Gun Control

by ameena amdahl-mason
In recent years, particularly in light of recent shootings, gun control has become a major issue. Both sides avidly believe the correctness of their opinion, whether it is based upon the Second Amendment, or the necessity of curbing violence. One example of this is that after the Littleton, Colorado shooting, the Senate voted for new gun regulations, including that sales at gun shows must have background checks. The House rejected the plan, so a joint committee has been formed to create a compromise. Last week in this committee, two essentially contradictory motions were passed. One stated that no law should be adopted that was inconsistent with the Second Amendment, while the other stated that the regulation requiring background checks at gun shows, was indeed consistent with the Second Amendment.
These two motions typify the variety of opinions within the controversy over gun control. Proponents of further gun control believe that curtailing of Second Amendment rights is necessary for public safety. Those against it argue that any infringement upon gun ownership is a violation of the Constitution, and therefore inadmissible.
There are two basic theories of gun control, the first being complete confiscation of all guns except those used in law enforcement and for military purposes. The fundamental flaws in this plan are threefold. First, there will always be a black market for weapons, just as there is in the status quo. This will lead to a situation in which the only armed civilians are criminals. In this circumstance, non-criminal civilians will provide easy targets for rapists, muggers, and thieves. Second, there is a problem of implementation, as there is no way to guarantee entire confiscation without invading the rights of the individual through search and seizure. If search and seizure in the case of gun confiscation were to occur, it would create a slippery slope, allowing further rights to be abridged. Third, the reason for the drafting of the Second Amendment was to allow citizens to keep the government in check. Entire gun control is a very totalitarian idea; Hitler did it.
The more common idea regarding gun control is the idea of limits. There are various means of limitation in place already, such as limiting the number of cartridges in a clip, and limiting the type of guns that civilians may own. The most common argument against this is that any infringement on gun ownership is a violation of Second Amendment rights.
The main argument for any kind of gun control is that there is a correlation between gun ownership and violence. However, a large percentage of people own guns and they are not committing random acts of violence. There are obviously other issues besides gun ownership contributing to recent shootings, such as that in Littleton, Colorado.
One often-quoted statistic promoting gun control is that a gun is forty-four times more likely to be used against its owner or a member of his or her family or a friend. This statistic is faulty not due to what it measures, but what it does not take into consideration. In this statistic, suicides, which are clearly intentional, are counted. Additionally, self-defense against a family member, such as a wife protecting herself against an abusive husband, figures into this statistic.
The John Lott study actually correlates gun ownership with a decrease in violence. In states which have conceal and carry laws, which allow gun owners to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon, incidents of crime have actually decreased. This is attributed to a deterrence effect; if criminals believe that their possible victims might be armed, they are less likely to attack or rob them.
There are hundreds of gun control laws in effect today, but they are not consistently enforced. This makes the validity of any arguments regarding the effectiveness of gun control unfounded because the laws have not been used in the way in which they were intended.
The one area of gun control which is consistently brought into the debate and should be modified is the idea of background checks. In the status quo, background checks are required for those who purchase guns in places other than gun shows and flea markets. Further legislation on this point would ensure the rights of citizens and protect society from criminals trying to purchase firearms. This allows citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights, while disallowing criminals, who have forfeited their rights to do so.
Before any more laws are passed, it would be useful to strictly enforce those which are already on the books, in order to gauge where to go from here. While a decrease in regulation would be ineffectual, an attempt to see if the current system works would be advisable before trying to impose further regulation.