Draft, Review and Reflect
Chester L. Brock
ENG 102 #27078
Feb 3, 2013
Instructor: Josephine Schwenckert
Thesis: The increase in gun violence can be decreased by limiting or monitoring the availability of guns, ammunition and ammunition clips.
I think that the solution to this complicated problem begin with the United States lack of regulation regarding guns and ammunition. This is a very conflicting issue for most Americans. It seems that most people want the government to intervene, when a mass shooting occurs but don't want the government to make laws or regulations that may prevent those shootings. There is no easy solution to gun violence but there are some measures that care be implemented that can decrease some gun violence. I want to examine these issues and propose ways that the United States can decrease some gun violence, while protecting the rights of gun owners. The best solution is one that decreases gun violence and get the maximum support from the public and elected officials.
THE AVAILIBITY OF GUNS AND AMMUNITION
The availability of guns and ammunition is a contributing factor in the increase gun violence in the United States. There is little disagreement that in the Unites States guns and ammunition are easily accessible. Whether they are purchased legally or illegally, guns and ammunition have never been easier to acquire. With this in mind, one would think that an advance regulation or tracking system would be in place in the United States. The true is no one wants to confront this issue. I think that most people are either for gun control or against gun control and most politicians vote to stay in office not to find a solution. I see the solution as somewhere in the middle. It seems that some questions should have simple answers. Should a civilian own a gun or a magazine clip that holds twenty to thirty rounds? Any rations person would probably say no. What are the scenarios or situations that a non-military person would need that much fire power? The debate would never end for those who support these guns and high capacity magazine clips. They probably will point to the Second Amendment or to the fact these guns and high capacity ammunition clips are legal and they are not breaking any laws. Whatever the reason, the people who wants these high powered guns and high capacity ammunition clips are not going to give them up. Until there are laws to regulate these guns and ammunition, the United State will continue to have an unlimited supply.
Guns sales and ammunition sales usually increase when the federal government starts making proposals to the current guns laws. After the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, there was an initial outcry to do something about the vast amounts of guns and ammunition in the United States. The view appeared to change somewhat when the federal government started to make plans to change current gun laws. Isn't it ironic that some of the same people crying out for changes, was the main one rejecting it? This is a perfect illustration of how the gun debate has become so perplexing. On one hand, many Americans cries and are sickened that one person can kill so many innocent children. They feel helpless are convinced that some authority should have been able to prevent this act or at least make it less tragic. And on the other hand, many America are reluctant to support the changes necessary to stop or slow this kind of tragedy. The ideas of new gun laws are always needed in the aftermath of a tragic incident. That seems to be some kind of a comforting thought people have after a tragic event. I guess people want to feel that they care and can sympathize with the victims and the best way sometimes to do that is to demand change even if you don't mean it.
GUNS AND AMMUNITION AND THE LAW
The lack of gun laws has contributed to the increase availability of guns and ammunition in the United States. I think this is a true statement for several reasons. There is little to no regulations on ammunition sales. To the unknowing public, there appears to be some kind of regulation in place to oversee the gun industry. There are some guidelines that a person must follow, when purchasing firearms but there are so many loopholes. Let look at a few of those loopholes. There are currently no restrictions on buying guns and ammunition in a private sale. I mean if I wanted to sell a gun, ammunition or ammunition clips in a private sale. There would be no papers to fill out or no regulator agency to report the sale to. I know, in some states and cities, this isn't the case but in most jurisdictions this is the case. There are currently no federal laws addressing the sale of guns and ammunition in a private transaction. In many states, guns sales laws are only pertinent to gun dealers with licenses to sale firearms.
Ammunition can be bought very easily on the internet from sites like bulkammo.com and midwayusa.com. These internet sites are allowed to sale large quantities of ammunition to any buyer, even ones without a background check. These online sites are not regulated the same way that guns stores are regulated. These online sites are the easiest places to but high capacity clips. These sites are only required to keep records of sales. In the Colorado theater shooting authorities found an AR-15 rifle drum magazine on shooter James Holmes, capable of carrying 100 rounds, and the police chief said thousands of rounds of ammunition for various weapons had been bought online in the weeks prior to the shooting.
According to CNN Wire, Thom Patterson on July 21 2012, Police took suspect James Holmes, 24, into custody Friday after they say he set off two devices and sprayed the theater with bullets from an AR-15, a 12-gauge shotgun and at least one of two .40-caliber handguns police have recovered. Police Chief Dan Oates said Friday night that Holmes had purchased four guns at "local metro gun shops," and bought over 6,000 rounds of ammunition through online transactions. "
This incident shows how easy it is to get ammunition and high capacity ammunition magazines in the United States. What if there was a mandatory requirement to report all transactions that exceeds 500 rounds? There is no guarantee that it would have prevented the shooting but it may have given police time to investigate the shooter. What rights are being violated in a case like this? There are no logical reasons for a civilian to acquire this much fire power. This is not a Second Amendment issue. The lack of concrete regulations, relating to ammunition and high capacity ammunition magazines, are a great contributor to these kinds of incidents.
GUN SHOW LOOPHOLES
The sales of guns and ammunition at gun shows and gun fairs are not well regulated. Private sales are permitted at many gun shows. There is no background check done on most transactions. The buyer has no guarantee that the gun is clean. There is a possibility that criminals can buy guns at gun shows. Gun show organizers are not required to check potential buyers for past criminal activity. Criminal can easily buy guns from private sellers because a background check is not required. 1. In most states, gun sales and ammunition sale are not reported to any regulation board. In some states, such as Arizona, guns are not registered by any licensing or monitoring association. Gun sales are only record in that particular store in many states. There is possibility that a mental ill or unstable person can buy a gun or ammunition.
Gun sales, ammunition and ammunition magazine sales are not well regulated at gun shows. According to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has prevented nearly 1.8 million criminals and other prohibited purchasers from buying guns. The law also has a deterrent effect-prohibited purchasers are less likely to try to buy guns when they know comprehensive background check requirements are in place. There is a very large loophole at gun shows. It all depends on what states you are in. There are currently 33 states that require no background check on firearms that are bought at gun shows. There are six states that require universal background checks on all firearm sales at gun shows; they included (IL, NY, OR, RI CA, CO,). There are three states that require background checks on all handgun sales made at gun shows; they included (CT, MD, and PA). There are seven states that require purchasers to obtain a permit and undergo a background check before buying a handgun; they included (HI, IA, MA, MI, NJ, NC, and NE). Florida allows its counties to regulate gun shows by requiring background checks on all firearms purchases at these events. This information is available on the FBI website. With this information, a criminal can easily find a state that has fewer restrictions. A criminal who lives in California and wanted to buy a firearm, can leave the state to purchase a firearm. The criminal will have trouble in the home state but can acquire an identification card in Arizona. Once this criminal has a state issued identification card, has can purchase a gun at many gun shows in Arizona. That is a major loophole in the gun buying system. A FBI background check does not apply to a person like that. He knows that he has little or no chance of getting a gun in California, but his chances are increased in Arizona. Gun show organizers are not required to check potential buyers for past criminal activity.
Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not "engaged in the business" of selling firearms to sell guns without a license-and without processing any paperwork. That means that two out of every five guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check. The buyer has no guarantee that the gun is clean. There is a possibility that criminals can buy guns that are not regulated.
WHAT CAN BE DONE
What can be done legally? Congress has not passed any meaningful gun laws, since the Assault Weapons Ban Laws expired on September 13, 2004. There have been efforts recently by Congress and the President to make changes to existing gun laws. An article in The New York Times, on January 3, 2013 by Adam Eisgrau explores "How to get a new assault- weapon bans through Congress." In this article, Mr. Eisgrau explains what processes are necessary for a new Assault- Weapons Ban law to pass and what will cause it to fail. According to Eisgrau Diane Feinstein has been attempting for over twenty years to get adequate gun laws passed. In recent months, Diane Feinstein has proposed several laws to restrict gun and ammunition availability. She has introduced a ban on some assault weapons. She has introduced a ban on ammunition clips larger than 10. In an article, on December 26, 2012, in The Washington Post, Scott Wilson and Phillip Rucker wrote that "President Obama calls on Congress to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazine." President Obama has made several references and proposals for more gun control. President Obama proposed a ban on military-style assault weapons. President Obama proposed a reduction of ammunition magazine capacity. President Obama proposed stiffer background checks on gun buyers. These are some of the recent proposals that Congress and the President have made.
Congress and the President must make every effort to protect the Second Amendment. This is the key to getting support from many gun advocates. They Congress and the President should engage all right wingers that attempt to dilute the conversation about gun control and right to bear arms. There are gun advocates, such as Bill O'Brien, writer for Guns & Ammo Magazine, who states "we should get high capacity magazines while we can." These advocates are part of the problem and must be discredited. These gun advocates are promoting the idea that that government wants to take law abiding citizens guns. The shooter in the Colorado theater was able to get vast amounts of ammunition and ammunition magazines without any problems. There should be a law that requires all sales of this magnitude to be reported to some government agency. Think about it this way, In the United states it is impossible to but 50 case of baby formula in one transaction but it is okay to buy over a thousand rounds of ammunition in one transaction.
THE INFLUENCE OF THE NRA
The influence of the NRA must be challenged by our elected officials, media and the public. There is probably no other organization that puts so much fear in Congress, than the NRA. The NRA has too must power and influence over Congress. The NRA contributes to Congressman, who supports their position and fight to remove member of Congress that don't. Members of Congress are reluctant to support any legislation that includes gun control or assault-weapons bans. Has anyone asked the question? Why does the NRA have so much power over elected officials? They simple answer is money but the accurate answer may be something more evil than money. It may be power. It may be the desire of the politicians to remain in a comfortable position. Most Republicans and many Democrats will not take a position that the NRA don't support. In other words, they don't want to give the NRA any reason to be against them. There are no Republicans that are willing to go record supporting gun control, even when that included changes to the faulted background check system. With that in mind, Democrats are the key to getting some gun control passed. In a recent USA Today article, entitled "Democrats ready to challenge NRA's clout in gun debate" writer Fredreka Schouten points to the increase in the Democrats increasing their rhetoric for more gun control.
The NRA has not made any reasonable proposal to the gun debate. After the Newton, Connecticut shooting, they one made one significant proposal. The proposal was to put armed security in all schools. That may be a good proposal but they offered nothing on guns, ammunition, ammunition magazines or background checks. The only solution to increased gun violence can't be more guns. The NRA opposes all of the Obama administration's main proposals: the assault-weapons ban, ammunition-capacity restrictions, and extension of instant background checks to all gun sales. Since the NRA is not a government organization, it should have no influence on the laws on the United States. The NRA has not won any elections nor has it been appointed by any citizens of the United States; it doesn't have the authority to demand anything in relation to guns. Congress has the authority to pass laws in this country, not the NRA
The NRA has supported more proposals in the past but has changed in recent years. The NRA has changed their position on background checks. They had previously supported universal background checks. They do not want private sales to have background checks. They want to continue the current system, which requires all license dealers to do back ground checks. They do not want any restrictions on ammunition or ammunition magazines. They do not want any restrictions on assault weapons. In reality, the NRA has no interest in reducing gun violence nor do they have any interest in making communities safer. There only interest is keeping the NRA the first and only spokesman on the gun debate.
CONCLUSION
My initial statement was that if guns, ammunition and ammunition magazines were regulated or monitored better; there would be a decrease in overall gun violence. The availability of guns and ammunition are at the core of my position to reduce gun violence. If guns are ease to get; more people are likely to have them. If there is no way to track the people who buy guns; there will be no way to know when criminals, mentally ill or unstable people have guns. The loopholes, in buying guns and ammunition, must be address. There should be one universal standard to buy guns and ammunition in the United States.
The United States Congress and the President must present and pass laws that make the country safer, while protecting the rights of gun owners. Our elected officials, not the NRA, should debate what gun laws should be. The recent mass shooting have brought gun control and the gun debate our attention. Gun violence was a great problem before those mass shooting and will continue to be even after the next mass shootings. This is a sensitive matter many people but here are the facts. In many urban areas, African Americans and Hispanics are victims of gun violence all the time. It doesn't get the coverage by the media nor does America stop for a moment of silence. It's just business as usual. That's the way this goes in the country sometime; it's not a crisis until it hits your neighborhood. I made the argument that until gun violence is viewed as a national problem, the solutions to the problem can't and won't be found.
