Debate over gun control has no convenient villains
Mona Charen
Are you opposed to “common sense” gun laws? These are what liberals like Hillary Clinton are always proclaiming their support for. In their telling, expanding background checks, closing the “gun show loophole” and restricting Internet sales will, in the words of liberal columnist E. J. Dionne, limit “the carnage on our streets, in our schools and houses of worship, and at our movie theaters.” That’s not an argument; it’s moral grandstanding — and not a word of it holds up under scrutiny.
As someone who believes that the Second Amendment does not forbid all regulation of gun ownership, I am open to the idea of gun control. The facts, though, are stubborn things. We’ve always had plentiful guns in this country, but we haven’t always had the frequency of mass shootings in public places that have so disturbed us over the past couple of decades.
As many critics, including the fact checker at the Washington Post, have observed, President Obama’s suggestion that “A violent felon can buy the exact same weapon over the Internet with no background check, no questions asked” is rubbish. “A gun dealer must comply with federal laws that require gun sellers to have licenses and perform background checks ... without regard for whether the sale is arranged on the Internet or in person,” quoth the Washington Post.
None of the reforms proposed by Obama would have prevented the mass shootings in Newtown or Roseburg or Aurora or San Bernardino. As the AP showed, the killers in those cases legally purchased their weapons and passed background checks; used straw purchasers, which is already illegal; or used weapons owned by family members. The Charleston killer should not have passed the background check — he had a drug arrest on his record.
Are we in the grip of an epidemic of gun violence? Writing in Reason magazine, Brian Doherty notes that the gun homicide rate in 1993 — when there were approximately 192 million guns in circulation — was 7 per 100,000 Americans. In 2013, the gun murder rate had declined to 3.8 per 100,000, by which time there were approximately 300 million guns in private hands. More guns do not seem to equal more gun murders.
Is the “gun show loophole” responsible for lots of guns in the hands of bad actors? Doubtful. A 2001 survey of federal prisoners found that only 1 percent had purchased their weapons at gun shows, and as Charles C.W. Cooke has patiently explained, the “gun show loophole” is a misnomer in any case. Federal firearms licensed sellers must perform background checks no matter where they transact business; private sellers are under no obligation to perform checks whether they sell from their kitchen or at a gun show.
Showcasing one’s feelings about mass shootings — especially when you can ratchet up your indignation at the “gun lobby” and Republicans — is emotionally satisfying. But the truth is that no one really knows why we’ve suffered mass shootings in such numbers in recent years. It may be partly the copycat effect; or the lure of the publicity shooters invariably receive; the decline of character-building institutions like churches and families (the vast majority of mass shooters have been males raised in divorced or single-parent homes); or the failure of our mental-health system to provide treatment to those who need it most.