Gun Control in the United States, Research Paper Example

The recent deaths of 20 children and 6 adults in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT has once again ignited discussion of a divisive political issue, gun control.  The events that occurred in Newtown will take years to fully unravel, but the core response of the American people is outrage at a tragedy that could have been prevented.  However, Americans differ on how and what they believe could have prevented a tragedy such as this.  One glaringly obvious fact is that, without access to high-powered firearms, this number of children and adults could not have been murdered so quickly and efficiently.  The American public does not have access to any ready-made devices or materials, other than guns, that can cause such mass death in a matter of minutes.  A person, with enough knowledge, can create a deadly device or substance out of commonly available materials, but the only device that can cause death on this scale that is available already assembled and operational is the gun.  The sole purpose of a gun is to cause death.  While guns have been adapted to other uses, such as sport, the gun was invented to cause the death of a human or animal.  In this manner, it differs from other deadly weapons such as the knife.  A knife is used to divide and separate materials, and gun is used to kill.  The United States Government does not allow the public to own any other devices or substances whose only purpose is to kill, and Congress must enact legislation that limits the purchase, use, and type of guns allowed to the public, all of which is provided by the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment.

The first control that the government must place on guns is greater restriction on who can obtain a firearm and how that firearm may be obtained.  A person is unable to purchase a deadly device, such as dynamite, without a license, training, and tight regulation.  However, the only current requirements for gun purchase are an age requirement and a background check.  There should be required training before a person is allowed to purchase a firearm.  This training should come with a certificate that expires every five years unless renewed via continuing gun education.  The background check should also continue concurrent with this new education requirement.  While some people will argue that murderers who use guns do not obtain them legally, this argument does not counter the fact that a higher barrier of ownership for guns would reduce the number of guns owned and on the black market.  Also, many of the guns used in assaults and mass shootings are legally owned.  “Adam Lanza (the Newtown shooter) shot his mother repeatedly in the head with her .22-caliber rifle as she lay in bed. He then drove to the elementary school, shot his way in and fired dozens of rounds into two first-grade classes using her Bushmaster assault-style rifle. Some of the children were shot 11 times. He then shot and killed himself with one of her pistols” (Bengali).  The guns used in the Newtown shooting were all legally obtained and registered.  However, with education on gun safety required, a child would hopefully be unable to take his mother’s guns for a crime.

Since the primary use of a gun is to kill, restrictions on the use of guns must occur.  The two most commonly cited reasons for owning a weapon are for sport (including game-hunting) and self-defense.  In fact, self-defense is likely the most common answer, and it is the one that most gun owners and gun associations use.  “Many (gun manufacturers and lobby groups) are selling more than guns; they’re also pitching fear” (Murphy 12).  They are pitching fear that Americans are living in a violent society that requires protection that can be provided by a gun.  This fear is peddled despite the fact that “the US murder rate is 44 percent lower than it was in 1995” (12).  Also, research does not support that civilians use guns for self-defense.  In a survey of gun victimization and self-defense, Hemenway and Azrael observed that, in their survey, “the number of respondents reporting that they were gun victims exceeded the number of respondents claiming to have used a gun in self-defense by more than 4 to 1.”  So, though owners can use guns for self-defense, this use is rare.  Gun owners use weapons far more often to kill or injure innocents.  Are we willing to allow 75% of innocents to be injured or killed to prevent 25% of violent crimes?  The logic of the statement is absurd.  Additionally, it is important to note that the survey did not take into account illegal gun ownership or use.  When purchasing a firearm, the purchaser should be required to furnish a reason for the purchase of the weapon.  Additionally, the type of gun should match the intended use.

Currently, the only limitations on gun types are a ban on allowing automatic weaponry to civilians.  The government needs to enact additional limitations on the types of guns civilians can own.  A civilian should be unable to own or obtain any weapon with assault-type capabilities.  The very title of the gun, assault-type, indicates its intended use.  An assault-type weapon is capable of holding multiple rounds and is usually easily modified to be automatic.  If a law were enacted to require gun purchasers to provide a use for the gun, the type of weapon available to the purchaser could be restricted.  If a person intends to purchase a gun for sport purposes, the gun type would have to be a hunting rifle.  A hunting rifle is a gun capable of firing long distances at very high power.  However, a hunting rifle is only capable of holding a few rounds.  Thus, a hunting rifle is not a weapon that a criminal would likely use.  It is unwieldy and inefficient for crime.  If a person indicates that the weapon is for self-protection, the gun should hold very few rounds, as the likelihood of multiple attackers is very low, and be of a very high power, to stop the attacker.  Additionally, it should be incapable of being modified for automatic fire.  These restrictions would mean that a self-defense gun would likely be a revolver.  The truth is that the majority of weapons used in assaults would be removed from the public by fitting the gun to the use since very few guns used in crimes are hunting rifles or revolvers.

On a last note, one important counterargument must be addressed.  Gun owners and gun rights advocates often state that an emphasis on violence in the media has led to the number of shootings and assaults in America.  However, interestingly, violence in the media actually tends to increase gun ownership, which in turn increases the number of guns available for crimes.  One would expect that violence might lead to more assaults, but not necessarily related to guns.  However, a direct correlation between the violence and weapon was discovered by Dowler in an analysis of television viewership and gun ownership and gun rights beliefs.  There is not a correlation between violent media and other weapons.  Thus, viewing shows involving violence with a knife does not correlate with knife ownership or knife use as a weapon.

Overall, the arguments against gun control boil down to a single leg, the Second Amendment to the Constitution.  However, to assume that the Founding Fathers anticipated the type of modern guns available in the United States is a very dense assumption.  The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged that the core and spirit of the amendment is to provide civilians self-defense.  However, the majority of guns available in the U.S. are not self-defense guns.  The NRA and gun rights advocates frequently quote the Second Amendment stating that civilians should be able to own any gun they want because it is in the United States founding document.  But, this logic is very weak.  Just because a person has the ability to do something is not an excuse for doing it.  Thus, just because I can purchase as much gasoline as I want, does not mean that I should buy 50,000 gallons and store it in my backyard swimming pool while smoking a cigarette.  Most Americans believe in reasonable and effective gun control.

Works Cited

Bengali, Shashank. “In gun country; the National Call for Restrictions After the Newtown School Shooting Runs Counter to the Area’s Long Tradition.” Los Angeles Times: A.1. Dec 21 2012. ProQuest Newsstand; Web. 29 Dec. 2012.

Dowler, Kenneth. “Media Influence on Attitudes toward Guns and Gun Control.” American Journal of Criminal Justice : AJCJ 26.2 (2002): 235-47. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 29 Dec. 2012.

Hemenway, David, and Deborah Azrael. “The Relative Frequency of Offensive and Defensive Gun Uses: Results from a National Survey.” Violence and victims 15.3 (2000): 257-72. ProQuest Research Library; ProQuest Social Science Journals. Web. 29 Dec. 2012.

Murphy, Jarrett. “Fear: The NRA’s Real Firepower.” Nation 295.11 (2012): 11-15. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Dec. 2012.

Summaries (keyed to Works Cited above)

1. Today, dozens of gun dealers, gun instructors, gun repair shops and shooting ranges do a brisk business in Newtown and nearby cities and towns. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a powerful lobbying group for gun retailers, has its headquarters across the highway from Sandy Hook Elementary School.
2. Dowler employs the 1995 National Opinion Survey of Crime and Justice to examine the effect that media consumption has on attitudes towards guns and gun control. Logistic regression results indicate that regular viewers of crime shows are more likely to oppose gun control and believe that firearms prevent crime.
3. Some controversy exists about the relative frequency of criminal and self-defense gun use in the United States. Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey of over 1900 adults conducted in 1996, we find that criminal gun use is far more common than self-defense gun use. This result is consistent with findings from other private surveys and the National Crime Victimization Surveys. In this survey, all reported cases of criminal gun use and many cases of self-defense gun use appear to be socially undesirable. There are many instances of gun use, often for intimidation, that are not reported to the police and may not appear in official crime statistics.
4. The article discusses the National Rifle Association (NRA), a U.S. gun lobbying organization that has four million members and does not want U.S. President Barack Obama to win a second term in office. An overview is presented of the NRA’s political power, support for Republican political candidates, and perspective on the Obama administration’s stance on gun control. The firearms industry’s economic gains since 2007 are noted, as well as its trade association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation.