Effect of Gun Control Legislation on Criminal Activities - Research Paper Example

Effect of Gun Control Legislation on Criminal Activities ID# Introduction "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” (Jefferson, 1801-1809) In a democracy, where the citizenry has diverse rights, duties and obligations, the constitution of the United States stands out as a beacon of hope and direction amongst other democracies. The constitution holds within it certain inalienable rights of every citizen by the people, of the people and for the people (The Gettysburg Address). These are contained in the Bill of rights. The Second Amendment (America, 1791) to the constitution of the United States of America recognizes the right of its citizens to bear arms. This right was envisioned as essential inviting constitutional mandating by the framers of the constitution. The idea that you can control the availability of firearms within the populous and to an extent control an individual’s constitutional right has been brought about by the continued challenging to this amendment to the constitution as a result of the incessant high rate of violence and crimes which the anti-gun proponents are attributing to the fact that anyone can legally acquire a gun and put it to criminal use (Morgan O. Reynolds, 1992). This is worsened by the fact that firearms are being sold off to the unsuspecting public at a very alarming rate. Most of the people selling these firearms have no valid license to transact in the same, and further, most of the purchases of these firearms have no licenses to possess the same. These death merchants all seek to make a profit at the expense of the populous. This creates a situation of dire need whereby a child can walk into a classroom and gun down their fellow students or a man can walk into a movie theatre and kill the movie goers (More, 2013). These scenarios are leading to an uproar amongst the citizenry who are wondering why the government is not doing anything to rid the streets of guns. Some newspapers have even gone as far as out rightly condemning gun ownership amongst Americans. (USA Today, 1993) stated "We will never fully solve our nations horrific problem of gun violence unless we ban the manufacture and sale of handguns and semi-automatic assault weapons." The anti-gun proponents advocate for gun control legislation that will lead to no citizen lawfully owning a gun. They are capitalizing on this situation without realizing that there is a very big difference between a lawful gun owner and how he chooses to use his or her gun and an unlawful gun owner who has acquired it unlawfully and how they choose to use their gun. This paper seeks to interrogate these issues with a view to succinctly laying out the distinction between an unlawful gun owner and a lawful owner and how both use their guns leading to an increase or decrease in homicide and gun related violence. I have chosen the following questions believing the same as leading to the crux of the matter. :- 1. Does gun ownership translate into the owner committing gun assisted violent acts? 2. What if any is the relevance of illegal gun ownership to criminal acts? 3. Will gun control have an effect on illegal activities? Having looked at the gun control legislation, I noticed that there is not much research and information on the same. This creates an avenue of misinformation and propaganda that is being peddled to the public who have no mechanism to check the validity of statements that they are being fed. Anti-gun proponent are banking on this to aid in them passing medieval laws that seek to curtail the rights and interests of the American public as envisioned in the constitution of the United States of America. These questions touching on the wrongful association of gun control to criminal acts are what this paper aims to address aiming to provide a fresh outlook on the relevance of gun ownership to criminal acts. Thesis Statement Research suggests that gun control legislation in the United States has little to no effect on lowering homicide rates, lessening gun related crimes or the number of illegal weapons. The issue of gun ownership as relates to violent acts The Second Amendment at its inception envisioned America as a country of law abiding citizens who would always act in the best interests of the country. The country was built on good morals, hard work and understanding which values guided its citizenry. As time passed, these values have been eroded and replaced by continued and widespread defunct violent acts pervaded by morally defunct individuals. Proponents of anti-gun ownership posit that the availability of guns within the populous is worsening the situation because individuals in any stressful situation turn to wrongful gun use (Don B. Kates, 1983). The continued reporting of gun related crimes is raising a red flag to the possibilty that America may be on the precipice of a disaster. The issue of gun ownership is twofold, legal and illegal gun ownership. Legal gun ownership is characterized by individuals who possess a firearm carrying license going to a licensed firearm shop and purchasing the same. These individuals usually use the said firearms for hunting and self defense. They are trained in these activities leading to a scenario of controlled gun usage as they understand that the availabilty of the gun is not for criminal violence but for engaging in lawful activities that promote the peace. The other prong to gun ownership is illegal gun ownership, which is characterized by anyone gaining access to a firearm illegally. This means that the person in need of the gun is a minor, criminal or the state has labelled them unfit to possess a firearm. It could also mean that the person selling the firearm does not have a valid license to transact in the same. These two extremes to ownership should be viewed as such so as to fully understand whether it is wise to blanetly condemn gun ownership, legal or illegal. This will also translate in effect to the debate on the root cause of the spiking out of control homicide rates and the worsening gun related crimes. Legal Gun Ownership Gun ownership in the United States of America is regulated by the existing federal firearm laws of every state. Each state has its own laws that guide its population on how to interact with both firearms and ammunition. There is in existence the aspect of reciprocity in every state as relates to how individuals are supposed to interact with firearms and this ambit extends mainly to having a permit whenever carrying a firearm across state lines. Where a state’s laws as relates to firearm possession are not in line with a specific state in which the individual is currently residing, the state has no obligation to enforce the laws of the state the individual is coming from. This was the Supreme Court ruling in (Mack and Printz v. United States, 1997) Further, legal gun possession has been proved to be a necessity through time. A seattle man used his legally-registered handgun to stop his attackers by shooting one of them, a woman shot a man who had broken into her home and was beating up her roommate and another woman held an intruder into her home at gun-point until the police arrived (Barnes, 2006). These instances and many more all go to show that legal gun possession has as its main agenda as self defense which is paramount to the protection and enjoyment of a citizen’s rights and priviledges. All legally acquired guns have a registration number that assists in tracking them. These numbers are registered as against the owner when the individual purchases the same from a lawful firearm shop. This in itself acts to curtail the legal gun owner from using the legally acquired gun to commit crime because the specific gun used in a crime can be traced back to the person who used it. (GUNS, 2010) The most comprehensive study to date by (Rossi, 1981) stated as follows, “There appears to be no strong causal connections between private gun ownership and the crime rate.... There is no compelling evidence that private weaponry is an important cause of, or a deterrent to, violent criminality.... It is commonly hypothesized that much criminal violence, especially homicide, occurs simply because the means of lethal violence (firearms) are readily at hand, and thus, that much homicide would not occur were firearms generally less available. There is no persuasive evidence that supports this view.” The study conducted by Rossi if adopted will finally address the real issues ssurrounding gun control and flush out the rumour mongers and individuals who hide behind falsehoods in trying to curtail the American’s Second Ammendment right. Illegal Gun Ownership The legislation that is currently in place seems to curb gun ownership because of the assumption albeit a wrongful one that gun ownership in general leads to an increase in the number of homicides and gun related crimes. This is not true because it is not legal gun ownership that is the problem, but illegal gun ownership. (Krouse, 2012) Guns are still finding their way into the population, and at this level, it is difficult if not impossible for the government of the day to keep track of who owns a firearm. (Investigation, 2004) This situation is compounded by the fact that illegal gun ownership does not warrant knowing how to use the same and criminals are seen to use the firearm wrongly if not chaotically. (Lott, 1998) Every year, thousands of guns find their way to criminal hands causing more than twelve thousand deaths every year. (Statistics, 2013) The guns make their way into the market through licensed gun dealers selling to unlicensed individuals, theft, robbery and sales from unlicesed dealers. Most of the illegal guns that exchange hands cannot be traced back to the owner because either it is unregistered or the guns serial number has been scratched off. All these scenarios make for one potent situation that blows up from time to time when a gun related crime occurs making legislators develop a knee jerk reaction to the whole issue of gun control. (fitsnews, 2012) Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) keeps track of illegal gun trafficking with a view to providing viable data that would enable one make an informed decision on the issue. They do this by gathering crime gun trace data from crime scenes and seek to match it against guns registered in a particular state to assess the extent to which guns have made it across state line illegally. These are the findings:- (GUNS, 2010) In 2009, ten states accounted for nearly 21,000 interstate crime guns which was responsible for nearly half of the total gun crimes committed in that year. States that have the highest crime guns export rate supply a grater proportion of guns that are likely to have been illegally trafficked. States that have enacted gun laws have a lower crime gun export rate and a smaller proportion of guns that are likely to have been illegally trafficked. There are individuals who claim that adopting more stringent gun control mechanisms that seem to have worked in other countries will work for America. This is far from the truth because America and other states are very different in their nature; politically, socially and economically, leading to the average American citizen facing problems of a different nature from an Israelite. (Wright, 1983) One study was done incorporating the diversity in culture as between the different countries and it found that gun control was not to be credited for the low crime rates in Britain or Japan. Further, other countries like Israel with widespread rates of ownership had lower gun related crimes. (Kopel, 1992) Not all firearms can be said to be legally owned by the average American citizen. This is because different firearms have different uses. A semi-automatic gun is not used in everyday life. Ownership of the same by the average American citizen is not an everyday occurrence. This is because the said firearms are only limited to military use. The average American citizen uses firearms for hunting and defending themselves; a handgun is used in this. Possession of a fully automatic gun is illegal gun ownership as it defeats the purpose that the gun was intended for. The Machine Gun ban was signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986 becoming the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (HARDY, 1986), in effect banning any new registration of machine guns for civilian use. Military style assault weapons are not to be in the possession of civilians. They only have access to Title 1 grade firearms unless they pay the requisite tax and license fees for Title 2. Title 2 firearms being military style assault rifles are only licensed to civilians under special conditions which require the filling in of numerous forms stating the intent and purpose of the intended Title 2 grade gun. (Derek Andrew DeBrosse) This acts as a check and balance against illegal gun possession by law abiding citizens. Of course, criminals are a whole different issue altogether. The availability of illegal firearms to criminals and the unavailability of legally acquired firearms to a licensed citizen will itself increase instances of gun related crimes because the criminal will know that their victim; the law abiding citizen, is not armed and cannot defend themselves. This will lead to a spike in incidences of homicide and gun related crime. The solution to illegal gun ownership and by correlation gun related crimes lies in the promise and not threat of swift punishment. Laws aimed at criminal gun use are crime deterrents because the offender will know what awaits them if they engage in activities contrary to the law. Relevance of illegal gun ownership to criminal acts The problem of illegal gun ownership is widespread if not endemic. This is because the government is not able to keep track of the firearms that illegally make their way into the market and end up in the population. This is made worse by the legislation that is currently in place that makes it difficult if not impossible for an individual to lawfully acquire a firearm. (Krouse, 2012) The Supreme Court of the United States of America held in District of Columbia vs. Heller that, “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defence within the home.” (District of Columbia vs. Heller , 2008) This in effect reaffirmed an individual’s right to legally acquire and own a firearm. It is illegal gun ownership that leads to criminal activities. Continued study and research into gun control by organizations such as the Los Angeles Times, Gallup, and Peter Hart Research Associates, its use and relation to criminal activities has led organizations to come up with reports that posit that American who lawfully own guns use them in defensive and not illegal activities. (Press, 2013) President Obama after the Sandy Hook Elementary school tragedy stated as follows, “We won’t be able to stop every violent act, but if there is even one thing that we can do to prevent any of these events, we have a deep obligation, all of us, to try.” (House, 2013) Individuals who illegally bear arms do not use the same for lawful purposes. They engage in gun related activities that are marred in violence leading to a high rate of homicide and general criminal activities. (Krouse, 2012) Illegal gun ownership makes it impossible for the law and its proponents to be able to track the path of a gun from one area to the up until the same is used in a criminal activity. People who are in possession of illegally owned firearms tend to act with reckless abandon because they believe that the guns cannot be traced back to them. Effect of gun control on illegal activities There have been many instances where violent shootings have occurred as a result of instances among which are gang related activities, underage children getting access to guns and crossing state lines while in possession of firearms. These instances of gun shootings from illegal gun ownership include the Aurora Co theatre, Minneappolis Sign Company, Oak Creek Sikh Temple, Atlanta Health Spa and the Omaha Westroads Mall. (Mark Follman, 2013) These instances go to show that illegal gun ownership at its most basic form leads to misuse by the owner because they have not been taught how to use the firearm, making them dangerous the society in which they live. (Investigation, FBI Uniform Crime Reports) Gun control envisages a scenario where there is no more violence and criminal activities in the country. It is a noble yet misplaced idea. This is because the legislation seeks to curb legal gun ownership while offering no solution at all to illegal gun ownership. Herein lies the problem. As soon as legislators realize that legal gun owners only defend and hunt with their guns and not commit criminal acts, the sooner the country will make a step in the right direction as far as curbing violence and criminal activities from gun use. Legislators are in the habit of sponsoring biased studies leading to polls that present the public with skewed results, advocacy polling. Any poll can be populated and the results fed to an unsuspecting public. One such poll that was manipulated was done by Louis Harris Research Inc. (LHRI) in the summer of 1993 which subsequently reported high levels of gun abuse by high school children. On examination of the poll, they were found to be inconsistent with the crime and victimization statics presented by the Department of Justice within the same period. (Kleck, 1993) The Washington D.C. city council in 1986 passed a law prohibiting citizens from possessing handguns and all firearms in homes unloaded and kept disassembled or with a trigger lock. The Supreme Court subsequently declared the law unconstitutional but in the period during its operation, the Washington D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was before the inception of the law vis a vis the murder rate in the whole of the United States of America where the law was not in effect. (District of Columbia and Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor of the District Of Columbia, Petitioners, v. Dick Anthony Heller, Respondent. , 2008) This shows that while there was a curb and regulation on legal gun ownership by the citizens of Washington D.C., there was an increase in the rate of homicide and gun related crimes in Washington D.C. while in the rest of the Unites States of America where the law was not in force, there was bo significant increase or decrease in the rate of gun related crimes or homicide. This goes to show that there should be a distiction between characterizing gun ownership as legal and illegal as they both have different effects once they are banned. Banning legal gun ownership has a negative effect on homicide and gun related crimes as criminals illegally owning firearms capitalize on the situation by robbing, maiming and killing the law abiding citizens who will not have a mechanism of defending themselves. On the other hand, banning illegal gun ownership will have a positive effect on the homicide and gun related crime rate because the people who illegally own the firearms and have previously using the same with reckless abandon will be alive to the fact that the government has set up measure, prefarably guarantees jail time, to whoever has been found to illegally possess a firearm. The relatively constant homicide and gun related crime rate in the other states where the law was not in effect clearly show that when the population is allowed to legally possess firearms, the status quo of the crime rate is amintained as they are able to defend themselves against criminals who own guns illegally. Conclusion and Recommendations The Second Amendment at its inception and its recent subsequent interpretation by the courts of law all recognize the right of an American citizen to legally acquire firearms. Research that has been conducted points to the conclusion that gun control will have little or no effect at lowering homicide rates, lessening gun related crimes or the number of illegal weapons. This is because illegal firearms are finding their way into the market through back channels while the government looks on helplessly as crime rates owing to the same spiral out of control. What the government needs to do is curb illegal gun ownership. Gun control legislation only affects law abiding citizens because a criminal is always able to lay their hands on a firearm if they choose to. What needs to be done instead of blanket condemnation of gun ownership is enforcing the already existing laws to the letter. This is because gun control vis a vis gun related crimes is a law enforcement issue. There are various laws in existence that already provide for curbing of illegal gun ownership including but limited to the Brady Act. (Frandsen, 2011) There is in existence the Brady Act (Frandsen, 2011) which has advocated for the existence of background checks of anyone who wished to buy a firearm. This was intended to prevent criminal and past offenders from acquiring access to firearms. This Act if enforced to the letter, will go a long way towards eradicating illegal gun sales and ownership which are the root cause of the increase in homicide and gun related crimes. This is because once a background check is done and the intended buyer’s name is found to be flagged, if the merchant of the gun strictly adheres to the law, the intended buyer will not be able to get access to the gun. The government should also move in to prescribe punishments for anyone found to have illegally sold a firearm to a person whom the law states should not get access to the same. References (1993, December 29). USA Today . America, G. o. (1791, December 15). BEARING ARMS: SECOND AMENDMENT. Constitution of the United States of America . Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America: Government of the United States of America. Barnes, J. (2006, May). Opinion/Editorial. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from Washington Policy Centre: http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/opinion/legal-gun-ownership-saves-lives Derek Andrew DeBrosse, E. The Myth of Purchasing a Title II Firearm. Columbus, Ohio: The Law Office of Derek A. DeBrosse. District of Columbia and Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor of the District Of Columbia, Petitioners, v. Dick Anthony Heller, Respondent. , Legal brief 07-290 (Supreme Court of the United States January 4, 2008). District of Columbia vs. Heller , 554 U.S. 570 (Supreme Court of the United States 2008). Don B. Kates, J. (1983). HANDGUN PROHIBITION AND THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT. Michigan Law Review . fitsnews. (2012, December 14). THE KNEE-JERK “GUN CONTROL” MARCH BEGINS. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from Fitsnews.com: http://www.fitsnews.com/2012/12/14/and-so-the-gun-control-march-begins/ Frandsen, R. J. (2011). Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2009. Ntional Criminal Justice Department. GUNS, M. A. (2010). TRACE THE GUNS :THE LINK BETWEEN GUN LAWS AND INTERSTATE GUN TRAFFICKING. HARDY, D. T. (1986). THE FIREARMS OWNERS PROTECTION ACT: A HISTORICAL AND LEGAL PERSPECTIVE. Cumberland Law Review , 585-682. House, T. W. (2013). Now is the time: The President’s plan to protect our children and our communities by reducing gun violence. Washington: The White House. Investigation, F. B. (n.d.). FBI Uniform Crime Reports. Retrieved March 14, 2013, from Investigative Reporters and Editors: http://www.ire.org/nicar/database-library/databases/fbi-uniform-crime-reports/ Investigation, F. B. (2004). Uniform Crime Reporting Hand Book. Clarksburg: U.S. Department of Justice. Jefferson, T. (1801-1809). President of the United States of America. Virginia. Kleck, G. (1993). Reasons for Skepticism on the Results from a New Poll on: The Incidence of Gun Violence Among Young People. Florida: Florida State University. Kopel. (1992). "The Samurai, The Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America adopt the gun controls of other democracies?. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Krouse, W. J. (2012). Gun Control Legislation. Washington: Congress. Lott, M. (1998). More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mack and Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. (Supreme Court 1997). Mark Follman, G. A. (2013, February 27). A Guide to Mass Shootings in America. Retrieved March 17, 2013, from Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2 More, Q. (2013, March 12). Aurora cinema shooting: Judge approves ‘truth serum’ interrogation. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from Question More: http://rt.com/usa/cinema-shooting-insanity-guns-154/ Morgan O. Reynolds, W. C. (1992). Myths about Gun Control. Texas: National Centre for Policy Analysis. Press, T. P. (2013). Gun Rights Proponents More Politically Active. Washington: www.peoplepress.org. Rossi, P. J. (1981). NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WEAPONS, CRIME AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICA. Boston, Massachusetts: Social and Demographic Research Institute of the University of Massachusetts. Statistics, W. f. (2013, January 11). Assault or Homicide. Retrieved March 24, 2013, from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention : http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm The Gettysburg Address. (n.d.). Retrieved March 24, 2013, from Abraham Lincoln Online: Speeches and Writings: http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/gettysburg.htm Wright, e. a. (1983). Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime and Violence in America. New York: Aldine. Read More