Gun control policymaking - Essay Example

Gun Control Policymaking The 1990s have been an active period in gun control policymaking, in the United s. At the national level, Congress passed a ban on assault weapons, and the new Republican majority voted in the House but not the Senate to repeal that ban. Congress also passed the Brady Bill, which required states to perform background checks on individuals purchasing handguns. The Bill also imposed a five-day waiting period if they are unable to perform instant background checks. The Supreme Court then struck down the requirement that states perform back- ground checks, leaving intact the waiting period.

Local governments continued to enact gun control laws, but increasing numbers of states passed laws preempting local action and in a few cases even repealing local laws. This report seeks to analyze the unique position and solutions on issues pertaining gun control in the United States. The treatise will further clarify whether or not gun laws should assume stronger controls over firearms (Vizzard, 56). Up until now, not much has changed in the politics of gun control. For many years now, this policy arena originates from a stalemate between an organized, outspoken minority and an ambivalent majority.

Gun control opponents originated through groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), which has a large, well-funded political action committee and highly skilled lobbyists but whose greatest strength is its large, geographically dispersed politically active membership. The NRA and similar groups represent a substantial percentage of those who ardently oppose gun laws, and these organizations have worked hard to shape the beliefs and political behaviors of their members. In contrast, small organizations such as Handgun Control, Inc.

, represent only a small minority of those who support stronger controls on firearms. The majority of citizens favor a variety of controls, but many Americans get confused between a belief in the abstract right to bear arms and the desperate hope that gun control will help reduce the violent crime that permeates American society. Whenever a highly publicized event of gun violence catches the public's eye, public concern spikes upward, and gun control supporters are sometimes able to use this opportunity to their advantage (Carter, 43).

There has been evidential aspects that indicate that gun control in the United States is necessary and needs to be strengthened. Although, many have claimed that gun laws seem to punish the law-abiding citizens rather than the criminals themselves. They suggest that firearms can be used for self-protection or to protect one's family. However, guns can also be used to injure or to kill innocent people. We can claim that both logic derives a useful purpose. Most would agree that it is somewhere in the middle, but many would argue that one of the above stories is much closer than the other to reality (Magoon, 59).

The perception of guns in major cities such as New York, Atlanta, or Chicago, differs from the perception in rural areas of Georgia, or Illinois. According to my view, there is no doubt that crime and gun violence have been an issue of concern in my area. The crime rate has risen to alarming levels and restricting the possession of a firearm is necessary. This estimate includes some 200 violent crimes, 100 murders and non-negligent manslaughters reported by the FBI up to date. Purchasing a firearm is as easy as shopping for groceries.

This has led into firearms falling into the hands of criminals and those individuals who have ill-intensions towards the innocent citizens. Violent crime does not affect all demographic groups in the population equally. Those with lower income levels and single African-American males between sixteen and twenty years old are likely to be victims of violent crime. Members of those same demographic groups are also likely to be the perpetrators Rather than releasing more guns to the public for protection purposes, the authority should implement a fundamental process of disarming the illegal bearers of firearms.

They should also increase control on the acquisition of a firearm. This will make it difficult and almost impossible for an ill-willed individual to acquire a firearm (Spitzer, 134). The problem began with the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The U.S Constitution created the framework for the nation’s legal system. The act stated that a well-regulated citizen devoted to maintaining the security of a free State has the right to keep and bear firearm, and the duty to do so shall not be infringed.

During this time, the Act served a useful purpose since the citizens did not have much access to guns. However, the relatively small number of firearms began to increase due to industrialization. This industrialization has now created mechanisms for better and faster gun production. It has become easier to make and distribute firearms, and the cost of purchasing guns has gone down. As a result, gun ownership has increased and has spilled to the wrong hands. In conclusion, it is pertinent to note that since the gun control is already ‘out of control’, it would be a big mistake to allow more individuals to own firearms.

This would mean that more and more firearms would spill to the wrong hands. It is the duty of policymakers to put in place an advanced control on gun laws to avoid illegal firearms getting to the wrong hands (Crooker, 116). Work Cited Vizzard ,William J., Shots in the Dark: The Policy, Politics, and Symbolism of Gun Control. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000 Print. Carter, Gregg Lee. Gun Control in the United States: A Reference Handbook. California: ABC-CLIO, Jan 1, 2006 Print. Magoon, Kekla.

Gun Control. Minnesota: ABDO, Sep 1, 2010 Print. Spitzer, Robert. Gun Control: A Documentary and Reference Guide. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, Jan 1, 2009 Print. Crooker, Emerson. Gun Control and Gun Rights. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003 Print.