gun law essay

gun law essay

The Need for Stricter Gun Control Laws

1. Introduction

Gun control has long been a contentious issue in the USA, and a complex one. Constitutional law, widespread hunting culture, and high rates of gun and other violent crime have meant that the issue has been highly debated and variously addressed. For instance, during Prohibition, firearms were restricted by the institution of a tax and permitting system on manufacturers and dealers, and the National Firearms Act of 1934 effectively made fully automatic weapons illegal. The Gun Control Act of 1968 replaced the NFA, and in a similar vein regulated the firearms industry and firearms owners, primarily dealers but also those with a felony on record. However, arguably the most notable attempt to regulate weapons in the US occurred with the so-called ‘Assault Weapons Ban’, which spanned a decade from 1994, though this was noted as having little effect on crime and has since expired. Since then, a significant ‘gun rights’ movement has taken place, involving debate and litigation over whether the Second Amendment prohibits significant gun control. Such has contextualized recent discussions following numerous mass shootings and the Obama administration’s push for greater regulation, yet little attempt has been made to quantify the effect of gun control measures in the US in comparison to other nations, to provide evidence for the current state and effect of US gun laws, and what the best methods for policy implementation are.

2. Current State of Gun Laws

Through much of American history, the right to own firearms for self-defense and sport has been considered a fundamental, unalienable right. Despite sweeping legislative reforms in the last several decades, this sentiment still holds much weight. In 2008, in the highly publicized District of Columbia v. Heller Supreme Court case, the Court ruled that the right to bear arms was an individual right and therefore the strict handgun ban in the District was unconstitutional. The decision effectively overturned the almost 30-year-old ban on handguns within the District of Columbia. In anticipation of litigation, other states and localities rescinded their handgun bans in order to avoid costly legal challenges. This caused much of the legislation regarding handgun bans on the state and local level to be overturned. The laughter of the Assault Weapons Ban in 2004 dealt another symbolic blow to gun control advocates. It showed that it was politically feasible to roll back gun control legislation despite the growth in random gun violence. Also, the expiration of the federal mandatory background check on the sale of firearms at gun shows and specific transfer record retention requirements have left many gun control advocates calling for more legislation to monitor and limit access to firearms by unscrupulous individuals and youth. With the growing body of research showing the detrimental effects of firearm prevalence on public health, some states have taken it upon themselves to enact legislation to reduce the number of firearms and strengthen those laws already in place. Despite these efforts, the lack of uniformity of laws between states coupled with federal preemption laws have made it difficult to limit the flow of guns from states with weaker laws to those with stronger legislation. Gun manufacturers have also been given unprecedented immunity from lawsuits related to the damage caused by their products due to a recent controversial interpretation of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. This makes it difficult to hold manufacturers accountable for marketing practices that may profit at the expense of public health and safety. Now that gun control advocates have gained a better understanding of which laws have been most effective at reducing the prevalence of firearms and firearm violence, and those which have been ineffective or even backfired, it is an opportune time to take more action at a federal level. The recession and instability caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and its subsequent demonstrations of police brutality and racial injustice have also highlighted the extra risks of widespread gun availability to public safety and civil discourse. This has added more urgency for action to be taken and should be played on the issue in future elections.

3. The Impact of Loose Gun Laws

While there have been numerous studies on the correlation between the adoption of gun control laws and the effect that they have on instances of homicide, suicide, and violent crime, the results are inconclusive and varied. This is due to the fact that there are often loopholes within the laws and the fact that there is an extensive supply of illegal guns which undermines the impact of legislation on legal firearms. While certain studies have shown a decrease in crimes involving guns, it is hard to confirm the direct correlation with the law itself. It is only in very recent years that some states have taken strict action, and the results of these latest laws are yet to be seen. Although the direct impact of the laws varies, it can be said that states with stricter laws generally have lower rates of gun violence.

According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, there are a number of states in the U.S. that have significant legislation which requires those who are purchasing, owning or desiring to carry a concealed weapon to obtain a permit. This “may issue” legislation stipulates that a person must meet certain requirements, background checks, and other determined criteria in order to be eligible for a permit. In certain cases, a permit must be obtained purely to own a weapon, outside of the intentions of carrying. Additionally, many states have also adopted extensive background check requirements for all gun sales, not just those at gun dealers, in order to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them, like felons, the mentally ill, and spousal abusers.

4. Benefits of Stricter Gun Control Laws

– It’s hard to measure exactly how many accidental shootings occur in the US; however, estimated non-fatal gunshot wounds reach as high as 5,000 per year. Although it may only make a dent in decreasing accidental shootings, stricter gun control laws could potentially make safety courses, cleaning, and increased rules of gun storage mandatory requirements. Measures such as requiring guns to be disassembled at home, trigger locks, or padlocks in a locked cabinet could decrease the number of children who get access to guns and play around with them. This would also decrease the number of teenagers who dare or dare each other to play with them. Underage firearm injuries could also decrease, given that it would be harder for them to obtain a gun in the first place.

A possible decrease in accidental shootings

– The U.S. has the highest rates of violent crime and violent deaths by firearms among the leading 25 industrialized countries. Whereas, Japan, which has the lowest rates of violent crime, also has the lowest rates of crime involving firearms. High rates of gun availability have been associated with high rates of both suicide and homicide. Having access to a gun makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be involved in a firearm-related homicide. By making it more difficult to own a gun, it limits those who may become so-called “crimes of passion” criminals from easily carrying them out and lowers the number of people who kill themselves in an event of severe depression. A study of the D.C. handgun ban revealed that it decreased gun-related suicides by 23 percent.

Lower rates of violent crime and violent deaths in the U.S.

5. Conclusion

It must be understood that there are clear benefits to gun control, such as crime control and reducing the risk of public and single-victim shootings, and that the control need not be detrimental in that it prevents the majority of citizens who are law-abiding and use firearms for sport from owning them. The issue remains that there is an undeniable need for stricter gun control laws in the United States, as a large number of the US population will agree, and that this is a measure that will and should be undertaken in the near future.

In conclusion, it is apparent that gun control is a substantial problem that is still a large issue in the US. However, the introduction of tougher laws and the ever-increasing support for this cannot be ignored. The Brady Bill was a large stride in the right direction, and with increasing firearm homicides and an increase in public awareness of the situation, the need for a more comprehensive take on this issue is more crucial than it has ever been. Perhaps when there is a more open public forum on the issue and the implications of firearm use in crime, more lessons can be taken from other countries who have been very successful in this area. A measure of gun control can be realized.