The Issue of Gun Control as One of the Most Contentious Topics in Contemporary American Politics - Essay Example

Thesis The issue of Gun Control remains one of the most contentious topics in contemporary American Politics. On one side are the NRA (National Rifle Association) and the various groups affiliated to it who oppose governmental intervention and bans on ownership of firearms and guns. On the other side do the advocacy groups comprise liberal groups who oppose guns and want the government to impose stricter control over the ownership of guns? With both sides sticking to their stand and refusing to yield their positions, it becomes difficult to find voices of sanity in the debate over gun ownership. This paper is an attempt to understand the vexed issue of gun control and the governmental interventions in this regard as they pertain to the ownership of guns. The paper starts off by framing the issue by explaining the deeply divisive nature of the issue and how it is corroding the political process with the acerbic stand taken by both sides. Then I examine the arguments for and against gun control and then I debate the issue further by stating my stand on the same. Finally, I conclude the paper with some remarks about the whole issue and an appeal for sanity and commonsense to prevail in these troubled times. The debate over Gun Control is primarily between those who cite the inalienable rights enshrined in the constitution with regards to individual liberty and the right of the individual to own whatever he or she desires if the transaction is in accordance with the law. This is the side of those who claim that they have a right to own guns and hence any attempts to snatch away these rights is tantamount to denying them the rights that are guaranteed by law. One the other side is those who call for elimination of guns and point to the increasing rates of crime and homicide as instances of ownerships of guns running amok. Since the issue is so divisive, it is pertinent to examine the literature surrounding it to establish the arguments put forward by each side. First, to start off, one needs to understand the issue and its centrality to American politics To quote from a book by a well known expert on the issue, “Few schisms in American life run as deep or as wide as the divide between gun rights and gun control advocates. Awash in sound and symbol, the gun regulation debate has largely been defined by forceful rhetoric rather than substantive action. Politicians shroud themselves in talk of individual rights or public safety while lobbyists on both sides make doom-and-gloom pronouncements on the consequences of potential shifts in the status quo. In America today there are between 250 and 300 million firearms in private hands, amounting to one weapon for every American. Two in five American homes house guns.” (Jacobs, 2002) What is obvious from the above excerpt is that this deeply divisive issue drives a stake through the contemporary political discourse making it impossible for laypersons to understand or contribute to the issue. It is my opinion that the issue whether people have right to own guns or whether there should be stricter controls on gun ownership is something that should be left to the government and law enforcement authorities to decide appropriately given the circumstances. This is the practice in the rest of the developed world where the issue is decided on a case-by-case basis and not in a blanket approval or a blanket ban scenarios. This is the position that I take throughout this paper. If we start looking at arguments for gun control, the following quote from a book on the issue would be handy to explain the position of those who want gun control, “Advocates argue that gun control laws reduce the incidence of violent crimes by reducing the prevalence of firearms. Gun laws control the types of firearms that may be purchased, designate the qualifications of those who may purchase and own a firearm, and restrict the safe storage and use of firearms. On this view, fewer guns mean less crime.” (Moorhouse and Wanner, 2006) As evident from the quote, this is a pretty straightforward argument. “Lesser guns mean lesser crime”. There cannot be much debate with this line of thinking particularly when one considers the soaring crime rate in states where ownership of guns is rampant. This was the line of argument taken by the well known documentary film maker, Michael Moore in his presentation, Bowling for Columbine. The central theme of that was stricter gun control necessitated by the Columbine massacre that involved students barely in their teens. Such a horrific crime did indeed raise the stakes in the debate and subsequent incidents like the Texas campus shooting in April 2007 and several such incidents have added ammunition (no pun intended) to the advocates of gun control. Anti-Thesis The central argument against gun control revolves around what I briefly discussed in the section related to the framing of the issue i.e. the right of individuals to choose what they want according to the laws of the land and no governmental intervention or interference with the rights (as perceived by them) that are guaranteed by the constitution. As is the norm in this paper, it is worth quoting from an expert on the argument against gun control. “The controversy over gun control revolves around two related questions of government authority: does the government have the right to impose regulations; and, assuming the existence of such a right, should the government regulate guns? It is perfectly obvious that numerous gun control regulations already exist, from the national to the local level.” (Jacobs, 2002) Indeed, gun control opponents are quick to point out that thousands of gun laws exist throughout the country, a fact usually quoted to underscore their belief that such regulation is futile. A pamphlet produced by the National Rifle Association (NRA) mentions "estimated 20,000 local, state, and federal firearms laws the vast majority of which are local codes. Gun control opponents also argue that further gun restrictions could impinge on constitutional rights and the innate rights of the citizenry in a free nation. Before proceeding with these key questions, we must begin with the role and purpose of government regulation. (Spitzer, 1998) In my opinion, this argument is at best specious and tantamount to stating since crime occurs anyway despite of laws against it; there should be no laws against crime. Though stating such an opinion would be heresy to the opponents of gun control, nonetheless the point needs to be made that this is indeed the case. More guns in people’s hands do not guarantee security for anybody and in fact, increase the chances of shootings and killing innocent people by that much. However, the fact that “Gun control supporters often assume that the acceptability of gun control laws turns on whether they increase or decrease crime rates. The notion that such laws might violate rights, independently of whether they decrease crime rates, is rarely entertained. Nor are the interests of gun owners in keeping and using guns typically given great weight” (Huemer, 2003) points to some sort of argument against gun control. Despite this concession to the gun control opponents, one can easily argue that the correlation between gun ownership and crime rates has been proved in many cases though the statistical methods used and the results obtained can be used to prove either side right. Synthesis As has been discussed throughout this paper, the position of this author is that guns need to be controlled and in this section, I look at some of the impediments to further regulate the usage of guns in the US. To quote from an expert on the issue, “Policy making in the area of firearm regulation must take into account the unique status of guns in American society. Examining what firearms mean to Americans focuses attention on whose values and interests are threatened by proposals for more gun controls. There are five key impediments to further gun regulation: (1) the entrenched position of firearms the United States; (2) the cultural significance of firearms; (3) American federalism and regional diversity of firearms traditions; (4) the active opposition of the NRA; and (5) gun owners beliefs about their right to keep and bear arms.” (Jacobs, 2002) The first factor is certainly the biggest impediment as any potential move to curb guns has to take into account the prevalence of guns already owned by members of public. This is not an easy thing considering the size and geographical spread of the ownership of guns and the fact that it would be a herculean task to recover guns from people already owning them. The other factor that should weigh on any gun control activists mind is the NRA and its steadfast opposition to anyone or anything that opposes the ownership of guns. This association is reputed to be heavily funded and is known to take on opponents with its own ads and propaganda designed to confuse the public and make the advocates give up their stand. If the government was serious about regulating gun ownership, it would encounter stiff resistance to its attempts because of the factors described above. Given that each of these factors is by themselves strong enough to thwart meaningful reform, any attempts at gun control have to contend with the entrenched interests as well as the practical difficulties that have been pointed out above. This makes the job of gun control advocates tougher and it has been observed that they have retreated from their positions many a time precisely because of these reasons. However, this should not deter future attempts at gun control and it is my fervent wish that gun control attempts succeed and this position of mine has been articulated throughout this paper. Conclusion In this paper, I have listed the arguments for and against gun control as well as framed the issue that is dividing the body polity. Though this section is listed as a conclusion, I want to highlight some recent developments in the US that make the issue of gun control that much more urgent. Since the economic slowdown began, it has been reported that there has been an increase in the sales of guns and that the people have been arming themselves in anticipation of civil unrest brought about due to the deteriorating economic situation. Though I am not an alarmist, the situation if allowed to go out of hand would indeed result in unrest and not because of any disorder, but, by the simple fact that so many people owning guns is a sure fire recipe for shooting matches and general levels of intolerance would contribute to the situation. In this context, it is urgent that the government steps in and takes necessary measures that might include temporary suspension of sales of guns and a ban on using firearms except in cases of self defense. Though this is not exactly the stand that gun control advocates insist that the government take, nonetheless, it would be a good measure to keep the rising sales of guns under check and ensure that the situation does not go out of hand. Throughout this paper, I have taken the position that gun control should be actively pursued by the government and that they have the right to decide who owns guns and who does not as is the case in other countries in the world. Added to this is the situation described above that necessitates immediate governmental action and intervention. In conclusion, I do hope that gun control advocates indeed get their way and ensure that there are no repeats of senseless massacres brought about due to rampant gun ownership and poor regulation. The images of teenagers brandishing guns are not something that a country like the US would advertise to the world. References Huemer, M. (2003). Is there a right to own a gun? . Social Theory and Practice Volume: 29. Issue: 2 , 297-215. Jacobs, J. B. (2002). Can Gun Control Work? New York: Oxford University Press. John C. Moorhouse, B. W. (2006). Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control? The Cato Journal Volume: 26. Issue: 1. , 103-110. Spitzer, R. J. (1998). The Politics of Gun Control. New York: Chatham House. Utter, G. H. (2000). Encyclopedia of Gun Control and Gun Rights . Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press. Read More