“If you live in America, you are four times more likely to be murdered than if you live in Britain, almost six times more likely than in Germany, and 13 times more likely than in Japan”
The tragedy of the mass shootings in Aurora has brought out a new cycle of discussion over gun control regulations. An overarching regulatory measure currently seems unlikely as recently both President Obama and Mitt Romney have not advocated enhanced gun control measures. Even though both represented and oversaw states with some of the strictest gun control in the nation, they have not publically pursued a nationwide referendum on the accessibility of guns.
To much chagrin, weapons have again reached those that did not use them with good intentions. The inevitable discussion about gun control then tends to morph into value judgments regarding what is a right and what a privilege. Even the dubious phrasing of the second amendment leaves uncertainty as to what can be restricted regarding who has access to and to what kind of guns. To best examine what the status of gun rights is in the country, a look at the trends among states best clarifies the issue.
The vast expanse of the United States provides challenges in how to properly serve different demographics and interests properly solely from a national level. States determine their policy on the legal accessibility of guns. In that regard, the states with the large metropolises are keener on ensuring stricter controls.
Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and California all have some of the strictest gun laws in the United States along with Washington D.C. Each state has issues with the homicide rate in its largest cities. D.C has perennially been in the top five in homicides over the years. The Los Angeles metro area is up to 41 homicides via shooting in July alone. New York has consistently hovered around 1000 murders, though their homicide rates are substantially down from the peak times in the late 70’s and 80’s. In response to these rates, these states have implemented stricter checks and controls on who access to guns and to what kinds of guns they have access to.
California has passed a ban on .50 caliber weapons in AB 809, a bill that also encompasses stricter reporting procedure on the manufacturing and distribution of the guns. No longer is it solely the responsibility of the retailer to report the status of the weapon, but that responsibility also falls to the manufacture to track where their weapons are. Also, the legislature has approved AB 1402 which shifts the regulation of weapons to the state legislature, negating the exceptions in city ordinances. Along with enhanced registration requirements, California has attempted to limit the legal retailing of guns to educated and qualified individuals.
New York is in the midst of a sharp decline in gun crimes, in light of targeted legislation and policing practices. Several programs have been credited for the progress, though not without substantial criticism. The Broken Windows theory gained popularity throughout the 90’s as the thinking became that the nicer their surroundings, the less inclined individuals become to engage in destructive behavior. Despite the numerous critiques applied to that theory, they pale in comparison to the recently applied Stop and Frisk Policy. The ACLU points to the racially tinted aspects of the policy as police officers are now encouraged to react to individuals they deem suspicious. The state appellate court even recently ruled against the policy ruling that “the gradual erosion of this basic liberty can only tatter the constitutional fabric upon which this nation was built, the ramifications go far beyond this single case.” The legislature continues its pursuit on eradicating gun violence. NY SB 00086 attempted to pass what the California legislature was able to in banning .50 caliber weapons, however the bill proposed in 2011 has not made it to a vote.
Illinois, in similar fashion attempts to legislate access to guns. Chicago is having a horribly violent year, with over 250 shootings just this year. Even New York has over 60 less shootings, despite being three times the size. As such, the legislature has made proposals to strengthen the qualifications required to legally possess a weapon. SB 0075, a bill sponsored by a lone Democrat, states that “no person may acquire or possess any firearm, stun gun, or taser within this State without having in his or her possession a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card previously issued in his or her name by the Department of State Police. ” After months of deliberation the bill has been tabled over a year ago and has not come back. SB 1611 tries to regulate the opposite end of gun possession; by regulating who can retail guns they felt they can better track the distribution. Again this bill was also tabled as opponents felt that it put unjust burdens on retailers to distinguish the purpose of the purchase. The bill stated that retailing
“with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” means that the intent underlying the sale or disposition is predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection; however, proof of profit shall not be required as to a person who engages in the regular and repetitive purchase and disposition of firearms for criminal purposes or terrorism.”
Washington D.C had for 32 years forbade handguns. Until the 2008 District of Colombia vs. Heller decision, which deemed that the second amendment provided for a right to self-defense, D.C had an absolute ban on handguns. Though the court overturned the ban, they did not provide guidance on new legislation. With that, current regulation mandates that guns must be registered by the city, it limits the number of bullets a gun can hold and the type of firearm residents can guns equipped with, and requires a special identification technology to be included in new firearms. Even with these restrictions the district still has the highest gun related deaths per 100,000 people, the 16 per 100,000 is substantially greater than the 7.75 rate of the next closest state, Louisiana.
Of course, on the other end of the spectrum are much more liberal regulations in certain states. Arizona with the passing of HB 2146 allows citizens to obtain a permit to carry concealed weapons. Governor Jan Brewer has been an adamant supporter of gun rights, and it is a move lauded by supporters and staunchly opposed by gun control advocates.
Texas has debated HB 86 which would allow permit holders to legally carry concealed weapons on college campuses. A bill that likely comes as a result of the events at the University of Texas, where a lone gunman ran through campus firing off shots before ultimately ending his own life. The legislature also debated extending the penal code for illicit gun trafficking to include more sophisticated rifles and handguns, but never made it out of committee.
Gun Control is rightfully a hotly debated issue. The polling numbers regarding changes to current regulation splits the country in ways that few other issues do. Even tragic events like the one that occurred in Colorado do little to shift the pulse of the country. According to a Pew poll, the numbers did not change as 45 percent prioritized gun control and 49 percent gun rights, much like the results obtained from a similar poll in April. Gallup has been asking respondents on whether or not they support a ban on assault rifles since 1997 and for the first time a majority of respondents support it. Having said that, Gallup also found that gun ownership in households is at the highest rate since 1993.
With a country so divided on the issue, a Brookings Institution report raised an interested argument regarding abandoning the second amendment in favor of delegating the issue to the states. Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow in governance studies, writes that since the second amendment is now generally accepted as not just a communal right but an individual right it essentially prohibits most sweeping gun control laws. His claim is that our needs have changed as some of the most gun ravaged urban centers demand greater controls than more rural communities, yet the meaning of the amendment has not changed and it is incorrect to ignore the meaning of the amendment in a way more suited toward stricter regulation. With that, he encourages at least the discussion of repeal, though he clearly does not see it forthcoming.
Despite its legality, it is clear that guns are clearly falling into the wrong hands. An illuminating expose in the New York Times reveals how often guns are falling back into the hands of those with documented mental illnesses. It is difficult to forecast what would happen to murder rates if guns were prohibited, especially in global marketplace where a black market is near impossible to successfully monitor, whether the law would achieve its desired results. However, tragedies occur at a rate far too frequent for anyone’s liking and without further changes, it seems unlikely that that will change.
About BillTrack50 – BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.