Will new background checks on gun purchases assist with decreasing gun violence - Research Paper Example

New background checks on guns Introduction The United s of America has had an increase in gun violence for a long time especially in the major cities. The availability of guns follows weak government institutions and guns management policies most of which have made it easier for more people to purchase guns. This gives rise to organized gangs and illegal trades, which heighten conflicts, thus necessitate the use of the guns in harming others (Kemshall 12). It is therefore with the knowledge that the American streets have more informal guns than the formally accounted guns thus explaining the high crime rates that the government formulated new background check on gun purchases. This policy seeks to review the current laws governing the purchase and ownership of guns thus improving more accountability. The efficacy of such a policy depends on its implementation to regulate the rising crime rates in the countries major cities. The crimes in the cities have an effective pattern that thrives on the formation of organized gangs. Such gangs operate on illegal businesses such as the trade of drugs; drug peddling is the greatest cause of street violence in the country. The illegal trade is worth billions of dollars an amount that requires security to manage. With weaker guns management policies, drug peddlers gain access to guns with which they secure their trades. The heightened rate of conflicts among such guns reciprocates in the use of the very guns in causing harms to other opposing gang members and other innocent citizens. Siegel (19) explains that another group of potential source of gun violence is robbery. Robbery and violent attacks is more prevalent in the American streets all of which are executed by the use of guns. Robbers need force to scare their victims before stealing from them, the most perfect source of scare to most of the people are guns, this therefore necessitate the frequency with which robbers use guns and violence in their robberies. Additionally, guns aid the robbers thwart resistance from their victims. The other type of gun use arises from the unregulated licensing of gun users, in a country with more people officially owning guns, every frustration and conflict attracts the use of guns thus causing more casualties from very light feuds. It is with this understanding that the government formulated the new background check on the purchase of guns in a bid to regulate the private ownership of guns. This in a way seeks to curb the rising crime rates. This new policy is an improvement to the Brady Handgun Violence prevention Act of 1993which required the federal firearms licensees to analyze every prospective firearms buyer and determine their suitability to purchase the arms. This new policy makes this analysis more stringent by dictating that just a single state organ have the ability to dispense guns to the public. With a single dispenser, it becomes to investigate every illegal gun in the street and determine its origin. Furthermore, such a single outsourcer provides effective documentation of the guns and their buyers to ease federal investigations in case of a crime. The legislation further dictate that the gun dispenser share its database with the federal bureau of investigation and any other state investigation body to fast track investigation processes of any case involving the use of illegal guns (Kemshall 41). This law further requires that the licensing body investigate the mental state of the gun buyers. In doing this, the federal body determines the suitability of the gun buyer to use the firearm responsively without causing intentional arm to the society. The gun purchase further requires the establishment of the need for the gun, the government laws permit top government officials to own guns. Such officials include government secretaries, judges, magistrates, attorneys and other top ranking civil servants. These people attract public attention towards themselves and they conflict with a number of people in the dispensation of their state duties. The state therefore provides them with adequate security to keep them safe and out of harm’s way. However, their usage of the arms is heavily regulated and they have a constant monitoring mechanism that requires them to account for every bullet they use (Stojkovic, David, and John 34). In addition to these state officers, the laws also permit other private citizens to purchase and therefore own guns. Such people must meet the state threshold on mental stability and convince the state authority that they attract attention of the public from their daily operations. Such people include businesspersons and any other citizen with adequate interest to cause them harm. Such people in most cases constitute the wealthy that face regular threats from robbers. The success of this legislation is relative and highly debatable, the legislation has effective policies, which seek to monitor the purchase of firearms and this improves accountability of every firearm owner thereby discouraging either resale or the transfer of the ownership of guns in the country (Barker 32). By preventing transfers of gun ownership, the federal body seeks to obtain accountability from every gun owner on the usage of their firearms and the involvement of their guns in any crime whatsoever. This follows the claim that some of the legitimate gun owners rent their firearms out to criminals thus gaining financial benefits from the criminal activities in the country. The regulation however dictates that the gun owners account for every bullet and the ware bouts of their guns at every moment, in doing this the gun owners become more responsive and take great care of their firearms to prevent any loss or theft of the guns. A major weakness that this policy presents in its implementation stems out of the ineffective survey of the criminal activities in the country. The policy provides an elaborate purchasing process and the subsequent gun management by the elite and the formal sector. The criminal gangs on the other hand do not rely on such mechanisms to obtain firearm that they use in their criminal activities. These people purchase their guns from the “black market” this refers to the informal market unrecognized by the government and the official taxation mechanisms. This industry has no control whatsoever and involves the business transactions from common citizens some of whom import the guns from other neighboring countries or others who inherit the guns from their parents and great grandparents. The American border with Mexico has been used in the illegal importation of firearms time, immigrants and drugs for a long. This new background check on the purchase of guns does not recognize the role that this illegal importation plays in the development of such criminal gangs and crimes. Furthermore, the law does not provide an effective means of establishing the number of illegal guns in the country and provide a mechanism of disarmament. This implies that the guns that had previously existed in the country continues to change hands in the informal markets as the weak boarder policies continue to allow into the country more guns and bullets from the neighboring countries some of which have weaker transportation legislations (Newton 12). Furthermore, the law introduces a blanket assumption that gun violence is the only form of violence in the streets. This assumption makes the policy a lot more ineffective in restoring peace in the country and reducing the escalating levels of crime (Stojkovic, David, and John 34). Most of the gangs in the country have guns but the stringent state laws discourage their use of guns in executing the crimes. They thus use the guns to scare their victims but resort to other forms of harm causing equipment such as knives and other blunt objects to mutilate and immobilize their culprits before robbing them. The new gun purchasing laws therefore do not achieve the restoration of peace in the country since this still permits the transfer of guns with the understanding that the criminals do not use the guns thus attracting the federal attention to the official gun owners. The law is more reactive than it is proactive. The reactive nature of the law implies that the law seeks essence after the state has had an immense increase in crimes. It is therefore a reaction to the rising crime rates and does not address the issues that cause crimes. Such legislation does not have an effective understanding of the criminal operations and their involvement with the guns. Instead, the law seeks to curb the further spread of the violence by curtailing the introduction of more firearms into the country. The problem with such legislations is the fact that it ignores the previous state of affairs before the introduction with the law. Prior to this law, the American streets had illegal guns; the government cannot account for either the origin or usage of these guns. An effective legislation therefore is one, which will have an acknowledgement of this fact and provide a blue print of how to deal with the previously existing illegal guns before controlling the new arrivals from both the official and informal coffers. This legislation lacks such a mechanism thus loses its authenticity in managing the illegal arms. Furthermore, this legislation does not incorporate the dictates of other federal or state policies. It is common knowledge that it is irrelevant to have very effective background checks in the purchase of firearms while the country’s boarders are weak enough to allow the proliferation of illegal guns from the neighboring states. The new legislation exists alone and seeks to control the formal purchase of guns without collaborating with other market legislations that have the mandate of monitoring the informal market, which plays an important role in the existence of informal guns in the country. The excessive regulations in the formal purchase of guns simply makes this process expensive and more people will therefore resort to the informal market which has lesser control and dispenses the guns at cheaper prices. This makes the new legislation less relevant in containing the rising level of gun crimes (Barker 21). Homicide cases are on the rise in the countries major cities such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and many others. The patterns in this case arise from the social trends in the American society. With an advancing economy, more people gain economic power and thus become capable of owning guns through the official means. Furthermore, the developing economy relies heavily on the informal market that provides employment to a substantial portion of the economy. The entertainment industry in the state of California employs millions of American despite the industry having a number of informal operations. This industry further portrays an American society filled with violence and disregard to human life. Such portrayals formulate a social trend, which promotes the use of violence, and the availability of guns to a bigger percentage of the population necessitates such. In this context therefore, the legislation still plays a reactive role by failing to address the issues that perpetuate the increase in the gun crimes. However, the legislation has some relevance and does not have a reactive role all through in the management of gun crimes. By establishing effective purchasing laws, the legislation provides an effective management of the introduction of new guns in the country especially in the cities that do not boarder and country. This legislation promotes citizens to own guns but it follows a strict mode of purchase and other management strategies thereby containing the infiltration of such official firearms in the informal sector (Newton 33). This discourages transfer of ownership thus containing the use of official firearms in the execution of homicides. In view to this, the new legislation is effective enough to contain the rising gun violence in the country. Works cited Barker, Thomas. Biker Gangs and Organized Crime. Burlington: Elsevier Science, 2007. Internet resource. Newton, Michael. Gangs and Gang Crime. New York, NY: Chelsea House, 2008. Internet resource. Kemshall, Hazel. Crime and Social Policy. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2013. Internet resource. Siegel, Larry J. Criminology. Belmont: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2012. Print. Siegel, Larry J. Criminology. Belmont: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2012. Print. Stojkovic, Stan, David B. Kalinich, and John Klofas. Criminal Justice Organizations: Administration and Management. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning - Wadsworth, 2012. Print. Read More