Laws and Public Shootings in the United States

Question: Why Should civilians be allowed to own firearms? Answer: Introduction Second amendment to the US constitution guarantees that all law-abiding individuals can purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes. However, firearms are usually considered to be a means of destruction and given the prevalence of public mass shootings that occur in United States every year, the perception isnt very far-fetched too. According to Blau, Gorry, and Wade, 2016, there has been a constant rise in the number of public shootings in the US since the late 1990s. At the same time, firearms are also used as a means of protection and personal safety in which case they are held legally with government license. In such cases, it is very necessary to consider the number and types of firearms control provisions and laws government has installed to handle the rampant illegal carrying and use of firearms. It is the absence of such strong laws and their effective execution that leads to mishaps like mass shootings, street wars, etc. However, the repeated cases of public mass shootings are testimony to the inability of the US executive and judiciary to control the gun mishandling effectively. Till the time that the US laws are not stringent enough to handle these issues effectively, gun licenses should be released to only a limited section of people and not to all civilians at large. Also, for a safe society with ready acceptance of firearms, sociocultural, behavioural and educational issues are needed to be sorted at the same time. Though they might be a means of protection for a lot many, guns inherently are destructive weapons which should not be released into society without stringent controls over their usage. Are the Right Laws in Place? The most basic argument that comes to mind while thinking of firearm ownership by civilians and its adverse effects arises out of the fact that there needs to be state-installed laws that are effective in controlling and preventing any firearm related mishaps from happening. However, the changes in gun laws have always been slow in evolving. When it comes to formal laws to prevent firearm misuse, there have been three different types of gun control policy measures viz. Lenient, punitive and restrictive (Fleming, Rutledge, Dixon Peralta, 2016). While restrictive laws are meant to stop the crime from happening, punitive (punishment for a crime conducted using a firearm) and lenient (easy access and ownership of firearm) laws punish the culprit based on the severity of the crime committed by him. These measures of gun control policy come into special focus at the time of focusing events which because of their horrific nature force everyone to take a relook at the gun control laws prevailing in the state at that time. And hence, these measures become the basis for introduction of new bills by policy entrepreneurs who then drive the firearm debate in their favour. Though federal laws exist to restrict the firearm ownership in felons as well as mentally ill people, many US states have just started to form such provisions making the society safer (Buckey, 2010). However, it is the need of the hour that the gun control laws are expanded beyond the purview of prohibited classes of people and start taking other seemingly normal people too into consideration. This is especially true in case of individual state laws which are distributed and non-uniform and hence has scope to have loopholes in them. Federal laws in comparison are more substantial, definitive and comprehensive with prohibition extending to individuals beyond felons. Hence, to restrict the access of firearms to civilians, restrictive bills such as restriction on handguns, ammunition, assault rifles, taxes on ammunition, etc. which make the acquisition of firearm difficult in the first place should be propagated and enforced since prevention is better than cure. Is the Society Ready? An emotionally mature society is one in which suicide rates and depressive population counts are quite low. Around 40,000 people die in US each year because of suicide making it the 10th leading cause of death in US (Siegel Rothman, 2016). The numbers of depression are not very promising either. According to the same study, the presence of a firearm in the house increases the risk of suicide for both firearm owner as well as the household members. There has been shown a significant relationship between firearm ownership and suicide rates at regional or state level clearly demonstrating that the society isnt emotionally mature enough to handle a firearm in the vicinity without misusing it. Complacently handing over firearms to civilians in a such a society is a sure way to invite trouble and cause public unrest. There have been studies focusing on mentally ill people with tendencies of interpersonal violence which show that not all people are at risk of public violence at all times but rather only at specific intervals when the threat is elevated. However, the true dilemma is sorting out each and every such individual, figuring out their trigger points time durations and to separate them from the firearm or any such potentially dangerous object for that interval which seems impractical in a large population. In such a scenario, restricting firearm access to civilians at all times seems to be the most practical solution, at least till the time more unstable ones can be sorted out or the potentially dangerous ones can be assured to be accompanied at all times by a caretaker (which again might not be feasible in all cases). Similar need of the hour is to educate the populace about the effective and safe usage of firearms. Cultural Integration of Firearm Ownership in American Society Firearm ownership in US is considered as a state-sponsored privilege and a very much part of the fabric of living the American dream. It is considered as a cherished right and is very dear to a lot of Americans (Kocsis, 2015). However, the question is, is the American society really ready for this privilege? The cultural entrenchment of gun ownership as well as the constitutional privilege makes gun control a challenging task in US and hence the maximum focus is kept on trying to limit the access of guns to identified dangerous individuals (Swanson Felthous, 2015). Stemming from the fact that there has been a limited restriction on firearm ownership according to federal laws since 1939 due to National Firearms Act, there have been efforts time and again to introduce new laws and policy control measures that restrict the universal access t guns that is prevalent in US. One such important step towards it was when the Heller Court stated the fact that gun ownership right was not unlimited and was limited in case of certain identified individuals. However, it might be true that gun ownership is an inherent part of American fabric; it still requires a limited control and restrictions over firearm ownership to control crimes related to it especially given the ever increasing crime rate in the country. Conclusion Gun ownership by civilians is a highly debated and sensitive issue with highly demarcated categories of gun-ownership supporters as well those who want to be more circumspect in its usage and accessibility. However, gun ownership is undeniably a part of American life experience and is unlikely to go away anytime soon given the sort of legislation and culture that exists here. Several studies have proved the relationship between gun ownership and the increased suicide rates amongst gun-owning individuals and their families. Other studies have correlated interpersonal violent behaviour and serious mental illness which can make gun ownership an added danger. In view of such complications in the control of firearm-generated crimes, it is prudent to introduce more restrictive laws towards gun ownership and restrict gun prevalence in American society. Also, considering the fact that time and again court has tried to bring in new measures of controlling the firearms accessibility in American public, it is prudent to say that firearm control is essential in American society and not all civilians should be allowed free access to firearms. References Blau, BM, Gorry, DH Wade, C 2016, Guns, laws and public shootings in the United States, Applied Economics, vol. 48, no. 49, pp.4732-4746. Buckey, J 2010, Firearms for Felons-A Proposal to Prohibit Felons from Possessing Firearms in Vermont, Vermont Literature Review, vol. 35, p.957. Fleming, AK, Rutledge, PE, Dixon, GC Peralta, JS 2016, When the Smoke Clears: Focusing Events, Issue Definition, Strategic Framing, and the Politics of Gun Control, Social Science Quarterly, vol. 97, no. 5, pp.1144-1156. Kocsis, M 2015, Gun Ownership and Gun Culture in the United States of America, Essays in Philosophy, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 154-179. Siegel, M Rothman, EF 2016, Firearm Ownership and Suicide Rates Among US Men and Women, 19812013, Journal Information, vol. 106, no. 7. Swanson, JW Felthous, AR 2015, Guns, mental illness, and the law: introduction to this issue, Behavioral sciences the law, vol. 33, no. 2-3, pp.167-177.