Gun Policy in the United States: Where We Are Now and Why
The United States is perhaps the only country in the world that is so accustomed to gun violence that its population can easily recall the cycle that follows in the wake of mass shootings: the standard “thoughts and prayers” followed by public outrage, and then by calls for policy change which soon fall to the wayside in discussions. In 2017, 39,773 people died from gun-related injuries in the U.S., with murder and suicide accounting for the overwhelming majority of cases. While this number can no longer be considered shockingly high as gun violence and gun-related deaths become more commonplace in our country, many are left wondering why we have such a problem. The answer boils down to three key factors: the ineffective gun control legislation currently in place, the NRA’s highly effective efforts to protect Second Amendment rights and mobilize others to support their cause, and the political composition of the legislature.
Our country’s gun control legislation is incomplete and riddled with loopholes which can be exploited to repeatedly cause harm. Take background checks, for instance. At the moment, there is a federal law in place mandating that licensed firearms dealers carry out a number of expectations, including the performance of background checks on people seeking to purchase firearms and the maintenance of sales records. The main issue with this law is that it does not address unlicensed firearms dealers. Because of this policy gap, unlicensed sellers can take advantage of this technicality to sell guns to illegal buyers, traffickers, and people with violent tendencies.
The overall stringency of background checks varies from state to state. Look at Louisiana and California; these two states represent opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to background checks. California has the toughest set of restrictions in the country. People have prior convictions of violent or gun related crimes, a juvenile record, or a history of mental illness or drug and alcohol abuse, are prohibited from gun purchase and ownership. In Louisiana, though? None of these restrictions exist. The lack of a nationally standardized description of a person who should be prohibited from owning a gun is problematic; those who do not pass a certain state’s background check can easily travel to another state which has lenient enough regulations to do so. This workaround highlights the necessity for the federal government to establish one strict, clear definition; a few states with specific restrictions are ultimately ineffective when there are countless other states in the country with ones that are intentionally vague and easily maneuverable.
Owning and operating a firearm comes with great responsibility–that is, depending on whom you ask. Licensing laws, for instance, attempt to ensure that only those aware of the intricacies of gun use are allowed to purchase and own firearms. These laws have been highly effective in limiting gun violence and trafficking, yet only a few states implement them. A depressingly low total of 15 states and the District of Columbia have legislation requiring that people obtain some sort of formal paperwork before attempting to acquire a gun. Certain states request a “permit to purchase,” others a “license to own.” A couple of states require completed firearm safety training, and D.C. employs a dual registration-license law.
We are quickly becoming so desensitized to the repercussions of improper and unregulated gun use that only mass shootings seem to temporarily penetrate the veil over people’s eyes. Why do these mass shootings happen? While each of the above factors certainly plays a role, the types of firearms to which shooters have access can cause even greater damage. In 1994, Congress passed a law banning the possession, transfer, and manufacture of semiautomatic assault weapons. The same went for large capacity ammunition magazines, or devices carrying more than ten rounds of ammunition. Semiautomatic weapons warranted legislation explicitly prohibiting their existence because of their military style design. Something intended for wars should not be accessed by the everyday individual–at least, that was the thinking in 1994. This law, however, included a sunset clause which resulted in the expiration of the semiautomatic weapons ban in 2004. Since then, it’s been up to the individual states to pass such legislation, but only seven states and the District of Columbia have.
How did we get to the point where there exists such incomprehensive–or in some cases, lapsed–legislation? There are multiple complex answers to this question, but there is an obvious one: the NRA. The NRA is one of the most well-funded and effective advocacy groups in the country and seeks to protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights. It argues that more guns cause less crime, and that any laws which attempt to limit people’s access to guns infringe on our inherent rights as Americans. The NRA is so impactful because of how it uses its large piggy bank to lobby for Congress to enact lenient gun laws, and in how it is able to incite millions to support and rally for its cause. Nothing incites Americans like protecting their freedoms, and the NRA has capitalized on this to create an effort as effective as our country’s legislative branch.
The NRA is just one part of the problem. Another part is owed to gerrymandering and how it impacts the House of Representatives. Gerrymandering involves redrawing Congressional district lines once a decade to reflect population changes. Whichever party is in control of the state during this time can draw the lines in their favor. This leads to uncompetitive seats with the incumbent gifted an advantage in elections. Democratic seats remain Democratic, and Republican seats remain Republican. The same politicians who support vague gun control legislation continue to be elected, so there is no legitimate opportunity for change. In the 2018 midterm elections though, Democrats regained control of the House, ending an eight year period with Republicans in charge; this was in part due to their winning over suburban “swing districts.” These seats are held by Democrats for now, and representatives could potentially work to establish stricter gun laws that have been stalled or undermined for years. Unfortunately, it is also possible to imagine an election cycle in the near future when Republicans reestablish control, undoing or blocking Democrats’ work before it truly begins.
It is also necessary to acknowledge the other half of our bicameral legislature: the Senate. Although Democrats control the House for now, Republicans control the Senate. This is problematic because, when different parties run the two chambers, there is constant disagreement regarding proposed legislation. A bill advocating for greater gun control which is passed in the liberal House is not likely to garner much support in the conservative Senate. Therefore, a potentially effective policy fails before it is ever implemented. The current Congressional composition requires Democrats and Republicans to communicate and work towards a common goal, yet this seems unlikely as the parties become increasingly polarized.
So what does “good,” or at the very least “adequate,” gun control look like? Well, there is no clear answer. The goal of future legislators should be to create laws that both protect people and are pragmatic in implementation. Even then, people with extreme, opposing ideals will never be content with compromise. While we remain stuck in this ideological and legislative battle, student activists across the nation host marches, boycotts, and walkouts to rally for effective gun control. The efforts of a few students not only put a harsh spotlight on those to blame for a lack of policy change, but also successfully encourage thousands of the same age group to do the same. Mass movements, such as the one which followed the famous Parkland, Florida shooting, have thrust a reality check upon Americans. People are beginning to realize that the “thoughts and prayers” on which they’ve relied for so many years are no longer an acceptable response to gun violence.
Gramlich, John. “What the Data Says about Gun Deaths in the U.S.” Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center, August 16, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/.
“Categories of Prohibited People.” Gun Laws. Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2018. https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/who-can-have-a-gun/categories-of-prohibited-people/.
“Licensing.” Gun Laws. Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2018. https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-owner-responsibilities/licensing/#state.
Ibid.
“Assault Weapons.” Gun Laws. Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2018. https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/hardware-ammunition/assault-weapons/.
Delaney, John. “97% Of Americans Want Gun Control. Why Congress Hasn't Acted.” Time. Time, April 13, 2018. https://time.com/5233748/gun-control-background-checks-gerrymandering-policy/.
Zurcher, Anthony. “US Gun Laws: Why It Won't Follow New Zealand's Lead.” BBC News. BBC, March 21, 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41489552.
Shafer, Leah. “Student Activism and Gun Control.” Perspectives and Opinions. Harvard Graduate School of Education, February 25, 2018. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/uk/18/02/student-activism-and-gun-control.