SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY

PPA 746: ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY

FINAL PROJECT
Gun Control Policy in the U.S.
By
Chuaungo Lalsawta

Introduction:

Gun Control Policy in the U.S., I believe, is among the most controversial and

intractable issues in America. Every assassination, sensational murder or massacre is greeted

with vociferous demand for tighter gun control policy. The recent mass killings in Virginia

Tech. on April 16, 2007 (preceded by similar massacres at Amish schoolhouse in October

last, Columbine High School on April 20, 1999, and at University of Texas at Austin on

August 1, 1966, & etc ) exacerbates the debate on Gun Control Policy.

Policy Background:

Gun Control Policy of the present administration is difficult to appreciate without

having background knowledge of the gun laws in America. The Second Amendment of the

Constitution is the root cause of the debate as the proponents of gun rights rely on it to assert

their fundamental right to bear arms. A history of gun laws as per ‘Your Internet Guide to an

understanding of Policy Issues’1 can be summarized as follows:

The U.S. Congress passed it first major gun control law in 1934 by regulating the sale

of fully automatic weapons like machine gun. In 1938, it passed another law by which gun

sellers are required to obtain license and persons convicted of violent felonies are prohibited

from buying guns. The Gun Control Act of 1968 regulates importation of guns, expands gun-

dealer licensing requirements, and expands the list of persons not eligible to purchase guns to

include persons convicted of any non-business related felony, minors, persons found to be

mentally incompetent, and users of illegal drugs. The 1986 federal legislation establishes

mandatory penalties for the use of a gun in the commission of a federal crime and prohibits

bullets capable of penetrating bulletproof clothing. The 1990 legislation bans the
1
http://www.newsbatch.com/guncontrol.htm
manufacturing and importation of semi-automatic assault weapons. In 1994, Congress passed

what is known as “Brady Bill” which imposed a five day waiting period for purchasers of

handguns and required local law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks of all

purchasers. The Supreme Court held the background check provision as unconstitutional

because it infringed on state's rights. The law was revised for instant background check by

gun dealers through a national computer system without the need of a waiting period. In

1994, Congress also passed a ban on certain types of assault weapons but this ban has expired

as the House could not pass the bill for its extension beyond 2004. States also have their

separate laws regulating firearms such as- safe-keeping beyond the reach of children,

prohibiting concealed weapons, requiring license for carrying concealed weapons, restricting

secondary sale of weapons, liming purchase of handgun to one a month and so on.

President Bush’s Gun Control Policy:

In the wake of the massacre in Virginia Tech on April 1, 2007, White House

spokeswoman Dana Perino2 said President Bush continues to believe in Americans'

constitutional right to have firearms, within the law. "If there are changes to the president's

policy, then we will let you know,” she said. “But we've had a consistent policy of ensuring

that the Justice Department is enforcing all of the gun laws that we have on the books, and

making sure that [violators] are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." I could not find a

single consolidated policy statement of the President regarding his gun control policy.

However from various sources such as speeches, debates, interviews etc culled out of the

internet, I summarize what I understand to be President Bush’s Gun Control Policy 3

as

follows:

2
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070416-1.html
3
http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/More_George W_Bush_Gun_Control.htm.
Sources: GeorgeWBush.com: ‘Issues: Policy Points Overview’ Apr 2, 2000 .,Third Bush-Kerry debate, in Tempe AZ Oct 13, 2004 ., St.
Louis debate Oct 17, 2000., Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000., The Economist, “Issues 2000” special Sep
30, 2000., NY Times, page A10, part of “Renewing America’s Purpose” May 13, 2000., GeorgeWBush.com: ‘Issues: Policy Points
Overview’ Apr 2, 2000., Judy Holland, Hearst Newspapers Apr 14, 2000., GeorgeWBush.com/News/ “1999 Texas Legislative Record”
Jun 25, 1999., L.A. Times May 1, 1999., Katharine Q. Seelye, New York Times, p. A20 May 5, 2000., Des Moines Iowa GOP Debate
Dec 13, 1999., “A Charge to Keep”, p. 35-36. Dec 9, 1999., Dan Balz, The Washington Post Apr 25, 1999., Time Magazine, p. 38 Jun
28, 1999., Press Release, Temple TX Apr 20, 2000
 He continues his support to law-abiding American’s constitutional right to own guns

to protect their families and home.

 He opposes government-mandated registration of guns owned by law abiding citizens.

 He would not initiate any new Gun Control law, except possibly tougher penalties for

criminals using guns.

 He supports stronger enforcement of existing gun laws, rather than creating new laws.

He would support providing more funding for aggressive gun law enforcement programs

such as Project Exile in Richmond, Virginia,

 He would support measures requiring that trigger locks be sold with guns if Congress

passes such a bill,. He opposes mandatory requirement of safety locks but supports

voluntary ones, and favors providing matching federal funding to states for its distribution

to gun owners.

 He supports extension of the ban on assault weapons, if Congress passes such a bill.

 He supports laws allowing citizens to carry concealed-weapons for self-defense.

 He supports banning the importation of foreign made, “high-capacity” ammunition clips.

 He supports restriction on (frivolous) lawsuits on taxpayers’ money, against gun makers

without prior consent of government authorities.

 He favors instant background checks (rather than three-day waiting periods) of purchasers

in shops and at gun shows by allowing gun show promoters to access the instant check

system on behalf of vendors.

 He supports banning juveniles from possession of semi-automatic “assault” weapons.

 He supports increasing the minimum age for possession of a handgun from 18 to 21.

 He supports automatic detention [until released by a judge’s order] for juveniles who

carry firearms illegally or commit crimes with a gun. He supports expanded beds for

housing violent juvenile offenders.

 He supports holding states & schools accountable for keeping students safe.
 He supports promoting character education in public schools to counter violence in

school and public places.

 In short, President Bush seems to adopt laissez-faire or ‘let sleeping dogs lie’ policy

with regards to gun control laws. Even in the midst of cacophony raised by pro gun

control group or pro gun right group, he would not initiate any change in the existing

laws, notwithstanding his conditional support for some new measures.

Gun and Crime Data:

In the absence of law requiring license or registration for firearms or national register

of firearms, it is obviously difficult to collect accurate data. Proponents and opponents of gun

control may also have vested interest in manipulating statistics to strengthen their respective

stands. However, in order to have some rough idea about the significance of this controversy,

I give some data available on the internet4.

About 40% of all US homes have guns; 81% of Americans say that gun control will

be an important issue in determining which Congressional candidate to vote for; 91% of

Americans say that there should be at least minor restrictions on gun ownership; 57% of

Americans say that there should be major restrictions or a ban. In 1996, 140 children died

after being accidentally shot. About 1,500 children are hurt by guns every year. About 39%

of homicide is estimated to be due to firearms. According a 1994 Department of Justice

survey, about 35% of American households own 192 million firearms. Some other estimates

are slightly higher. Handguns account for about 35% of this total. Slightly less than half of

gun owners own both handguns and shotguns or rifles. The typical gun owner is male, middle

class; college educated and lives in a small town or rural area. Gun ownership varies greatly

by region and there is a significant correlation between the percentage of handgun ownership

and the rate of gun-related homicide.

4
http://www.ontheissues.org/Background_Gun_Control.htm
 The Stakeholders:

A large segment of American society is affected by the controversy over gun control

policy. Generally Democrats proclaim support for gun control while Republicans do not.

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Coalition To Stop Gun Violence etc are the major

lobby groups for gun control. Led by National Rifle Association, gun lobbies such as Gun

Owners of America, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, American

Hunters and Shooters Association, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, etc are

very active in opposing further gun control measures. During elections, the pro gun right

lobbies raise and donate huge fund, even much more than the pro gun control lobbies. It

appears that these lobbies have exerted strong influence on the members of the Congress as

well as on the President when it comes to legislations on gun control.

The Debate, Arguments & Counter-arguments:

In spite of some restrictive laws already in existence, gun control supporters still

believe that gun control regulations are too weak. Even if guns cannot be totally abolished, at

least their sale, possession and use should be further restricted. They want trigger locks on all

guns, a federal law authorizing only one handgun purchase per month and raising the age for

gun ownership from 18 to 21. They contend that the fundamental duty to protect life of

citizens is with the government rather than with the individuals. They postulate that fewer

guns mean fewer deaths from homicide, suicide, and unintentional deaths.

On the other hand, opponents of gun control led by the National Rifle Association

(NRA) maintain that an unregulated right to bear arms is guaranteed to citizens. They claim

that gun owners use their weapons for self-defense and to deter crime much more frequently

than they use for criminal offence. They are law abiding citizens who put greater trust in

individualism than in the government to protect their safety. Although government is tasked

with an obligation to protect citizens collectively, it can not guarantee such protection.
 Values & Issues involved:

At the heart gun control politics is the relationship between the rights of the citizens

and the government's duty to provide for the common defense versus the government's

authority to regulate firearms and duty to maintain order 5. Gun Control Policy involves the

following issues/values: Constitutional/Legal-: Does Second Amendment guarantee

individual’s absolute right to bear arms? Is right to bear arms a fundamental or derivative

right? Political-: Does Government have right and authority to regulate gun? If it does, is it

effective public policy to regulate guns? Practical-: Does gun ownership cause or prevent

crime? Does decrease or increase of firearms in private hands increase or decrease incidents

of crime? Ethical-: What should the balance be between an individual’s right of self defense

through gun ownership and the people’s interest in maintaining public safety?

Policy’s Consequences, Risks and Cost-Benefit:

Gun culture appears to be entrenched deep inside the psyche of Americans and Gun

has been equated with America’s heritage, symbol of power, masculinity, freedom, respect

and patriotism. With an estimated 200 million guns in private hands of 59 million Americans,

outright abolition of gun seems outright unfeasible from the socio-economic cost point of

view, let alone constitutional hurdle. Attempt to ban guns may meet the same fate as

prohibition. Effective enforcement will be virtually impossible and the cost will be

prohibitive. Complete freedom without any gun restriction will be as dangerous and risky as

complete ban. If the President does not play proactive role in enforcing appropriate gun

control, his credibility may suffer. If the gun control enthusiasts attribute crime and murders

to the inadequacy of gun control laws, they may even contemplate seeking compensation

from the government. The consequences of such inaction may overwhelm the costs of

bringing further reasonable restrictions now and their enforcement.

Policy’s Consistency with Public Integrity:

5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States
 The President favors certain restrictive measures like increasing minimum age for

possession of firearms from 18-21, requirement of safety lock, and a ban on assault weapons

but does not favor initiating new gun control law. There appears to be ambivalence in his

policy or a sort of contradiction in these policy statements. Personal integrity demands

consistency between inner beliefs and public actions. Integrity depends upon people

possessing the self-discipline and moral courage to act on a commitment even if doing so

requires sacrifice and effort (Dobel, 1999 p3,4)6. Though legislation is primarily the duty of

the Congress, yet, the President, I believe can exert sufficient influence on the Congress or

individual members of the Congress to initiate legislation, if he feels strongly about the

policy. But he apparently does no such thing. May be, he is paying merely lips services and is

not really committed to those measures which call for fresh legislation. Or may be, after he

weighs the pros and cons of alternatives or the likely consequences of fresh legislature, he

considers it more prudent to lie low and wait for an opportune time to initiate actions.

‘Foresight requires leaders to try to think through the consequences of action and avoid

actions whose probable negative consequences would overwhelm their good effects’ (Dobel,

1999, 201). May be he does not want to take sides in this controversy or he felt so indebted to

one of the lobbies that he is reluctant to initiate measures against the interest of the group. Or

he might have thought of testing the effectiveness of the existing policy by accelerating

enforcement of the law. ‘The relation of prudence to public integrity flows from the

“effectiveness imperative” (Dobel, 1999, 18)’.

Too many laws or too restrictive laws are difficult to implement, and if enforcement is

lax, the public may lose their respect for the laws. Therefore foreseeing the consequences of

such a law, he might have preferred to use his resources for enforcement than bring in fresh

laws. ‘The political reality is that passing laws and making policy is a complex and difficult

process of building coalitions’ (Dobel, 1999, 19). The provision for 5-day waiting period for

6
Dobel, J. Patrick, ‘Public Integrity’ John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1999, p 3-4.
purchasers in the Brady law was struck down by the Supreme Court, not because it was bad

otherwise, but because it infringed the jurisdiction of the state.

Conclusion:

Complete ban of guns is neither morally justified nor legally sound in view of the

Second Amendment. Total ban of gun even by another amendment to the constitution,

though idealistic it may sound, is not practical. The cost of enforcement will be too high as

it was for prohibition. However, whether or not the right to bear arms by citizens is

guarantied by the Second Amendment and is a fundamental or derivative right, governments

have legitimate powers and responsibilities to restrict or regulate guns. No privilege, even a

fundamental right, is absolute; it is always circumscribed by others’ rights. The right of one

has to be moderated when it infringes on the rights of others. The preponderance of firearms

and incidents of crime in the US lend support to proper regulation of firearms. Most countries

impose restrictions, including licensing of firearms. Perhaps the President should be more

proactive and use his influence to bring legislation incorporating the remaining agenda such

as increasing the minimum age for possession of firearms from 18-21, ban on assault

weapons, provision of trigger lock etc.

Governments impose excise duty on liquor to discourage or reduce its consumption.

They also impose income tax, vehicle tax etc for various reasons. Gun tax may be imposed to

discourage its ownership and to compensate the cost of enforcing gun laws. Civil liability

may be imposed on the owners of guns if the guns are misused by any body or if they cause

any illegal harm to any body. Many countries mandate third party insurance of motor

vehicles to ensure prompt and adequate compensation to victims of road accidents. Hence

such insurance scheme for gun will make possession of guns less attractive, reduce gun

related violence and also bring some solace to the gun control supporters.

****