ABSTRACT
In this contribution, we comparatively analyse the discourse networks generated by three shooting rampages. We formulate hypotheses on the extent to which (a) the framing cohesion of the status quo coalition and (b) the perceived causal complexity of the event are associated with varying degrees of subsequent gun policy change. Drawing on news reports in major newspapers, we collect information on actors and frames and systematically analyse those data with the tool Discourse Network Analyzer. The networks show that major gun policy change is possible if the status quo coalition is internally divided and the event’s causal complexity is low. Incremental adjustments are also likely if the status quo coalition lacks cohesion, but if additionally causal complexity is high, i.e., the problem signified by the event is disputed. Finally, if the status quo coalition manages to retain its framing cohesion, deadlock is likely to occur regardless of the event’s perceived causal complexity.
