CAN GUN VIOLENCE IN AMERICA BE PREVENTED?
Perhaps the Florida massacre will prove to be the turning point for meaningful change in the country’s gun laws
IS it possible to stop gun violence in the United States? No, but it is possible to minimise it. The massacre of 17 students at a Florida high school this month offers a prime example of how laws can be changed to reduce the likelihood of mass shootings.
In Florida, a person over the age of 18, with no criminal record or documented history of mental illness, can purchase most commercially-sold firearms, including the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle used by a 19-year-old at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Therefore, access to this powerful weapon would have been much more difficult, in this instance, by changing two laws: raising to 21 the minimum age to purchase any firearm and restricting the availability of this type of weapon to the military and police forces.
The oft-repeated objection to any restriction is that, prior to such a ban taking effect, gunlovers will go into overdrive purchasing these war weapons. But this can be easily resolved, with passage of a third law: making the possession of such weapons a felony. Many Americans would vehemently object to such a law, but very few would be willing to violate it.
Gun proponents often rattle off claims about the US Constitution’s second amendment without bothering to address its limitations. Ten years ago, the US Supreme Court, in the case Heller v. District of Columbia, held that the second amendment grants individuals the right to possess firearms. But the court did not even hint that restrictions on that right were unconstitutional. Indeed, no constitutional right is absolute — not even those rights considered the most basic, such as speech and religion. (The speech right does not extend to endangering others with “fighting words”, and religious freedom does not allow parents to refuse, on religious grounds, lifesaving medical treatment for their children.)
The fact of the matter is, guncontrol laws vary tremendously from state to state, and restrictive laws — for example, on minimum age and waiting periods for purchasing firearms, and carrying concealed weapons — are perfectly legal. Furthermore, the Federal Government can pass its own gun-control laws, as it has done on rare occasion. In 1968, for example, congress passed a law prohibiting the interstate trade of handguns, and in 1993, passed the Brady Act, which requires background checks on most firearms sellers.
The National Rifle Association (NRA), the nation’s leading gunadvocacy interest group, insists that most American adults agree with its hard-line resistance to virtually any form of gun control. But opinion surveys suggest otherwise. A 2017 Gallup poll found that 51 per cent of Americans favoured more gun legislation, and about one-half of the public wishes to see existing laws enforced more strictly. So, why is it so difficult to pass laws that most Americans favour?
Part of the answer is federalism, the division of governmental power between the national and state governments. Even if most Americans feel one way about guns, a majority of those in a single state — in this instance, Florida — may disagree, and federalism weighs in favour of the people in the state. Another impediment to change is saliency.
The number one concern of members of congress and state legislatures is getting reelected. But even if a majority of voters in a legislator’s district favour gun control, the issue may not resonate as much with gun-control advocates as it does with guncontrol opponents. Thus, taking a majority position on the issue may cost a candidate votes. This accounts for a good deal of the NRA’s potency. The group targets anti-gun legislators and attacks them furiously — and there is no group with the political or financial resources sufficient to effectively counter such attacks.
The lack of meaningful guncontrol legislation frustrates millions of Americans, especially following a tragedy such as the one in Florida, or the 2017 slaughter of 58 people in Las Vegas, or the many other shootings in recent years. But there are two reasons to be optimistic that change may be on the horizon.
First, Americans have changed their collective mind on other things, such as women’s rights and racial segregation, and change has been achieved. Second, the recent spate of gun-related killings has caused national revulsion unmatched in times past, aided by round-the-clock television coverage reminding viewers, with alarming visuals, of the carnage owing in part to lax gun laws.
The popular demand for change can influence legislators to act. Perhaps, the Florida massacre will prove to be the turning point for meaningful change in the country’s gun laws.
The fact of the matter is, gun-control laws vary tremendously from state to state, and restrictive laws — for example, on minimum age and waiting periods for purchasing firearms, and carrying concealed weapons — are perfectly legal.
The writer is a faculty member in HELP University’s American Degree Programme