Gun Control
An End to Violence
Welcome to my web page on Gun Control. My name is Michele Burdi and I am a student at the University of Illinois Champaign Urbana. This page is dedicated to the recent victims of the deadly shootout in Littleton, Colorado.
The fire over the gun control debate in America is fueled by two sides, the National Rifle Association (N.R.A.) and their stand on the constitutional right to bear arms, and those fighting for gun control to end gun violence. The debate between the N.R.A. and gun control activists is further complicated by politics, laws, and morals. The Second Amendment of the Constitution states, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" (Shalhope 127). When our forefathers wrote this amendment, over two hundred years ago, they were certainty insuring the right for the people of the newly formed states to form militias to protect themselves. However, it is questioned today weather our forefathers could have foreseen the use of weapons in today’s society. The N.R.A.’s argument to such violence is that guns do no kill people, people kill people; however, people who kill are very often holding guns.
Gun control activists believe that a real attempt at banning or strict regulation of assault and handguns could certainly reduce gun violence in our society. They are justified in their views because current legislation such as the Brady Act is insufficient and gun violence continues to claim the lives of innocent people.
The contemporary debate over gun control has been argued for 30 years. In 1968, a national revolution against gun violence prompted congress to pass the Gun Control Act. This federal legislation banned most interstate sales of firearms, licensed most gun dealers, and barred felons, minors, and the mentally ill from owning firearms. Since then, some changes have been made to the regulation. The most popular of those changes was the addition of the Brady Bill. In 1993, President Clinton singed the Brady Bill and the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act became a law. The Brady Act of 1993 increased the importance of conducting national criminal history record checks on potential firearm purchasers (Chaiken 5). According to Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., director of the National Conference on Criminal History Records:
November 30, 1998 has passed, and Congress immediately renewed the Brady Act. It lacks, however, the originally mandated five-day waiting period. Gun control advocates see this as a loss. The waiting period was important to provide a cooling off period for buyers who might be making purchases in a state of anger. Additionally, the Brady Act suffers from further limitation—background checks are required only for sales through federally licensed dealers, although 40 percent of sales are transferred through avenues like gun shows, flea markets, and classified ads(Chaiken 5).
The gun control debate is further complicated because of political issues. Just as views are split amongst gun control activists and members of the N.R.A., politicians also have difficulty coming to a consensus on this matter. Most Democrats support the gun control activists, and Republicans uphold the views of the N.R.A. For both the Democrats and the Republicans, maintaining each group’s loyalty at election time influences their decisions. Because of this counterbalancing influence, gun control legislation remains at a stalemate, and critical legislation is never enacted. However, recent shootings by teenagers have brought the attention to many American citizens who question our country’s legislation on gun control. For example, in Pearl, Mississippi, on October 1, 1997, 16-year old Luke Woodham killed his mother and then shot nine students at his school, killing two of them, including his former girlfriend. On December 1, 1997, a 14-year old boy, Michael Carneal, opened fire on a student prayer circle in a school in West Paducah, Kentucky, killing three and wounding another five students. In March 1998, Mitchell Johnson, 13, and Andrew Golden, 11, fired 27 shots at Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Arkansas, killing four classmates and a teacher. Finally, in Springfield, Oregon, on May 20, 1998, 15-year old Kip Kinkel shot dead his parents and, the following morning, killed two classmates and injured several others in his school. In a study of school crime, the United States department of Education reported that 6,000 children had been expelled from American schools in 1997 for bringing guns and bombs to class (Singh 1). In lieu of these events, many Americans question the availability of guns.
Many people against gun control, especially the N.R.A., say that instances such as guns being brought to school our out of parental carelessness. Again the N.R.A. believes that guns do not kill people, people kill people. They see their views justified in the Constitution and structure their entire argument around it. Robert E. Shalhope, a professor of History at the University of Oklahoma, states:
In today's society, guns are being used for different purposes. An average of 14 children a day and 40,000 Americans a year are killed due to gun violence (Anderson 28). The N.R.A. and gun control activists need to come to a compromise, stricter laws need to be enacted and enforced. In Britain for example, trends involving firarm use are dramatically decreasing. A total ban on private ownership of handguns went into effect in Britain in 1998. The ban was a result of a public outcry over the 1996 massacre of 16 school children and their teacher by a crazed loner in Dublane, Scotland. Under the handgun ban, owners of weapons over .22 caliber had to turn in their weapons within a year, or face jail terms of up to 10 years. So far, more than 140,000 guns have been surrendered, and $50 million dollars in compensation has been paid (Witkin 44). The enforcement of a handgun ban by the British government, reflects its true concern for the welfare and safety of its citizens!
