In the past few years and especially in the last few months, gun shootings have become a rather frequent occurrence to the utter shock and dismay of the United States media and American public. In instances like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the Naval Yard shooting in Washington DC, the murderers were seemingly normal citizens who gained access to their weapons not through illegal black market purchases, but through entirely legal pathways. The perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those of so many other, lesser-known shootings, have been able to attain weapons with relative ease. Their ability to do so has made many American and government officials wary of the background checks that all individuals are subject to when purchasing a firearm. Not only have Americans questioned the effectiveness of the system, they have also begun to worry about their safety as they grow more skeptical of the gun purchasing process. This concern can be considered legitimate, considering how many deaths due to gun related incidents occur each year. In fact, over 32,000 deaths occur annually due to the misuse and abuse of firearms, and this number is only increasing.[1]
As these crimes continue, the United States government has realized the necessity in bringing gun control laws to the forefront of its attention. Although the government understands the importance of addressing these rising gun control issues in order to subdue violence, the strong partisanship in Congress poses a huge dilemma. The Republican and Democratic parties have long stood on opposing sides ever since this issue has come into question. Republicans have established that the Second Amendment right should not be tampered with in any way. In the Republican mindset, all citizens have the right to own and use a weapon, and by creating limitations on gun purchases or stricter, more intensive background checks, the government is encroaching on these fundamental rights. On the other hand, the Democratic Party believes that the government is not, in fact, infringing on the Second Amendment rights’ of its citizens; rather, it is attempting to protect them. The Democratic Party views the restrictions and changes to gun control as a necessary step in trying to promote safety and stop gun abuse while the Republican Party thinks that these restrictions will not help end violence.
The divide between the two political parties is so strong that disputes have even arisen between them regarding international gun control laws. In fact, Secretary of State John Kerry recently signed a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which was created to crack down on the transfer of international weapons to human rights abusers and especially terrorists.[2] Although this treaty was meant to hamper international terrorist organizations and protect Americans, members of the American National Rifle Association believed that it limited their fundamental rights. The National Rifle Association’s chief representative Chris Cox stated, “these are blatant attacks on the constitutional rights of every law abiding American. The NRA will continue to fight this assault on our fundamental freedom.”[3] The response of this NRA representative shows the strength of the divide between many members of the Republican Party and the more liberal members of the Democratic Party. All other countries throughout the world besides Syria, Iran and North Korea agreed to sign the treaty and bring the international law into effect, showing that the laws it set in place were not controversial in the viewpoint of most nations. However, the tenderness towards any firearm related law, whether international or meant to advance security policy, remains high and many Americans still oppose any limitations placed on firearm purchases and trade.
Because there is such a huge dispute and divide between the political parties regarding this issue, many United States legislators have attempted to focus their attentions on another portion of this matter. When investigators analyzed the backgrounds of the murderers in the Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech shootings, they discovered that both perpetrators not only had a history of violence, but they had been diagnosed with mental illnesses.[4] In actuality, this situation has held true for similar, lesser-known cases; many mass murderers who have managed to attain weapons legally have had a history of mental illness. For this reason, federal investigators and Congressional officials have begun to believe that mental instability is a leading cause in many instances of shootings.
With the sharp partisanship in the House and in the Senate, Congress understands that there is little likelihood of passing any gun control regulation laws, even if such laws only strengthen background checks for those trying to purchase weapons. Additionally, Congress may be trying to shy away from any serious political debates in exchange for much less controversial issues that could help solve the problem. In general, Congress acknowledged its limitations and attempted to effect change and provide some safety for the population by focusing on mental health laws, which they knew they could control. Regarding this issue, Senator Lindsey Graham, R- S.C. even admitted, “the mental health component could do the most good.”[5]
As of recently, Congress has been making headway on mental illness laws. Moreover, Democrats have brought it the attention of Republicans that by leaving the Affordable Health Care Act and Obamacare unscathed - or at least somewhat, more people with mental instability and serious illnesses will be allowed to enroll in health insurance. [6]Therefore, they will be able to seek the treatment and necessary help that they need. Thus, many American lives could potentially be saved; however, Republicans have to take many other factors into consideration when evaluating these plans and are reluctant to make any decisions just yet.
Shootings and gun-related deaths continue to pose a problem in American society and throughout the country; however, even without partisanship hampering the law-restructuring process, there are many difficulties in creating gun-control laws. Another major problem in trying to create these laws and basic restrictions is that there is a lack of clarity about where to draw the line. For one, it is difficult to determine exactly how the government should decide who is eligible to own a gun. Every person’s criminal record is different, and it becomes a question of when does a person’s criminal record become so bad that they should not own a firearm. Should people with misdemeanors or small felonies be allowed to purchase and carry a weapon? What crimes prevent a person from owning a weapon- is it dependent on the extent of the crimes or the repetition of certain crimes? Moreover, it is difficult for the government to define what mental illness is, or even what types of guns are more destructive than others. In order to create more laws and put stricter background checks in place, government officials must come to an agreement and specifically determine what is universally acceptable.
The gun control debate becomes more and more of a pressing issue as gun shootings continue to constantly ring throughout the news. It is certain that changes need to occur regarding gun control laws or mental health laws in order to provide a safer, more secure environment for this generation and those in the future. However, these changes will come very slowly, as partisanship and serious technicalities pose countless problems for legislators throughout the nation. These changes demand that legislators work together to determine basic guidelines and come to an agreement about what needs to be accomplished and how to accomplish it.