Why do major events of gun violence (i.e., mass shootings) lead to incremental change or no federal legislative change at all in the United States while major events of gun violence have resulted in large-scale legislative changes in Canada? Exploring the complexities involved in this compelling question, this article conducts a comparative analysis of recent gun control policy gridlock and shift in these two countries. We concentrate on two mass shooting cases in each country: the Columbine (1990) and Sandy Hook (2012) massacres in the United States and the École Polytechnique Massacre (1989) and Concordia Shooting (1992) in Canada. We use veto player theory to gain insights into why tightening gun policy is so difficult to implement in the United States while Canada often follows up with policy transformations after a focusing event. This theory informs the central argument that the key factors underpinning the divergent policy outcomes on gun control issues in both countries involve differences in the structure of government/institutional design and the role and power of interest groups in each case.

Hostile political conflicts have caused Bangladesh to miss out many global economic opportunities despite much achievements made since independence. Its evolving readymade garments (RMG) sector is one of the most affected sectors of this malicious politics. The focal point of this article is to demonstrate the recent violence of vicious politics of Bangladesh and its effect on the evolving RMG sector. The result shows that the average losses in this sector due to the recent political turmoil are very alarming. Moreover, foreign buyers have cancelled their orders from Bangladesh for uncertain shipment for the same reason. It is an ominous sign for a developing sector. So, the main objective of this article is to figure out the losses and missed opportunities of the RMG sector caused by the political impasse and to provide some suggestions to protect the RMG sector from these political atrocities.

The Western realists and Western liberalists evaluate the universal interdependence and globalisation from distinct political and theoretical standpoints. This article critically examines Western realism and Western liberalism—the two genetic theoretical streams that comprise a converse version of the globalisation of world politics. It exemplifies the effects, the impacts, the benefits and the challenges of globalisation from different angles—not from a particular aspect. In addition, it attempts to critically explicate the role of the Trump administration in order to understand this regime’s motive towards globalisation.