct” weapon. It’s when these innocent males and the innocent weapons get together they exhibit the emergent behavior which takes so many lives. The doubly tragic fact is most of the eventual shooters do not have preexisting criminal records. They may have behaviors which telegraph their future actions, but so often those facts are ignored. The Law is very well versed in prescribing prohibitions against individuals and their behaviors but is majorly lacking in what is the cause of those actions and behaviors. The Law completely misses the inclusion of emergent behavior which manifests in specific situations. It has no suggestion for how to deal with the phenomenon.
The most logical solution is to never let the two elements ever get together. The problem with that approach is there is a myriad of couplets which can combine to create a perilous outcome. Staying with the human/gun example, Abusive spouses who obtain guns are a leading source of murder statistics. This not to claim that if no guns were available that no significant other murder would occur. Other combinations would increase to fill the void. The real issue is, relationship violence is widespread in this country and in nearly every part of the world.
In 1959, two ex-cons, Perry Smith and Richard Hickock, murdered four members of the Clutter family in Kansas. During their trials the defense tried to make the case for the existence of a "third personality" which emerged when the two men got together. The argument was not successful and the two men were executed on April 14, 1965. The premise was neither of the perpetrators would have never committed the murders if they were alone. However, once the crimes were committed there was no way to justify not convicting them.
Economic stressors lead to emergent behaviors which are strikingly similar across many social groups. There is something in the human mind which finds expression in violence. Providing powerful weaponry only serves to amplify that expression.
Drivers on a busy freeway have the propensity for "platooning" where they all bunch up in tight formations leaving long gaps between. In such platoons massive collision pileups regularly occur leaving many injuries and dead bodies. Experts do not have a solution to those events in the same way as we don't have a solution to the phenomena of mass shooters.
In both examples, the mechanical elements are merely tools which millions of people use daily but only a small percentage of people misuse. A possible solution to the mass shooter behavior is the curtailment of the manufacture of the weapon of choice, limiting all purchases and a systematic reduction in their presence at large.
To those people who say owning guns is a "right", while presently true, rights are granted, regulated and removed by legislative and judicial decrees. There may very well have been a time when the language of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution made it necessary and possibly essential. Amendments do come and go over time. The 18th Amendment prohibiting the manufacture, import and sale of alcohol for consumption in 1919 lasted only until 1933 when the 21st Amendment repealed "Prohibition." Soft rights such as those covered in Roe v Wade were only in effect due to Supreme Court declaration. On June 24, 2022 the rights granted were overturned by the newer Justices.
While once viewed as an essential policy of the United States, gun ownership has become destructive to the stated goals of the nation. There remains valid purposes in allowing citizens to possess firearms for personal protection, sport and comfort. The technologies of manufacture and performance of the weapons have far surpassed any notions Congress ever had in passing the 2nd Amendment.
When drug use becomes too widespread and the effects far too dangerous, we pass laws limiting their manufacture, sale, import, mere passion, distribution and use. Automobiles are dangerous tools for transport. Therefore we license operators and require training, insurance and enforcement of related performance laws. We limit the size speed and weight of what vehicles any specific person shall be allowed to operate on public roadways.
Emergent behaviors also arise in the population of automobile drivers. Similarly, the characteristics of the vehicles themselves add to the carnage we see every day on the highways. We don't reduce and eliminate the motor vehicle rules.
