Does Gun Control Really Work?

Does Gun Control Really Work?

America has experienced the highest numbers of gun violence and deaths related to the same. In 2017 alone, the most recent year for which data is entirely available, America recorded 39,773 cases of deaths from gun-related injuries. If the recent mass shootings in Texas, El Paso, and Dayton, Ohio, are anything to go by, then the issue of gun violence in America is far from being brought under control. The right to keep and bear firearms in America is protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, which grants limited access to guns across the country. However, it is interesting to note that despite the recent amendments done to the Gun Control Act of 1968, gun violence in America continues to be a worrying menace, which further prompts the question, is gun control an effective tool for curbing gun violence in America?

The history of gun violence traces back as early as the 1980s and 1990s when homicide rates surged across cities in America. The surging number of cases were primarily attributed to the increased access of firearm in the country. Ratified on December 15^th, 1971, as part of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment protects the rights of Americans to keep and bear a firearm. The amendment reads in part, “being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This provision implies that American citizens have the constitutional right to access guns for the sake of their security.  Personal security has been cited as the leading factor for the need to own arms in American families. The American law allows for an individual to use the gun in cases of security threat, such as in burglary and self-defense cases.

However, despite the active role gun ownership plays in enhancing security both at the personal and community level, the downside is that it has led to increased gun violence in America. The law defines gun violence as violence committed with the use of a gun. Depending on the given jurisdiction, gun violence encompasses homicide, suicide or attempted suicide, and assault with a deadly weapon, all of which cases are considered criminal offenses and are thus punishable by law. Other types of violence, which may not be illegal, include accidental firearm deaths, public health, psychological, and economic costs. Regardless of the type or intent of the gun violence in question, there is no denying that the increased access to guns in America continues to threaten the lives and social well-being of American communities.

The increased cases of gun violence in the country have led to the modification of the definition of a mass shooting by law. Initially, mass shooting referred to an incident involving more than four victims of gun violence. However, with the increased cases of shootings in public settings, the definition has shifted to include any incident involving multiple victims of gun violence, whether directly shot at or otherwise. With America topping the top 10 civilian gun-owning countries with 120.5 of gun ownership per 100 residents, there is no downplaying the adverse effect gun ownership has on the social set up. The most common types of gun violence in the country include suicide, which rates at 60% of the total number of cases, while murder makes for 37% and three other less common types making for the remaining 3%. To provide intervention to the worrying trend of gun violence in America, the federal government introduced modifications to the regulations regarding the acquisition and ownership of arms for American families, but does gun control work?

In understanding the effect of gun control in America, it is essential to point out that guns are a significant part of the American culture. Whether it is for hunting, personal security measures, or gun collection, many Americans own arms. However, although guns make for the more significant part of the American culture, 85% of gun owners and non-owners support gun control laws. The goal of gun control is to establish a system of checks and balances that regulate access to guns in the country. These laws determine who acquires and owns an arm, and who does not. Thus, one lingering question about the effectiveness of gun control would be, “why is the system failing despite the large support from both owners and non-owners of arms in America?”

There is no denying the fact that gun control is not as effective as it should be. The system may have adequate checks and balances to regulate access to arms, but the numbers keep increasing annually. For instance, the 2017 recorded number of deaths related to gun violence was the highest since at least 1968. Between 2014 and 2017, the numbers rose by at least 32%, with the CDC now confirming that gun suicides reached their highest level in 2017, and worry that the trend will likely get worse. Gun regulation measures include age limits. This criterion has done reasonably well in ensuring that minors do not have access to arms since they do not have the legal capacity to purchase weapons from the relevant federal authorities. The other measure that has been slightly effective is in the establishment of legally approved institutions from which a person can buy their arms. By establishing such federal platforms, the government increases access to legal channels of acquiring guns, thus discouraging citizens from using the black market.

However, despite this dismal success in curbing gun violence by introducing string gun regulation measures, technology has played an effective role in limiting the efforts by the federal authorities. Currently, 40% of gun purchases do not go through the established background checks since they take place online. With the world moving to the digital platform to conduct various businesses, gun purchases have equally joined the bandwagon of online trades, which makes it challenging to examine and access the eligibility of the buyer. In most cases, criminals and minors pose as older, responsible American adults using fake identities, which increases their access to such weapons. Gun control may have played an active role in discouraging and shutting down black markets, which were primarily responsible for selling an illegal firearm, but the creation of online trading platforms undoes this progress.

This article focuses on the background checks run under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 as the chief gun control measure employed by the American government, both federal and state. The Brady Bill has had a good run in implementing its strategies to stop the increased access to arms by unqualified individuals. The bill has prevented 2.1 million purchases between 1994 and 2014, which translates to an average of 343 purchases a day. This progress is commendable, given that it actively blocked 1 million felons, 118,000 fugitives, and 291,000 domestic abusers from purchasing a firearm during the stated period. These figures equally translate to the saving of millions of lives that would have potentially been taken away through gun violence conducted by the blocked individuals. The Bill partners with given states to determine whether local law enforcement or the FBI will do the background check within that state.

To measure the impact of the Brady Bill background check, a two-year study reported that having the tests conducted at the local level directly resulted in a 27% lower rate of gun-related suicides and a 22% lower rate of gun-related murders in various states across the country. One of the factors for such tremendous progress is the fact that the local enforcers have more information regarding the citizens and the potential buyers to help them ensure that the people who do not qualify for gun ownership do not get a gun. The background checks target those individuals who are a potential danger to themselves and those around them. Another factor is that the states requiring such partnerships with the Brady Bill background checks already have stricter gun control laws in place, and thus incorporating these two approaches proves to be more effective compared to running individual operations.

The lingering question remains to be, “Why has the Brady Bill background check proven to be less efficient in recent years?” to understand the shortcomings of this gun control mechanism, it is essential to take into account the numerous failures to report felons to the federal database. For the measures to be effective, it is crucial to update the central database of any felons or abusers to ensure they are adequately marked. For instance, in November 2017, a convict by the name Devin Kelley entered a church in Texas and shot at the congregation, effectively killing 26 people. It was later established that Kelley and a couple more service members had been charged with serious convictions. Had the Air Force reported this case to the federal gun background check database, Kelley would have most likely been stopped from buying a gun given his previous domestic violence conviction.

Given the increased online purchases of guns in America, it is critical to review the measures put in place to seal the growing loopholes. One such mechanism would be facilitating the permit-to-purchase law in every state. The permit-to-purchase law requires that every individual gets a permit from the local law enforcement agency before purchasing a gun from the approved federal institutions. Getting a license from the local law enforcers is critical in sealing the loopholes that unauthorized individuals may capitalize on when getting arms. To determine the effect of the permit-to-purchase law, it is essential to consider the repercussions of the Missouri repeal of the law in august 2007. Research on the impact of the repeal indicated a 55-63% increase in the firearm homicide rate per year for four years following the directive. By repealing the permit-to-purchase law, every individual had direct access to purchasing a firearm in the country, regardless of their mental or physical standing.

Following the increasing mass shootings, and the evident loopholes in accessing arms in America, it is critical to establish more robust approaches to gun control mechanisms. In addition to enhancing the background checks to include a universal approach, other measures such as regulating the manufacture, transfer, and modification of arms should be implemented. While the existing control measures focus on the direct purchase of weapons, it is essential to consider the other avenues of acquiring arms such as through second-hand purchase or the transfer of ownership from one person to another. Additionally, it is critical to seal the holes created by the black market. Although the federal agencies have put in place legal apparatus to determine the level of eligibility of a person in purchasing arms, the black market offers express access to weapons regardless of a person’s age or mental state.

In conclusion, existing gun laws have been effective in curbing gun violence in America. However, various loopholes still exist which limit the potential of the measures in ending gun violence. It is essential to point out the increasing rates of gun violence in terms of increased cases of suicide, murder, and mass shootings. In the recent past, more individuals have increased access to guns in the country regardless of their age or mental state, which further puts at risk the lives of those around him. To curb gun violence, it is critical to ensure that individuals who have a history of felony, violence, and mental health cases are barred from owning arms. Thus, the federal and state governments should liaise to ensure that other strict local law enforcement measures are incorporated alongside the Brady Bill background check to ensure the effectiveness of the general gun control measure.