Gun Control: what are we even talking about here?

By Tim Newton
Article updated 4/18/2013

On December 14, 2012 a man named Adam Lanza entered Sandy Hook Elementary School and fatally shot 20 children and 6 adults. His primary weapon was an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. I remember this day with sadness in my heart. I prayed for the families of the victims and watched as a nation mourned in disbelief. Many asked how could we let such a thing happen? Shouldn't someone have known he was going to do this and what can we do to prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future?


There is some basic information to consider about gun control which comes from both sides. Obviously we need to consider some basic statistical information concerning gun violence in the U.S. and the effectiveness of gun control on gun violence. The first thing we should all know is that in the last five years murders by firearms has decreased significantly. According to the FBI crime statistics murders overall and murders by firearm were down 15% from 2007 to 2011. That still means however that there are over 8000 murders caused by firearms in the U.S. Firearms deaths are one of the lowest causes of death in the U.S. overall, as heart disease and cancer continue to lead in those categories. Assault weapons are generally among the least used form of weapon in deaths in the U.S. This being said, semi-automatic weapons have been used in many of the successful mass shootings in the U.S.

Comparing the U.S. to other nations with gun violence seems difficult as well. Several studies conducted by the United Nations and others have been conflicting at times, but largely seem to point to the idea that increased gun rights also means increased overall rights for individuals within nations.


The two sides are also at odds on another basic issue, that of overall government philosophy. The question is: Should we have more government control or less? Generally speaking we consider liberals to want more control over issues dealing with economic policy and conservatives wanting less. This of course means that liberals would want increased control and regulations on guns, while conservatives are desiring more ability for law abiding citizens while striving to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Neither side wants these tragedies to continue, and each side has put forth solutions to what they see as the problems.

Two days after the tragedy President Obama made a pledge at a vigil honoring the victims that he would do whatever he could with the power of his office to prevent similar future tragedies from occurring. Shortly thereafter he appointed Vice President Biden to head up a Gun Violence Task force. After going around the country and meeting with activists on both sides for a few weeks, the administration announced 23 executive orders dealing with gun control. These orders include increasing the effectiveness of background checks by encouraging federal and state departments to cooperate together, maximizing efforts to enforce gun laws, and authorizing studies on gun violence prevention. Among these orders was also included a controversial order that encouraged doctors to ask their patients if they had a gun in the home and allow doctors to report that, if necessary, "to law enforcement authorities." One thing I want to mention here. Obama stated that : "it’s hard to enforce that law when as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.” It should be noted that 40 percent of all inmates obtain their weapons from family or friends, 10 percent obtained their guns in the course of their crime, and almost another 40 percent obtained their weapons by illegal means.

Since then the U.S. Congress has dealt with the issue in great detail. Heading up the issues include Senators Feinstein (D-CA), Manchin (D-WV), Toomey (R-PA) and Collins (R-ME). Several bills have been introduced that are under discussion and debate that deal with gun violence in America.



The NRA came out with suggestions to increase security at schools by placing armed guards at all schools, something that is common at most middle and high schools around the country. They also suggested that we deal with the mental health and culture of violence in our country.

Senator Feinstein's bill would ban the sale, manufacture or transportation of any assault rifle, which is any automatic rifle with a "military" feature(pistol grip, threaded barrel, shrouded barrel) as well as any magazine that accepts more than 10 rounds.

The bipartisan senate bill headed up by Senators Collins and Leahy  would make gun trafficking a federal crime for the first time with punishments of up to 20 years for those who violate it. 

Senators Pat Toomey(R-PA) and Joe Manchin(D-WV) introduced another bill that would increase background checks to include all commercial sales of guns,  even those in gun shows and internet sales. Senator Toomey said "Criminal background checks are just common sense. If you pass a criminal background check, you can buy a gun. It's the people who fail a criminal or mental health background check that we don't want having guns. That can be done without infringing on law-abiding people's gun rights. And we ought to do it."

Many states have considered and some have passed their own laws on the issue with the divide widening, as some states loosened control while many increased regulations on gun purchasing and ownership.

So what will happen with these bills? The filibuster lead by Senators Marco Rubio(R-FL) and Rand Paul(R-KY) of Feinstein's Bill was broken when several senators including Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA), Senator Joe Manchin(D-WV) and Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) agreed to open up debate on the issue. This however does not mean that they agree with or would vote yes with the current bill. To quote Senator Heller:

  "As a strong supporter and bold defender of the Second Amendment, I refuse to compromise Nevadans' constitutional rights. It is because of my solid support for the Second Amendment that I am not afraid of having this debate. I remain staunchly opposed to any proposal that would create a national gun registry or would infringe upon Nevadans’ ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights. At the same time, I do think it’s important to explore ways to keep guns out of the hands of felons and the mentally ill. As the deliberative body, let’s move forward with an open debate and give Americans an opportunity to better understand where their representatives in Washington stand on this issue."


That being said, there has been movement on this issue by Senators Manchin(D-WV) and Toomey(R-PA), but many believe that without a strong showing in the senate of at least 70 votes, it would be difficult for such a bill to pass the house.

It is likely that once the bill hits the floor in the senate that the bill could easily have many amendments proposed and passed which could limit the effect of it much like the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban did. I am sure both the gun lobby and the gun control lobby have been prepping for when this happens.

It seems much more likely that the bills offered by Senators Collins (R-ME), Toomey(R-PA) and Manchin (D-WV) would have a chance at passing in the house due to their wide popular support and backing from bipartisan members. These two could get weighed down by amendments and votes on these could be very interesting.

My opinion on the matter is that there should be background checks on all commercial sales, which we already have. Another thing to note is that .7% of all criminals in prison obtained their weapons from gun shows.  What seems to be the aim of increasing checks? A national registry where gun owners would have to register their firearms with the US government. There may be other options here as well that could be considered. So we need to start thinking about what would actually have stopped these attacks.

I am against banning further weapons because I feel it necessary to limit the amount of control our government has, and that we must strive to simplify it, not make it more complex. I stand against creating a national gun registry because that men have a tendency to do evil things, and therefore while lots of power is good in one man's hands it can and will be used for evil by evil men. More power generally leads to more corruption and more waste.

I also feel that one option that hasn't been given much consideration is increasing the use of gun safety courses, and use of gun safes. I favor increased security at elementary schools and movie theaters, as this seems to have worked as a successful deterrent at high schools since the Columbine High School Shooting.

I also believe that we must make further efforts to consider treating mental health and the culture of violence which we have allowed to take hold in America. From what we can tell it appears that Adam Lanza spent much of his time locked in a dark room playing first person shooter video games and even created a spreadsheet that focused on the amount of victims of each shooting. He clearly wanted to kill as many people as he could and chose the elementary school for that reason. Little has been said about these issues and we need to deal with it in our culture and in our homes. I believe that as we strengthen our homes and our communities by becoming involved in them we can lower crime, bring people together and accomplish a great deal together.

I am not opposed to further gun trafficking laws as long as they would not infringe too heavily upon individual rights. I also feel like simplifying some of these regulations or leaving them to the states to decide would make this issue simpler to resolve, as each state has different cultures and ideas, and as such have different perspectives on this issue and gun culture.



Do you agree? disagree? please comment below or shoot us an email at: politicaldisccussionsforamerica@gmail.com