Gun Control can be a controversial topic. In this essay, there will be points from both sides and not to be just controversial. There are lots of facts and evidence to support both sides. There is one side that believes there is nothing wrong with guns, and the other side believes the guns are the problem. As well as background to the whole topic. Also a bunch of case laws that are important to the whole idea and narrative. Gun laws are supposed to help the country and to either simplify a way of living or maybe even get across as a deterrent to get people to stop with murdering others.
Case LawsOrder now
To start it off there are plenty of case laws and they can be from the simplest things to the most detailed situation. The most important would be District of Columbia v. Heller where it prohibits people from owning automatic, semi automatic firearms and handguns and requires guns to be protected by a trigger lock. People did not take it the best way because it went against the second amendment. “This case was the first Supreme Court decision which declared a law unconstitutional solely on the grounds of the second amendment.” This case was in 2008 and went to about 3 courts which got the first response denied and then the higher courts approved it.
Another case that was important was Voisine v. United States, that prohibited people with misdemeanors of domestic violence convictions from owning firearms. This case happened in 1875 by two men that pleaded guilty previously to misdemeanor assault charges. The case stated from Ranker.com included a quote: “Erin Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners America responded to this case by saying “ A Principle in law is that the punishment should fit the crime. Sadly, permanently disarming americans for slight infractions that impose no jail time is simply not just.”” That was later ruled against the two men that went to court about this whole situation.
History Case: One of the last case laws that had an important cause was: United States v. Cruikshank in 1875. The case stated that it overturned convictions who attacked and disarmed civilians who were politically organizing. This case was very racially motivated and had lots to do with the color of their skin. People did not react well with this case. Racist groups like the KKK tried to limit the political power of colored civilians. The government did not protect their rights to bare arms at the time. During this time there was a political protest where they were attacked and over 100 black protesters got killed. The case also stated that “only an agent of the federal government can violate your second amendment right.”
There are a decent amount of current cases going on but lots tend not to do too much with California. There is one case by The New York Times and it states how California is limiting ammunition to suppress gun violence. It continues about the police trying to limit the amount of gun violence and to make it harder to be in a situation like a mass shooting. The police are using shell casings from a gun to help on their investigations because the guns each make a mark on the bullet and it is almost like a fingerprint. One issue with limiting ammunitions would be how people that go hunting for sport or for fun would also have a harder time because of the limitations put on everyone. Is it morally right to hurt everyone for a fews’ actions?
Another recent case by The New York Times would be “Catching Killers by Matching Tiny Marks on Bullets.” This article notes that places like Chicago are reducing crime by putting the evidence into their system and using it on current crimes. Did you know three different states such as Arkansas, New Jersey, and Delaware have police forces that are permitted to enter shell cases and possible guns used in a crime into the database. California being one of the nations with the most restrictive laws for guns, could soon do the same and apply a law to do the same as the three states mentioned before. This quote from NYT states: “Every gun leaves a unique etch on the casings it expels, marks that are like a firearm’s fingerprint.” Which is true because of how they leave the gun they were fired from.
Background of Gun Control
The background of gun control started from: revolutionary roots, frontier expansion, and the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment explains “ A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state , the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Summarized from ProCon.org, one side believes that the Second Amendment was intended for militias, and the other side says that the Second Amendment protects individual rights to own guns. Also one side thinks with more gun control laws it would be safer while on the other side it would lead to more crime with more gun control laws. On the other hand if you had less gun control laws one side believes in higher rate of crime while the other side believes they would be scared and not try to commit these crimes. Were there guns in colonial and revolutionary America? There definitely was but back then they tended to use the guns for hunting and more or less for protection of one’s home. There were lots of restrictions in colonial and revolutionary America. Laws such as Indentured servants and slaves could not own guns. Another one would be Native americans were not allowed to buy guns. Also certain professions such as lawyers, millers, school masters, and doctors were excluded from buying or owning firearms. Simplified from ProCon.org: In 1792 a federal law required that every man eligible for militia service own a gun and ammunition suitable for military service, register their guns, and a frequent inspection.
Time beyond: There was an act passed in 1938: The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, This act required federal firearms licensees and also made it illegal to sell firearms to certain people such as convicted felons. The act later repealed by the 1968 Gun control Act. There were a few more acts put into play such as the National Firearms Act which made it so owners that purchased their firearms before the act, they did not have to register their unregistered firearms. Later in the 2000s, The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 was created to provide information to NICS to limit people that were not supposed to buy guns because of what they have on their criminal record. Disclaimer, most of the info above was received from ProCon.org.
How Gun Control Fits with Criminal Justice
After the latest shootings there has been a lot of involvement with people and how they act to all of this. What a lot of it really comes down to is the Second Amendment and how different people interpreted it. It was stated how some people interpreted it as only a well regulated militia can have access to have firearms and the others believed how anyone could have it to protect their home or for self protection. No matter how far people will try to get from the truth it ultimately is up to how the people interpreted it now to how people used to before. Will we ever really know how the people that originally signed The Constitution really meant?
One way to end a great piece of writing is to recap of what has all been gone over. There were three case laws talked about and they each had something to do with Gun Control. The first case law to deal with the prohibition of firearms. The second to deal with how people with misdemeanors of domestic violence could not own firearms. The third more of a historical racial event had to deal with convictions of colored people against people of non color. There was also two current events brought up. The first one to deal with California and how they are limiting ammunition to suppress gun violence. The second to deal with how they are able to track convicted murderers to the killing of a person or people. After that there was the whole background of gun control and how its changed from before to now. There were at least three acts brought up in this section and some were repealed while some are possibly here today. Last but not least is how it contributes with criminal justice and that is one of the harder subjects to get to because there is not too much on it but there was enough. It states that a lot of this trouble we are dealing with is because of how people interpret the Second Amendment.
- Background of the Issue – Gun Control – ProCon.org. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://gun-control.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=006436
- The Most Important Supreme Court Cases About Guns and Gun Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ranker.com/list/supreme-court-cases-about-guns/katherine-ripley
- Supreme Court Landmarks. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks
- Gray, S. (2018, February 22). A Timeline of Gun Control Laws in The U.S. Retrieved from http://time.com/5169210/us-gun-control-laws-history-timeline/
- How does Gun Control fit in with criminal justice? (2015, May 23). Retrieved from https://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/gun-control-in-criminal-justice/
- Urbina, I., & Kang, I. (2018, September 10). California Today: Limiting Ammunition to Thwart Gun Violence. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/us/california-today-ammunition-gun-control.html
- Urbina, I. (2018, November 16). Catching Killers by Matching Tiny Marks on Bullets. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/bullets-police-evidence-nibin.html?rref=collection/timestopic/Gun Control&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection