Callanan, 1

Jack Callanan

Professor Ferrara

English 1001

2 May 2024

Take Control Of Your Safety: An Analysis of the United States Gun Control Policies

As a result of increasing gun violence across America, there has been a rising call to

action to implement policies to stop this brutality. Since the beginning of American history, guns

have been intertwined with American culture whether their use is for self-defense, hunting, or

sport. Unfortunately, some people have taken advantage of having these guns and used them to

rob, harm, or kill innocent people. To combat these acts of violence, many people argue for

stricter gun control laws that will ensure gun owners are able to own and use them. Others

believe introducing more guns into our society will allow people to protect themselves. While

most people agree something needs to be done, the constant debate of how it should be done

stalls any change being made. I believe by enforcing stricter background checks, ending

loopholes, and tackling social issues that cause gun violence, we can decrease the amount of

armed violence and death in The United States of America.

Gun violence is an issue that affects everyone across the country because shootings can

happen anywhere and at any time. One location that is often targeted is schools. As a student, I

traverse the day constantly wondering, what would I do if there was an active shooter? While the

chances of this happening to me are slim, it is ignorant not to consider it a possibility. Sophie

Kjærvik, a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Injury and Violence Prevention Program at Virginia

Commonwealth University, shares that “firearms are the leading cause of death for children in

the US” (Kjærvik). This constant sense of paranoia follows me along with many other
 Callanan, 2

Americans throughout everyday life. Based on a survey I conducted, twenty-eight out of thirty

participants, or 93.3%, responded that they believe gun violence is an issue in America. This

overwhelming majority reveals that many people do not feel secure with the current gun situation

in America.

John Gramlich, who works for a nonpartisan organization called The Pew Research

Center that shares information regarding social issues including gun violence, shared how “about

eight-in-ten U.S. murders in 2021 – 20,958 out of 26,031, or 81% – involved a firearm. That

marked the highest percentage since at least 1968” (Gramlich). In addition to a steady increase in

the number of homicides, “the FBI found an increase in [mass shooting] incidents between 2000

and 2021. There were three such incidents in 2000. By 2021, that figure had increased to 61”

(Gramlich). Gramlich also references a study done by the Gun Violence Archive, which

discovered that 706 people died specifically from mass shootings in 2021. These statistics are

alarming as they reveal the issue is growing each year. It is apparent action needs to be taken

before the issue continues to escalate.

One reason for the rapidly increasing amount of gun violence can be explained by the

weak background checks while purchasing a gun. Jennifer Mascia, who works for The Trace, an

independent and nonprofit organization whose goal is to share information regarding gun

violence, claims “the overwhelming majority of gun background checks take just minutes” and

“only 2 percent result in a rejection” (“Federal Background Checks”). During these background

checks, the FBI searches databases such as The Interstate Identification Index and the National

Crime Information Center (NCIC) for any flagged information. Although these databases contain

information on criminal history, mental health issues, and a history of drug use, some people can

buy a gun without being flagged. Mascia explains that “some records never make it into the
 Callanan, 3

databases, and others are entered in a way that doesn’t make it crystal clear that the person is

barred from possessing guns” (Federal Background Checks). If the measures put in place to stop

a criminal from accessing a gun lack effectiveness, then new policies must be implemented to

strengthen these background checks so gun violence is reduced.

For someone's records to reach these databases, a state must voluntarily give their

information. As a result, there are instances where the state does not accurately or quickly report

data. Mascia mentions how “at the end of 2014 there were 7.8 million active-warrant records in

state warrant databases, but only about 2.1 million such records in the NCIC database” (“Federal

Background Checks”). In addition, some databases used to determine if a person is fit to buy a

gun do not include the same information other ones can. For example, only the NICS Indices are

allowed to contain information regarding someone's mental health. Thus, the state would have to

supply data to this specific database, which often does not occur. As a result of this, “the Virginia

Tech massacre [was] committed by a gunman whose history of severe psychiatric illness had not

been forwarded to the FBI” (“Federal Background Checks”). Similarly, the military often fails to

alert these databases of dishonorably discharged members. This led to the Sutherland Springs

gunman, who had choked his ex-wife and fractured his baby's skull, “purchasing three guns

from licensed sellers” to commit his mass shooting (“Federal Background Checks”).

Along with a lackluster database determining one’s ability to buy a gun, there are some

loopholes to access them. For example, The Department of Justice requires a licensed seller’s

immediate decision on whether the buyer can own a gun. Consequently, if the FBI needs more

time to decide then they are given three days. During this time the FBI reaches out to local law

enforcement or the state to make a more informed decision. If the FBI fails to decide, the seller

can legally sell the firearm to the person. Mascia mentions how “the NICS examiner … has up to
 Callanan, 4

90 days to reach a final conclusion” (“Federal Background Checks”). During this time the buyer

still has full access to the gun. Thus, “in April 2015, the Charleston church gunman legally

purchased a Glock” via “a cascade of clerical errors [that] delayed his background check” and

“two months later, he used the weapon he bought to murder nine parishioners” (“Federal

Background Checks”). Due to a prior drug charge, the gunmen should never have had access to

the gun, but as a result of the default process loophole he was able to obtain his firearm. Had

there not been a loophole through the three-day policy, it is possible these parishioners would be

alive today.

Another loophole that is commonly used to avoid background checks is to purchase a gun

from a non-licensed seller because federal law does not force them to conduct a background

check. An example of this would be buying a gun at a gun show or online. Everytown for Gun

Safety, an organization that advocates against gun violence, shares how “this loophole enables

people with felony convictions, domestic abuse restraining orders, and other people with

prohibiting histories to buy guns with no questions asked” (Everytown). This organization also

discovered that “as many as 1 in 9 people arranging to buy a firearm on Armslist.com, the

nation’s largest online gun marketplace, are people who cannot legally have firearms”

(Everytown). Furthermore, “a 2015 survey found that nearly a quarter of Americans…acquired

a firearm in the two years prior … without a background check” (Everytown). With society

becoming digitalized by relying on online purchases, it is essential preventative policies are

made so loopholes such as this one are not abused. I believe background checks should be

mandatory even if the firearm is purchased online through a non-licensed seller. For someone to

receive a gun from these tenders they should have to meet at a store where a background check

can be conducted.
 Callanan, 5

While creating stricter laws will limit guns from falling into the wrong hands, it is also

important to tackle societal issues that drive people to turn towards gun violence in the event

someone can get a gun or already owns one. Typically, people assume the main cause of mass

shooters is that they are mentally ill or severely disturbed; however, Dr.Swanson, a professor in

psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University School, argues the media has wrongfully

taught us “the mentally ill are dangerous” (Swanson). This sentiment is shown through the

survey I conducted where 86.7% of respondents claim they believe people with mental health

issues are more likely to contribute to gun violence. Swanson suggests that research shows a

majority of people with mental illness will never act violently. Instead, Swanson directs us to

consider how “suicides account[ed] for 61% of all firearm fatalities in the United States—19,393

of 31,672… in 2010” (Swanson). When considering the issue of gun violence people often only

consider shootings where one person harms another. However, it is important to consider

suicides as well since it accounts for over half of the fatalities from a gun every year. Thus, I

believe the United States should implement social programs that will reduce gun violence by

requiring yearly health checks for gun owners to ensure they do not harm themselves.

Jessie Klein, a professor in sociology and criminal justice, shares her belief that society,

rather than the person themself, pushes people toward gun violence. She argues “we live in a

world where, trying desperately to break free from the schools and social situations [gunmen]

found brutal and oppressive, school shooting perpetrators unleashed rage with a lethal and

devastating impact” (Klein, 242). These shooters “didn’t try to replace the old hierarchies with

something new,” instead “they believed the only thing they could do was destroy their schools

and themselves as they became the biggest bullies” (Klein, 242). Through this, Klein is arguing

that societal pressure forced them to see violence as the only way to escape the oppression they
 Callanan, 6

faced. Klein feels “if schools are transformed, students who come from these new, more

supportive, peaceful, and affirming communities can have a powerful effect on the larger society”

by “move[ing] from a destructive one-size-fits-all bully society to more compassionate

community” (Klein, 243). Combining the sentiments of Swanson and Klein reveals how the root

cause of gun violence is often misjudged. Rather than blaming mental health, we should consider

how society pushed people to feel that they needed to take their own lives or others.

One solution researcher Sophie Kjærvik offers that will reduce gun violence and

self-harm on the societal level in the long term is to require children to watch gun safety videos.

Kjærvik ran an experiment where some children between ages 8-12 were shown a gun safety

video. She discovered that “children who had previously taken a gun safety course, had guns in

the home, and had negative attitudes toward guns were less likely to engage in unsafe behavior

around real guns”(Kjærvik). She also suggests children should not be shown age-inappropriate

media as it may contribute to unsafe or violent gun practices in the future. By implementing

these safety videos in schools, it will eventually ensure most of society will have seen these

videos, and help reduce future shooting incidents where people may harm themselves or others.

An argument people have against gun control is that implementing new laws will strip

freedoms given to them by the Second Amendment. According to the results of the survey I

conducted, 60% of participants believed stricter gun control would infringe upon their rights

under the Second Amendment. Diane Wolk-Rogers, history teacher and survivor of the Parkland

Shooting, shares her feelings about this argument in an emotional Ted Talk two months after the

shooting. Wolk-Rogers mentions how the initial purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow

“a well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to

keep and bear arms’” (Wolk-Rogers 04:24). Thus the purpose of the Second Amendment was to
 Callanan, 7

“ensure our newly formed and fragile country had access to organize state militias” rather than

simply allow pedestrians the right to own a gun (Wolk-Rogers 05:26).

Wolk-Rogers further explained “it wasn't until 2008 that the Supreme Court ruled for the

first time the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected

with service in a militia… such as self-defense within the home” (Wolk-Rogers 06:14). Thus,

increasing background checks or limiting what guns can be purchased would not violate the

Second Amendment, since the purpose of the Amendment was only recently changed to include

defending yourself in your home. As reflected by the results of my survey and Wolk-Roger’s

teachings, it is apparent that many U.S. citizens are unaware of the purpose of the Second

Amendment.

Another argument against gun control is that people will be unable to protect themselves

in the event of a shooter if they do not also have a gun; however, by looking at other developed

countries who maintain strict gun control laws it is apparent that this will not be the case. For

example, to get a gun license in Japan you must “go through a lengthy screening process by the

local public security committee” as well as “take a written test and conduct shooting practice as

well as pass a shooting test” (Benoza). During this screening test the police review “criminal

record, personal relationships and involvement in organized crime — along with psychiatric and

drug tests” (Benoza). If someone gets a gun, they must undergo a license renewal process every

three years, and their weapon location and ammunition will be inspected each year.

Due to these strict laws “the number of licensed firearms in [Japan in] 2021 was at

177,719” (Benoza) compared to the United State’s “377 million guns in circulation” (“Guns Are

Circulating”). The effect of the number of guns available in the country can be seen when

comparing how in the first five months of 2023 “Japan had seen 0.08 gun deaths per 100,000
 Callanan, 8

people” while in the United States “the number of deaths stood at 10.89” per 100,000 people

(Benoza). Based on the drastically different amount of licensed guns in each country and the

amount of deaths per 100,000 people it is apparent that Japan's stricter policies are more

beneficial to the United States' laid-back approach.

Based on the increasing gun violence that plagues the United States, it is clear that

change needs to be made. I believe that the best way to fix this problem is by increasing gun

control through implementing new federal policies. The background check system should be

improved to ensure the database is up-to-date and accurate. Furthermore, loopholes need to be

closed so that everyone can purchase a firearm legally and safely. Lastly, mental health resources

need to be increased, and gun owners should be required to undergo mental health checks so they

do not harm themselves or others. While some people believe these changes may strip them of

their freedom, they misunderstand how these changes will allow them to safely act upon the

freedoms given to them by the Second Amendment and will ensure someone unfit to own a gun

will not have access to one. Furthermore, by viewing other developed countries with stricter gun

policies it is apparent their system is working, so we should incorporate some of their ideas into

our laws. By taking action I hope to craft America into a country where everyone feels protected

and safe.
 Callanan, 9

Work Cited:

“Background Checks on All Gun Sales.” Everytown, www.everytown.org/solutions/background-checks/.

Accessed 22 Apr. 2024.

Benoza, Kathleen. “How Are Firearms Regulated in Japan?” The Japan Times, 31 May 2023,

www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/31/national/crime-legal/gun-control-explainer/.

Gramlich, John. “What the Data Says about Gun Deaths in the U.S.” Pew Research Center, 26

Apr.2023,www.pewresearch.org/short-read/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-t

he-u-s/. Accessed 22 Apr. 2024.

Kjærvik, Sophie L., and Brad J. Bushman. “Effect of a Gun Safety Video on Children’s Behavior Around

Real Guns: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA Pediatrics, vol. 177, no. 9, 2023, pp. 903–10,

https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2023.2397.

Klein, Jessie. The Bully Society School Shootings and the Crisis of Bullying in America’s Schools. New

York University Press, 2012, https://doi.org/10.18574/9780814771495.

Mascia, Jennifer, and Chip Brownlee. “How Many Guns Are Circulating in the U.S.?” The Trace, 6 Mar.

2023, www.thetrace.org/2023/03/guns-america-data-atf-total/.

Mascia, Jennifer. “Everything You Need to Know about Federal Background Checks.” The Trace, 11 July

2015, www.thetrace.org/2015/07/gun-background-check-nics-guide/.

Swanson JW, McGinty EE, Fazel S, Mays VM. Mental illness and reduction of gun violence and suicide:

bringing epidemiologic research to policy. Ann Epidemiol. 2015 May;25(5):366-76. doi:

10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.03.004. Epub 2014 Apr 29. PMID: 24861430; PMCID: PMC4211925.

Wolk-Rogers, Diane. “A Parkland Teacher’s Homework for Us All.” Diane Wolk-Rogers: A Parkland

Teacher’s Homework for Us All | TED Talk,

www.ted.com/talks/diane_wolk_rogers_a_parkland_teacher_s_homework_for_us_all/transcript.

Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.