In the months after the Sandy Hook tragedy, little has been done on a national level to stop future shootings. Now, some are wondering if crime scene photos of the shooting will be released.

The photos should be released because the public needs to be able to see the damage these weapons do. They are important photos because they show the dangers of allowing unqualified individuals to possess firearms.

Last week, filmmaker Michael Moore wrote, “When the American people see what bullets from an assault rifle fired at close range do to a little child’s body, that’s the day the jig will be up for the NRA.”

He compared releasing the photos to the Emmett Till incident. Till, a black 14-year-old, was murdered in 1955 for supposedly flirting with a white woman. The release and publication of photos from his open-casket funeral changed the country’s attitude toward race relations.

Journalists and news agencies need to balance the public’s right to know the truth with respecting victims’ privacy and general decency. In a story that ran last year, the New York Post published photos of a man who had fallen onto the subway tracks and was about to be struck and killed by a subway car. Though the image was horrific, the publication allowed the public to understand that bystanders should help others. The images had a deeper meaning than just depicting a man’s death.

In the same way, publishing images from Sandy Hook would be controversial, but would have deeper meaning. The pro-gun lobby would likely not want these photos published, as it would bring back emotions from the day of the shooting. Sean Hannity, a FOX News commenter, said Moore’s idea shows he “cares more about his political agenda than he does about families that have suffered enough already.” Others argue that releasing the photos is pointless.

People who dislike this idea make valid arguments. The debate on gun control could be conducted without these photos. The public’s “right to know,” they argue, is not as important as the need to maintain civility. In their view, emotions should not be considered in this issue.

Emotions are involved in shootings or any crimes. Taking emotion out of the gun control debate is unrealistic because guns are implements used to harm others.

At times, the gun lobby also relies on emotions irrationally to advance its agenda. Members argue the government is going to take away guns or impose martial law. These are completely unsupported ideas used to instill fear.

By releasing the photos, those who cling to unnecessary weapons may come to the realization that the right to own guns should not be absolute. They may realize the need to limit our firearms so that future damage is prevented. After the Columbine High School shooting, crime scene photos were released that exposed the damage, though no identifiable bodies were shown. Releasing school shooting photos is not unprecedented.

Our amendments are not absolute. Our First Amendment does not protect speech like fighting words or libel. Similarly, the Second Amendment has been allowed for interpretation. A previous ban on assault weapons was deemed legal until it expired in 2004. Limiting guns is not against the Constitution. There is a legitimate public interest to restrict guns from those with ill intentions.

By releasing the photos, the effects of gun violence are captured. It may help convince more Americans that there is a need to restrict guns. The photos will remind Congress that inaction on this issue will only lead to further tragedies.

Harmen Rockler is a senior newspaper and online journalism and political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at horockle@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @LeftofBoston.

Published on March 19, 2013 at 2:50 am