Firearms: State vs.

Federal 1

Firearms State vs. Federal:

The encouragement why firearms are a state issue.

Espinoza, Ervin

Salt Lake Community College
Firearms: State vs. Federal 2

Abstract

This scholarly material will begin by giving a description of what Federalism is in its entirely.

This will then provide us with a valuable foundation of how firearms are viewed as most

importanting how they should be handled. Primarily in regulations as these are of great

importance due to the constitutional right to own a weapon who throughout history has taken

lives. Therefore with supporting factual evidence retrieved from peer-reviewed articles. We

come to a conclusion that it is not necessary for the federal government to regulate firearms,

however how it must be the individual state's responsibility. To act as a one delegate based on

their states stats associated to firearms that reflects the state's needs. Although the federal

government may have a general view on firearms and it may be a positive perception. A general

view is far from critical thinking about such a controversial topic. Due to the many different

involvement of firearms. In fact certain city’s within a state itself. Therefore firearms are

overwhelming for federal control. While at the same time upholding our democratic system

based on the decision The Second Amendment of the U.S Constitution consist of. We have the

responsibly to elect officials within our own community due to personal experience. Eventually

leading to the best way to combat irresponsible use of firearms is by leaving all decision making

to the individual state and their elected educated representative.

Keywords: State, Federal, Federalism, Mass Shooting, Responsibility, Firearms

To begin we must understand what Federalism is how it is proceeded as within our

democratic form of government. Federalism is defined as the distribution of power in a

government between central authority and constituent (​Federalism. (n.d.). Retrieved June 29,
Firearms: State vs. Federal 3

2017). To receive a full understanding pertaining to this article critical thinking will be needed

to analyze and detail Federalism from a general definition.

There​fore we understand that federalism within the United States is understood as the

central power being the federal government this includes its three main branches the Legislative,

Executive, and Judicial. Then onto the secondary half of the definition understanding that each

state is a constituent of the central government. That also have their own smaller political system

within them. This allows for separation of state and federal law while have some Law being

universal.

With the understanding of what federalism is and the overall view of how it functions

within the United States. It provides a solid foundation to claim it is a proficient system

especially in broad topics such as firearm regulations. Where the the topic must be handled by a

state government rather than the federal government. This is due to being a huge topic to take

control of the work in metaphorical sense is too much. Therefore it must be disturbed among

fifty states. Each state considering their own stats regarding firearms.

Each state is different in many aspects politics, majority beliefs, and income. Included in

this variation comes the tragedy of mass shootings. Within the last fifty years of mass shooting

records of valuable numbers that associate firearms within mass shootings. With this valuable

information we are able to logically analyze why firearms are meant to be regulated by each

state.

Beginning with the comparison of mass shootings stats state to state.To set the foundation

of this general idea there has been a total of 889 victims due to firearm related mass shootings.

With the total of guns used being 248 of those 141 obtained legally. 102 victims of the total
Firearms: State vs. Federal 4

soley being in the state of Texas in comparison to the stats of the next four bordering states

cobine of twenty four. To go further comparing Texas’s 102 victims to none in the bordering

state of New Mexico (Berkowitz, B., Gamio, L., Lu, D., Uhrmacher, K., & Lindeman, T.,2017,

June 6, 50 years of U.S. mass shootings).

In this matter we are able to say that Texas where guns are legally consumed and sold

there is a higher issue with firearm related mass shootings. Comparing to other states of course

where mass shootings have not been such a great concern. Furthermore we come to the logical

aspect that Texas needs to regulate their firearm process this on the foundation that there is a

problem. However this is not the federal government's foundation to generally regulate guns

through the fifty states as a whole.

Due to the fact that there are states in which mass shootings have not become an issue

example of New Mexico. Where mass shootings are non-existent, this is an ideal comparison of

why the federal government shall not punish the entire population due to the fact that one of fifty

states can not govern their states morally in the right directions. To prevent these actions from

being engraved into our country’s historical time period.

It is a state's responsibility to act as a delegate in the topic of the firearm regulation. As a

delegate due to the fact that they must continue to protect the natural well being of each person

within their state. This is too large for the federal government to handle.

Yes as the government does also have the obligations to uphold our democratic system

and the well being of the population. That includes the any threats that may arise domestic or

abroad this including firearms. While upholding the foundation of our greatness The Bill of

Rights (U.S. Const. amend. II) which clearly states “....the right of the people to keep and bear
Firearms: State vs. Federal 5

arms, shall not be infringed.” This is to be best produced by distributing the large topic of

firearms through each individual state.

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act 6 mandates background checks of gun

buyers, however only to licensed sellers this does not apply to John Doe selling to anyone he

wishes (D. 2014, The case for moderate gun control. ​Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal,​.) This

alone makes the spectrum of the problem has widen, making the issue of the guns logically

impossible for the the government to take control without the infringement of the right to bear

arms.

Conclusion

This is the cause of in what position the gun control status should be place as a state to state

governed topic rather than a federal government centralized topic. Due to the fact that all states

have a variety of thoughts in the firearm category. Also that we must uphold our rights within

each state due to the fact of it possibly being infringed if handed to one central power similar to a

monarchy. This is the cause of why firearm regulation is and needs to continue to be governed by

our elected state officials.
Firearms: State vs. Federal 6

Reference Page
Berkowitz, B., Gamio, L., Lu, D., Uhrmacher, K., & Lindeman, T. (2017, June 6). 50 years of U.S.

mass shootings: The victims, sites, killers and weapons. Retrieved July 08, 2017, from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/mass-shootings-in-america/

D. (2014). The case for moderate gun control. ​Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal,​ ​24​(1), 1-25

Federalism. (n.d.). Retrieved June 29, 2017, from

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/federalism

U.S. Const. Amend. II