Citation

Trinkoff AE, Fennell H, Kraemer K. Health Lawyer 2022; 34(6): 28-52.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, American Bar Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The "Worst Case Scenario" game was a favorite gift from long ago birthday parties. The card game set forth various situations forcing each player to think of how to survive an unthinkable event, such as an earthquake or a fire on a subway car. As the details of the Uvalde Texas elementary school shootings emerged, thoughts of that game came to mind when an 11- year-old girl was lauded in the press for outwitting the 18-year-old boy who pulverized 19 of her classmates and two of her teachers before being shot to death himself.1 This little girl, who met with the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform to testify about her ordeal, smeared the blood of a friend on her face and played dead.2 This child would have been good at the "Worst Case Scenario" game, as she survived the shooting using her wit and survival skills learned through active shooter drills. While active shooter drills may help minimize fatalities, we, as a society, need to address the causes of violence and analyze what actually reduces gun violence.

Many believe that more stringent gun control laws are required to end the epidemic of gun violence.3 Others believe that any restriction on the ability to purchase and own any kind of gun, including battlefield automatic weapons such as AK 15 rifles, is a violation of the United States Constitution and the right to bear arms.4 In order to navigate this chasm of fundamental beliefs, it is important to determine what measures are effective in improving public health and safety.

Language: en