Introduction: Laws of Gun Control
Much of what is portrayed by the media tends to favour a negative point of view surrounding guns, gun control, and their associations with various forms of violence (Piquero, 2009, p. 4). One may think: considering the seemingly adverse effects of gun possession in the USA, why do they not create more stricter rules with gun control? The answer is far more complex, multi-faceted, and requires a more extensive research than what is currently available (Sproule & Kennett, 1989, p. 245). Sproule and Kennett (1989) explain that there are limited studies conducted in the US to justify the effectiveness of gun control in the nation. In comparison to their Canadian counterparts, an evident decrease in gun related crimes and violence was most prominently seen since 1976, when gun control legislation was enforced throughout the country (1989, p. 245-246). By definition, gun control simply refers to the regulation and/or banning of firearms of citizens, by the state or government (p. 246). Furthermore, it is speculated that such discrepancies can be attributed to “the differences in rigour and pervasiveness of gun control” between the USA and Canada even more (p. 245).
Moreover, in order to understand the societal impacts of gun use and possession in the USA, one must be ready to open debates on the multiple aspects of gun control (Singh, 2015, p. 498). According to the American health perspective on gun violence, much of the public outrage over gun deaths arise from the notion that they could have been prevented (2015, p, 498). Despite gun associations with violence and crime, Singh (2015) maintains that the usage of guns is integral to American freedom, democracy, and health. However, for non-Americans - “outsiders”to make sense of the roles and legislations of gun use, Singh (2015) proposes that it is even more important to develop new research methods, frameworks, and “cultural-ploys” in the future.
The Need to Reduce Gun Violence and the Right to Bear Arms
Through media reports and thoughtful questions posed by the American public, it is presently thought that the politicization of guns is counterproductive (Solce, 2014; cited in Singh, 2015). However, research conducted by Piquero (2009), suggests that the opposite may be true. The gun violence crisis in the state of Florida during the 1990s, saw a higher anxiety from citizens, who pressured the government for more extensive interventions on gun related crimes and violence (Helle & Livia, 2014). From 1998 to 2003, only five years since the passing of the 10-20 Law in Florida, there was a 28 percent overall decrease in statewide crimes related to gun activity.
Nonetheless, the media also has a role in sensitizing the public to: “gun crimes, multiple shootings by deranged individuals, accidents with firearms, suicide rates, and children with guns” (Faria, 2012, p. 135). Although Faria (2012) argues that there is an important need to reduce gun violence, they also explain how citizens ought to be allowed to have possession of firearms to protect themselves, their families, and their property. Thus, “increasingly oppressive”governments that enforce the total disarmament of firearms among its citizens, demonstrate that they do not trust their citizens, tend to be “despotic … and are a potential danger to good citizens - a peril to humanity” (2012, p. 135).
Similarly, Vernick (2013) discusses how the Second Amendment to the US constitution is both problematic and difficult to adapt to the laws of modern society. The Second Amendment clearly states that: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (U.S. Const., amend. II.; cited in Vernick, 2013). Therefore, banning firearms and handguns in one’s home directly violates their right to the Second Amendment (2013). This alone invalidates individual laws created by states, such as seen in the 2008 case with District of Columbia v. Heller, where the US Supreme Court addressed the modern implications of the Second Amendment for the first time in 70 years (2013).
Overall, the factors that contribute to gun crimes must also be considered including: tougher gun control laws, and greater access to mental health services (Smith & Spiegler, 2017). There appears to be a positive relationship between these factors and the instances of gun deaths and crimes, which suggests that there are ways of dealing with these problems before they worsen. Often, victims and perpetrators of gun violence are just the “ordinary person”, and “most of the perpetrators of violence are not criminals” (Faria, 2012). However, the availability and access to guns can turn you average person into a killer, if given the right conditions (2012).
Conclusion
To summarize, the issue of gun control in the USA is both a societal and political issue that is highly relevant, due to the prevalence of gun related violence, as perpetuated by the media. Although citizens have the right to use firearms to ensure their safety and protection, the issue becomes convoluted when the accessibility to guns is related to violence and crimes. Simultaneously, the state banning the possession of firearms would be a direct infringement to the rights of the Second Amendment in the US Constitution (Vernick, 2013). The major question now becomes: how does the USA maintain the rights of its people while also ensuring their safety from gun related violence?
References
Faria, M. A., Jr (2012). America, guns and freedom: Part II - An international perspective.
Surgical neurology international, 3, 135. doi:10.4103/2152-7806.103542
Helle, L., & Livia, A.(2014). Use a Gun and You’re Done: How 10-20-Life and “Stand your
Ground” Together have a Disparate Impact on Florida Citizens. Southwestern Law
Review 43(3), 431-435. doi:19443706
Piquero, A., R. (2009). Do Gun Laws Affect Crime the Way Steroids Affect Home Runs in
Baseball? American Journal of Criminal Justice. (34)1-2, 3-8. doi:
10.1007/s12103-009-9059-1
Singh, P. (2015). Opening up debate on guns in the USA. The Lancet. 385(9967), 498. doi:
Smith, J., & Spiegler, J. (2017). Explaining Gun Deaths: Gun Control, Mental Illness, and
Policymaking in the American States. Policy Studies Journal. 1(1). doi:
10.1111/psj.12242
Sproule, C. F., & Kennett, D. J. (1989). Killing with Guns in the USA and Canada 1977 - 1983:
Further Evidence for the Effectiveness of Gun Control. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 1(3), 245-250. Retrieved from: https://heinonline-org.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/cjccj31&id=258&men_tab=srchresults
Vernick, J. S. (2013). Carrying Guns in Public: Legal and Public Health Implications. The
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 41(1), 84–87. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12047
Introduction: Laws of Gun Control
Much of what is portrayed by the media tends to favour a negative point of view surrounding guns, gun control, and their associations with various forms of violence (Piquero, 2009, p. 4). One may think: considering the seemingly adverse effects of gun possession in the USA, why do they not create more stricter rules with gun control? The answer is far more complex, multi-faceted, and requires a more extensive research than what is currently available (Sproule & Kennett, 1989, p. 245). Sproule and Kennett (1989) explain that there are limited studies conducted in the US to justify the effectiveness of gun control in the nation. In comparison to their Canadian counterparts, an evident decrease in gun related crimes and violence was most prominently seen since 1976, when gun control legislation was enforced throughout the country (1989, p. 245-246). By definition, gun control simply refers to the regulation and/or banning of firearms of citizens, by the state or government (p. 246). Furthermore, it is speculated that such discrepancies can be attributed to “the differences in rigour and pervasiveness of gun control” between the USA and Canada even more (p. 245).
Moreover, in order to understand the societal impacts of gun use and possession in the USA, one must be ready to open debates on the multiple aspects of gun control (Singh, 2015, p. 498). According to the American health perspective on gun violence, much of the public outrage over gun deaths arise from the notion that they could have been prevented (2015, p, 498). Despite gun associations with violence and crime, Singh (2015) maintains that the usage of guns is integral to American freedom, democracy, and health. However, for non-Americans - “outsiders”to make sense of the roles and legislations of gun use, Singh (2015) proposes that it is even more important to develop new research methods, frameworks, and “cultural-ploys” in the future.
The Need to Reduce Gun Violence and the Right to Bear Arms
Through media reports and thoughtful questions posed by the American public, it is presently thought that the politicization of guns is counterproductive (Solce, 2014; cited in Singh, 2015). However, research conducted by Piquero (2009), suggests that the opposite may be true. The gun violence crisis in the state of Florida during the 1990s, saw a higher anxiety from citizens, who pressured the government for more extensive interventions on gun related crimes and violence (Helle & Livia, 2014). From 1998 to 2003, only five years since the passing of the 10-20 Law in Florida, there was a 28 percent overall decrease in statewide crimes related to gun activity.
Nonetheless, the media also has a role in sensitizing the public to: “gun crimes, multiple shootings by deranged individuals, accidents with firearms, suicide rates, and children with guns” (Faria, 2012, p. 135). Although Faria (2012) argues that there is an important need to reduce gun violence, they also explain how citizens ought to be allowed to have possession of firearms to protect themselves, their families, and their property. Thus, “increasingly oppressive”governments that enforce the total disarmament of firearms among its citizens, demonstrate that they do not trust their citizens, tend to be “despotic … and are a potential danger to good citizens - a peril to humanity” (2012, p. 135).
Similarly, Vernick (2013) discusses how the Second Amendment to the US constitution is both problematic and difficult to adapt to the laws of modern society. The Second Amendment clearly states that: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (U.S. Const., amend. II.; cited in Vernick, 2013). Therefore, banning firearms and handguns in one’s home directly violates their right to the Second Amendment (2013). This alone invalidates individual laws created by states, such as seen in the 2008 case with District of Columbia v. Heller, where the US Supreme Court addressed the modern implications of the Second Amendment for the first time in 70 years (2013).
Overall, the factors that contribute to gun crimes must also be considered including: tougher gun control laws, and greater access to mental health services (Smith & Spiegler, 2017). There appears to be a positive relationship between these factors and the instances of gun deaths and crimes, which suggests that there are ways of dealing with these problems before they worsen. Often, victims and perpetrators of gun violence are just the “ordinary person”, and “most of the perpetrators of violence are not criminals” (Faria, 2012). However, the availability and access to guns can turn you average person into a killer, if given the right conditions (2012).
Conclusion
To summarize, the issue of gun control in the USA is both a societal and political issue that is highly relevant, due to the prevalence of gun related violence, as perpetuated by the media. Although citizens have the right to use firearms to ensure their safety and protection, the issue becomes convoluted when the accessibility to guns is related to violence and crimes. Simultaneously, the state banning the possession of firearms would be a direct infringement to the rights of the Second Amendment in the US Constitution (Vernick, 2013). The major question now becomes: how does the USA maintain the rights of its people while also ensuring their safety from gun related violence?
References
Faria, M. A., Jr (2012). America, guns and freedom: Part II - An international perspective.
Surgical neurology international, 3, 135. doi:10.4103/2152-7806.103542
Helle, L., & Livia, A.(2014). Use a Gun and You’re Done: How 10-20-Life and “Stand your
Ground” Together have a Disparate Impact on Florida Citizens. Southwestern Law
Review 43(3), 431-435. doi:19443706
Piquero, A., R. (2009). Do Gun Laws Affect Crime the Way Steroids Affect Home Runs in
Baseball? American Journal of Criminal Justice. (34)1-2, 3-8. doi:
10.1007/s12103-009-9059-1
Singh, P. (2015). Opening up debate on guns in the USA. The Lancet. 385(9967), 498. doi:
Smith, J., & Spiegler, J. (2017). Explaining Gun Deaths: Gun Control, Mental Illness, and
Policymaking in the American States. Policy Studies Journal. 1(1). doi:
10.1111/psj.12242
Sproule, C. F., & Kennett, D. J. (1989). Killing with Guns in the USA and Canada 1977 - 1983:
Further Evidence for the Effectiveness of Gun Control. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 1(3), 245-250. Retrieved from: https://heinonline-org.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/cjccj31&id=258&men_tab=srchresults
Vernick, J. S. (2013). Carrying Guns in Public: Legal and Public Health Implications. The
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 41(1), 84–87. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12047
