Gun Control
Introduction
Gun control is a hot button issue in America and has been so for a substantial period of time. Proponents of gun ownership argue that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution gives citizens the right to bear arms for the purposes of protecting themselves and their families. Therefore, all regulations regarding gun control must pass Constitutional muster. Opponents of gun ownership argue that guns are used to commit violent acts against others; therefore, the ownership of handguns and other firearms typically used to commit violent acts should be unlawful or heavily regulated in America. They believe that the United States Constitution does not prevent law makers from enacting tough gun control measures for the safety of citizens of this country. Throughout this paper, I will discuss gun control in America. I will discuss what the United States government is doing in the area of gun control. Furthermore, I will discuss what special interest groups are doing in the area of gun control. In addition, I will discuss the arguments for and against gun control. Finally, I will state my position regarding gun control in America using the information I have obtained while conducting research on gun control.
The Second Amendment and Gun Control
The issue of gun control focuses on regulations for the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, and use of firearms. Gun control laws in the United States vary from state to state. Those opposed to heavy gun control regulations argue that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution gives United States citizens the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (Second Amendment of the United States Constitution). Proponents of gun ownership argue that this amendment gives individuals the right to own a firearm for use as a means of protects and other lawful uses. Those in this group feel that gun ownership is an individual right granted to citizens of the United States by the Constitution. Opponent of gun ownership argue that the right to bear arms as granted by the United States Constitution is for the limited purposes of having a well-regulated militia. This is called the collective rights approach. Those who hold this view feel that the right to bear arms is not an individual right, instead it is for a specific purpose. Those in the collective rights group, therefore, feel that state governments and the federal government do have the power and authority to place stringent limits on individual gun ownership.
The first major case to use the collective rights approach is the United States Supreme Court case of the United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174. This case concerned whether or not Congress, through its National Firearms Act, “could regulate a sawed-off shotgun that had moved in interstate commerce” (Second Amendment). After Miller, the collective right to gun ownership stood for approximately 70 years. Recently, in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the issue was revisited. This case reached the United States Supreme Court in 2008. In this case, one of the strictest handgun laws in the United States, the District of Columbia ban on handguns, was challenged. In this case, the Court ruled 5 to 4 that the handgun ban that the District of Columbia had in place for more than 30 years violated the individual right to gun ownership. Therefore, in this case the court ruled the opposite way that it had in Miller. Instead of keeping the collective right reasoning set forth in Miller, the court ruled that there is an individual right to gun ownership. Furthermore, the court held that Miller only applied to a limited set of facts. Therefore, the court in recent years has determined that the Constitution does give American citizens and individual right to own firearms. In addition, the court has said that this individual right is paramount to rulings based on the ‘collective right’ of gun ownership reasoning.
The Gun Control Debate Today
In recent years, gun control has been a hot topic of debate proponents of stricter gun control laws can point to a rash of school shootings, workplace shootings, and shootings in other public places, to argue that there needs to be much more regulation on the sale and purchase of guns and gun ownership in America. One things that these occurrences has done is to allow for the institution of stricter gun control measures. This had troubled those who are opposed to tougher gun control laws. Recently, a well-publicized anti-gun control rally was held in New York that brought thousands of anti-gun control protesters as well as Donald Trump. During the rally, Trump stated that New Yorkers have a Constitutional right to bear arms. He urged rally-goers to realize that the New York state government is trying to take that Constitutional right away by slowing eroding it (See Blain, 2014). These comments are in response to strict gun control measures pushed through by New York Governor Cuomo after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. “The gun-control law, known as the SAFE Act, strengthened the state’s ban on assault weapons ban and limited to seven the number of bullets that can be loaded into a magazine” (Blain, 2014). A New York federal judge already ruled the magazine limit unconstitutional (See Blain, 2014). The facts that this law has drawn such sharp criticism from those who oppose strict gun control measures, does not mean that the majority of people in the state of New York are opposed to the law. In fact, the opposite is the case. Approximately 63% of the voters of the state of New York support the law; only 32% of New York voters oppose the law (See Blain, 2014).
And it was not just the state of New York that has used the rash of school shooting to try to enact tougher gun control measures. As the article “The One Thing the Federal Government Did On Gun Control Since Newtown” points out, the United States Congress has also tried to enact tougher gun control measures in light of recent shooting incidents. The article starts off by saying that Congress has failed in their attempts to get these gun control measures passed. Many reform initiatives has bipartisan support. However, the Constitutional debate still prevents much of the tougher legislation on gun control from being enacted. Therefore, those opposed to gun control measure may not have the support of the majority of voters or lawmakers on their side; however, they do have the United States Constitution as a powerful ally.
The gun control debate has change drastically over the last few decades. One of the reasons for this change could be the increase in the crime rate throughout America; thus may have caused the reasons for gun ownership to shift from hunting and sport to personal protection. “Thirty years ago, the NRA was principally an organization for hunters and sports-shooters. Lobbying against gun-control laws was a rare activity, since there were few such laws about. Since the mid-1970s, though, the NRA has increasingly focused its supposed 3.6 million members and its $137 million annual budget on two political objectives: helping to elect pro-gun-rights candidates, and then lobbying to ensure that they keep the faith when gun control laws are mooted in Congress” (The Economist). However, the NRA and other gun rights advocates face some strong opposition.
Those at the forefront of pushing for gun control measures has gotten even bigger recently. One of the primary proponents for the push for stronger gun control measures is the president of the United States. The president of the United States, President Obama, is pushing to get some of his gun control measures passed to help end the recent wave of shooting violence that has plagued America. One gun control measure that Obama is pushing for is for background checks to cover private transactions so that the government will know who has the gun (See Miller). The President’s plan for stronger gun control measures has been set out in “Now is the Time” which appears on the whitehouse.gov website. In this plan, President Obama calls for the institution of such measures as the closing of background check loopholes, banning military-style assault weapons and high capacity magazines, making schools safer, and increasing access to mental health (See Obama, 2013).
It is my belief that the Constitution does not prevent the enactment of tough gun control legislation in America. As the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution clearly states that the right to bear arms is for the purposes of a militia, I believe that the founding fathers did not intend to grant American the right to own handguns for other purposes. At the time when the Constitution was written militias for the purposes of protecting state’s rights were a distinct possibility. In today’s society, however, the need for militias does not exist. I feel that the Supreme Court’s recent interpretation in Heller fails to take this adequately into account.
Conclusion
The gun control debate in America is a hot button issue with people with strong views on both sides. One side, people argue that the Constitution of the United States of America grants individuals the right to own firearms for lawful personal use. On the other hand opponents of gun ownership argue that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution did not provide for an individual right to gun ownership in America. The right guaranteed by the Constitution is a collective right of gun ownership for the specific and stated purpose of maintaining a state militia. Those with this view fell that strict gun control measures need to be enacted for public safety reasons, especially in light of recent well-publicized shooting events that have wounded and killed many innocent Americans. Those in support of stronger gun control measures were dealt a strong blow by the United States Supreme Court in 2008, when the Court changed its view for the collective view espoused in Miller to the individual right view in the District of Columbia v. Heller. However, that has not stopped those who advocate for tougher gun control measures form getting some strong laws on the books. In New York City, a rally was recently held to protest New York’s gun control measures that Donald Trump and thousands of gun owners argue is taking away their individual right of gun ownership.
Those is strong support of tougher gun control measures have some powerful advocates as well. Recently, President Obama introduced some gun control measures that he would like put into law in America. These measure called for the banned of military assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and the closing of loophole regarding background checks. Furthermore, after the rash of school shootings, Obama would like to institute measures that would help make schools safer.
Works Cited
Blain, Glenn. “Anti-gun Control Rally in Albany Brings Out Donald trump to Oppose SAFE Act,
Cuomo.” 1 April 2014. Web. 8 April 2014.
Depillis, Lydia. “The One Thing the Federal Government Did On Gun Control Since Newtown.”
TheWashingtonPost.com 16 December 2013. Web. 8 April 2014.
Miller, Emily. “Miller: Supreme Court Ruling on Abramski Could Limit Obama’s Radical, Gun-
Control Aims.” TheWashingtonTimes.com. 22 January 2014. Web. 8 April 2014.
Obama, Barack. “Now Is the Time.” Whitehouse.gov. 16 January, 2013. Web. 4 April 2014.
“Second Amendment.” Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Web. 8
April 2014.
“Special Interest Groups In the Cross-Hairs.” The Economist. 6 July 2000. Web. 8 April, 2014.
