Gun Law Reform Research Paper

Gun Law Reform in The United States

The issue of gun control reform has led to arguments in recent years because of the increased media coverage of shootings—the “media contagion” factor outlined by the American Psychological Association—which has caused the awareness of firearm danger to rise (Media). Further, the gun culture of the United States has promoted the widespread use of firearms since revolutionary times, making guns prevalent in society (Kennett). These factors have grim results, making the United States the leader of developed countries in gun homicides — with almost five times more gun deaths than in any other developed country (Quealy). These data found, in an article by Kevin Quealy, a journalist and co-professor at both

Joseph Blocher, a professor at Duke University, comments on one proposed solution to reform the process of getting a concealed carry permit in the United States. “The right to keep and bear arms does not encompass a right to carry guns in public for any reason whatsoever. It is equally clear, however, that some “causes” for gun ownership are constitutionally protected, and therefore cannot be excluded by a good cause requirement” (Blocher). He argues that while the right to own guns is not intrinsic in the Bill of Rights, there are certain times where it is covered in the constitution, so he defends the motion that would make it necessary to present a good reason to need a firearm in order to get a gun license. The Maryland proposal of this idea was addressed in Woolard v. Sheridan. Benson Legg, the judge presiding on the case stated, “A citizen may not be required to offer a ‘good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right’s existence is all he needs”

Following the 1996 Tasmania shooting in Australia, a strict gun policy was enacted banning long guns, and the Australian government started buying back guns. The effectiveness of this is analyzed by Philip Alpers, a professor at the Sydney School of Public Health. In order to possess a gun in Australia after the reform, one had to present a genuine cause, and in order to sell or transfer firearms, dealers must be licensed. In Addition to this, the government banned and bought back rapid-fire rifles and shotguns. From 1996 to 2006, 1.8 million of the 3.2 million guns in Australia were destroyed. It should be noted that this caused an immediate surge in buying unrestricted guns, and the importation of guns, but the public health benefit is perceivable. The risk of an Australian dying of firearm homicides fell 50% to 0.13 out of 100,000, and there has not been a mass homicide since (compared to 13 mass homicides in the prior 18 years)(see appendix B)(Alpers). 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton cited the Australia example as something worth looking into for the United States, and Nonetheless, the United States National Rifle Association criticized Clinton for promoting this, saying that the views were “out of touch with the American people” and “extreme” (Chozick). Alpers expounds on the original notion. He states that because the U.S. and Australia have different societies and legislation,