Michael Abrahams | ‘Good’ shootouts are bad

Last week, there was a deadly shootout in Mandeville where a man shot and killed another after a dispute, rumoured to be about payment for eggs. The gunman fled the scene, but the security forces located him, and after a standoff and prolonged shootout, lasting for several hours, he was eventually killed by the lawmen.

The lengthy exchange of gunfire attracted the attention of people nearby, some of whom recorded and live-streamed the event, with several videos of the conflict being sent to my phone via WhatsApp.

When I saw the images, it dawned on me how much things have changed. In my youth, you would have to wait until the evening news to see footage from such an incident. Not only that, but in the past, traditional media were our gatekeepers, deciding what would be appropriate for us to see. Now, there are no gatekeepers. No filters.

Our society has become very violent, and we have become desensitised to the trauma from directly seeing violent acts, hearing about them in newscasts, reading about them in newspapers, and from repeatedly viewing graphic images on social media platforms. Not only are many of us not shocked, but some are entertained by the violence.

Case in point, on the evening of the shootout I came across a video posted by a local newspaper on one of their social media platforms, featuring an eyewitness gleefully giving an account of the incident and saying “It was a good shootout.” The man was excited as he related the tragic sequence of events, complete with making sounds imitating the gunshots (“pam pam pam pam”) and demonstrating how the perpetrator was holding and waving his firearm. By the look of excitement on his face, if you did not know better, you would think the video was from a vox pop of moviegoers outside Carib Cinema after watching an action movie. I was curious about his “good shootout” comment, wondering what metrics or criteria he employed to determine how “good” a shootout is. The enthusiasm of his expressions and the incongruity of his affect compared with the magnitude of the tragedy were disturbing. I thought the video of the man was bad enough. But it got worse. I subsequently saw a video of someone singing a dancehall song about the incident. Not a mournful tune, but a funny (depending on your sense of humour) one. That was also bad. Then it got even worse. Later on, I saw an AI video depicting the deceased perpetrator at a stove, frying eggs and smiling and saying they are “worth dying for.”

SADDENED BUT NOT SURPRISED

I was saddened but not surprised by all the abovementioned events. We live in a violent society, and many of us have become desensitised and embrace our culture of violence. Many of our dancehall songs not only document, but also glorify it, and we use our fingers to simulate guns and wave them in the air when we hear songs we like, accompanied by sounds representing gunshots, like our enthusiastic eyewitness mentioned above. In fact, our lexicon is replete with onomatopoeic expressions representing gunshots or explosions, such as “booyaka booyaka”, “pow pow”, and “pye pye.” I am also unaware of any other country where its citizens make the sound of explosions while singing their anthem: “Jamaica boom!”

Changing this culture is not easy. The legacy of slavery still affects us. Our political leaders in the seventies and eighties used violence as a tool with impunity, and they openly associated with and legitimised “community leaders” or “dons”, men who used violence to enforce order in their communities and terrorise others.

I applaud our security forces for bringing down our murder rate. Improved policing has helped to cauterise violence in the country although, unfortunately, it has been accompanied by a significant increase in police killings. The Government has also reported that our poverty and unemployment rates have fallen, which is commendable, as poverty and unemployment can be contributing factors.

To comprehensively and effectively tackle our crime and violence problem, we must also address how our children are socialised and stress the importance of family. Children exposed to trauma, such as those who live in violent communities and dysfunctional households, are more vulnerable, and more likely to be perpetrators and victims of violence. On the other hand, children raised in stable families are less likely to become violent and dysfunctional adults. For example, research has found that boys who grow up with absent fathers or appropriate father figures are more likely to join gangs. Mentoring, fostering, and adopting children, as well as teaching about parenting and the benefits of family, are also valuable tools for changing these behaviours and attitudes.

We tend to look to the Government to fix our societal ills, but this requires the input of us all. The culture can change, but only if we want it to.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator, and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X , formerly Twitter, @mikeyabrahams

The official figure given for the voter turnout for the general election indicated that less than half of the electorate voted, and the closeness of the result suggests that a minority of those registered to vote not only voted for the Opposition but also for the governing party. In my article titled “Time come for a PNP wake-up call,” published on September 9, this was communicated by mistakenly referring to the government as a “minority government,” which is not, as the JLP has the majority of the seats in our Parliament. I apologise for the error, which I subsequently corrected in the online version.