In most of the countries, firearms distribution is regulated by laws which are incorporated in the laws of the land. For example, in the United States, this is done by a number of state laws and federal laws. Several acts have been enacted all aiming at controlling possession, use and situations where a firearm can be carried openly in the public. So as to understand some of these laws quite well, let us consider some laws in the US constitution which regulate gun use and in turn how this affects the crime rates associated with use of firearms or guns.
In the US, gun use is controlled by a number of laws enacted following several processes of use and ownership in the country. These laws were enacted through:
National firearms act of 1934.
Omnibus crime control and safe streets act of 1968
Gun control act of 1968
Firearms owners protection act of 1986
Brady handgun violence protection act of 1993.
In total, about eight acts of the second amendment to the US constitution that regulates guns and other firearms in the country (Frank, 1998).
Gun control laws have impacted greatly towards reduced crime rates within the borders of the country to some considerable levels. This can be attributed to the increased regulations of people with firearms by the law as well as community policing which is allowed by homeland security department (Frank, 1998).
Homeland security department is the main organ of the security system in the US that deals with regulating use of guns as well as licensing and sale of the firearms. Therefore, they have absolute power to deprive or allow a person to hold a firearm or carry out any business transactions involving firearms. For this reason, the department is able to regulate the number of guns in the hands of the public. They also have details about the guns and their owners. By having all this information, a person feels personally obliged to take care while using or carrying a gun. This also means that the possession of a firearm calls for some qualifications. Some of these qualifications are dictated in the Brady handgun violence protection act (Joachim, 2004). Anybody in any of the below named categories is not liable to holding any firearm.
- Any person convicted of any crime against humanity and has been fully reinstated to by the federal law to a point of holding a firearm.
- Any law fugitive in the country.
- Any person under the age of 18 years for a shotgun and 21 years for a handgun.
- Any person known to use any form of narcotics or stimulants.
- Any person suffering from a health issue or psychological issue which may affect the brain of the person.
- Any person of a known domestic violence conduct. (Jon, 2006)
With such laws put in place, then the firearms department stands a very high chance of issuing or licensing only the appropriate persons with these firearms.
The other issue that the government tries to its level best to control is the access of the guns to the general public which may not be qualified. This is mainly through smuggling of the firearms either by dealers or terror groups in the country. The other possibility would be by transfer of a gun or firearm from one person (who is qualified to hold a firearm) to another who may not be qualified to hold the firearm. Though the second possibility is more like ordinary trade, it must follow guns regulation laws as dictated in the firearms acts and mainly gun control act and Brady handgun violence protection act. So as to ensure that the person to whom the gun is transferred to is qualified, the buyer and the seller have to approach the necessary authorities and seek any formal documents to legalize the transfer. After the transfer is successful, the new gun owner is licensed under his own name thus any atrocity committed using the firearm is fully on him (US Senate 2006).
Considering the other factor that dealers may smuggle the firearms to the wrong hands, the gun control act and violence protect act outlines the rules and regulations that any dealer has to follow when importing or selling a firearm to any person. These regulations explain clearly the possible consequences that may follow any breach of the law resulting in the firearms getting in the wrong hands. The other issue is the fact that all firearms must be registered with security department in the country. This means that even ammunition and other accessories associated with gun use have to be registered with the government as well. By doing this, the government is able to regulate the flow and use of firearms in the country. It is able to monitor which area has the highest number of gun owners and the rate at which they are using their firearms. This helps the government curb the rates of crime in the region and the whole country in general (US Senate 2006).
Having looked at the federal laws governing gun use control, there are additional laws in eh specific states that adds to gun control. For example, in California, gun use laws are very different from gun use laws in Illinois. This is due to the different security approaches used in the regions making guns to have different uses.
Generally from gun use laws, one can claim that a gun holder is solely responsible for the use of the gun. This makes the person to be held accountable if he commits a certain atrocity and be prosecuted in a court of law. Guns users are allowed to use their guns only in an even of privacy intrusion and mainly house intrusion which may cause a security threat. If a person is found to have used a gun on personal defense, the case is taken much lightly hence the firearms are licensed only for this purpose.
With the increased number of guns in the hands of the public the people of US have increased tension while in their operations. However due to the controls installed on gun use, the number of criminals have reduced since it is almost impossible to know who has a gun. This mutual fear has created a sense of respect of another person which has greatly reduced the number of crimes committed using guns (Johnson 2010).
The other issue which has greatly reduced gun crimes is the increased security measures. This is mainly exhibited by the use better security measures and an increase in security personnel which has increased persona security of the people and reduced the urge to have a personal gun. As a result, many people feel secure even without guns.
The last issue that has caused the great decline in crime rates in the US is the equitable distribution of all resources. This has caused a balance in regional development with increased employment rates. This has reduced the number of crime prone people due to unemployment. With this happening, the federal government has commenced a campaign to urge the public to return any unlicensed firearms. This has seen many guns being returned to the government. With a reduced number of guns in the hands of the public, who in this case are licensed and mostly prominent people in the government, has seen crime rates drop to insignificant levels in the United States (Timothy, 2002).
Comparing the United States with another country like France, the law on gun use in France is very strict on firearms acquisition and public use. In fact, about 90% of the total firearms in France are held by security personnel with a negligible 1% of the firearms being illegally acquired by the general public. This accounts for the high security measures and levels in France with minimal gun crimes.
In conclusion, gun crime is mainly a factor of the number of illegal firearms in the hands of the public. If such firearms are returned to the government, the crime rates will drop significantly to levels manageable by the security personnel.
References
Johnson F 2010. Victory for the Second Amendment, retrieved from Gunowners.org.
US Senate 2006, A Citizen's Guide to Federal Firearms Laws, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action,
Jon H. 2006. Florida Firearms Law, Use & Ownership: Qualifications for Purchasing or Possession of Firearms, Warlord Publishing
Joachim J. 2004. Institutional Environments and Scholarly Work: American Criminology. Social Forces 82 (4): p1275–1302.
Frank Z. 1998. Is Gun Control Likely to Reduce Violent Killings? The University of Chicago Law Review 35 (4): 721–737.
Timothy J 2002. BRADY SHADY ON GUN RULES Control backer got son rifle. New York Daily News
