The Five Things You
Have To Know Before Today’s Gun Policy Hearing
By Zack Beauchamp on Jan 30, 2013 at 9:03 am
At 10
AM on Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold its first hearings on new legislation to reduce gun
violence in the United States. Here are the five things that’ll help you make
sense of the policy and politics at play in today’s hearing.
1. America has a gun problem. Study after study after study has
found that the spread of guns in the United States has led to more people being
killed by guns. The old “more guns, less crime” theory has been conclusively debunked. The question now is how
to limit the spread of guns, particularly by better mechanisms to prevent
people who would commit murder and other gun crimes from getting them.
2. The National Rifle Association is not
interested in real measures to address it. In today’s hearing, NRA Executive Vice
President Wayne LaPierre will say that
we have to “be honest about what works,” but his organization has proven
uninterested in any real reform beyond its own quixotic quest to put more guns in schools. The NRA refused to
meet with the President to discuss his framework for gun violence prevention
and has spent the days post-Newtown blaming everything other than guns for the deaths they cause. NRA members don’t share the
organization’s absolutist positions.
3. There’s real evidence that gun regulation
can work. Research
comparing murder rates across states found that those with stricter gun
regulation found that “[f]irearm
deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control
legislation.” These regulations include the main measures being debated today —
universal background checks, a strengthened assault weapons ban, and limits on
high-capacity magazines. Strengthened background checks and oversight over gun
dealers has in particular proven effective — one “study using crime gun trace
data from 54 U.S. cities”found that “strong
regulation and oversight of licensed gun dealers, regulation of gun sales by
private sellers, and permit-to-purchase licensing systems (which require
potential gun purchasers to apply for a license directly with a law enforcement
agency, where they are typically photographed and fingerprinted) were each
associated with significantly fewer guns that were diverted to criminals.”
4. This debate isn’t about the Second
Amendment. Since
the Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling in D.C. v. Heller, banning
the ownership of guns “in common use” has been legally impossible. That’s why
none of the proposed regulations ban handguns or most shotguns and hunting
rifles. Justice Scalia’s ruling specifically allows restrictions on “dangerous
and unusual” weapons and stipulates that
“nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding
prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or
laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools
and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the
commercial sale of arms.”
5. This is the best chance for Congressional
action on guns since 1994. The
massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary hasgalvanized American public opinion on guns in a way unlike any other event in
recent memory, with public opinion firmly behind new regulations — 90 percent of
Americans, for example, support expanded background checks. And while House and
Senate Republicans still appear firmly opposed to most of the proposed
regulations, key Republicans like Rep. Paul Ryan and
Sen. Tom Coburn have
indicated openness to action on background checks.
No comments:
Post a Comment