Gun Control a Look at Mass Shootings

The right to bear arms is an inalienable right stated in the Bill of Right, ratified in 1791, it has been in frequent debates on gun control. In America every time there is a mass shooting gun control becomes a leading topic. The debate on gun control began to advance after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King and President John F. Kennedy, and US Attorney General and Senator Robert F. Kennedy with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (Gale, 2018). The creation of the National Firearms Act of 1934 imposed a tax on all firearms in America, which must be registered with the Secretary of the Treasury. Although the act collects revenue that was not its underlying purpose, “As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms. Congress found these firearms to pose a significant crime problem…” with a high imposed tax it was assumed that it would discourage the purchase of firearms (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 2020). As of March 2020, over 2.5 million guns were sold the Coronavirus (COVID-19) is attributed to the increase of sale versus last year in March an 85% increase (Brown, 2020). The second amendment stated that the people have the right to bare arms, does gun control violate this inherited right or does it create acceptable parameters to keep citizens safe?

History

The Constitution first ten (10) amendments are known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was created to establish trust in the government to and protect the benefits of the republic. The preamble also allows for “further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added” this allows for Acts to be established. The National Firearms Act of 1934 was the first major action towards gun control. The act established a tax on firearms in the amount of two hundred dollars ($200) the tax as of 2020 has not been increased (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 2020). Several Acts followed, the Acts of 1938, 1968, 1986, and 1993. The Federal Firearms Act (FFA) of 1938 requires gun manufacturers, and dealers to maintain a federal firearm license. It also prohibits certain people from purchasing guns and keep records (Gray, 2019). The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) repeals and replaces the FFA. The act had several effects: it added an age restriction when buying a firearm; it expanded the definition of machine guns and destructive devices; prohibits non-sporting imported guns, felons and those with mental illness from purchasing firearms (Gray, 2019). The Firearms Protection Act (FPC) of 1986 included the expansion of the GCA, prohibited the national registry of dealer records, limited ATF inspection to once a year with a caveat of a business not having multiple infractions, it allowed license holders to sell guns at gun shows, it also clarified criminal offense with firearms (99th Congress, 1986). The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 included one of the most prominent know additions to gun control, the National Instant Criminal Background Check. Each act was not intended to water down the 2nd Amendment, but to provide additional clarification to keep constituents safe (House of Representatives, 1993).

Restrictions

Many restrictions are placed on the transfer of firearms that helps to protect the public. For reference the word “transfer” includes the sells, delivers, or otherwise transfers a handgun to a transferee. Some of the most know restriction in the last 50 years were:

• Brady Handgun – The National Instant Criminal Background Check

o Established an electronic database for background checks

o Set additional provision for the transfer of firearms

o Defined the term handgun – a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand

o Dictated the fines associated with violation of the act with possession of a firearm (House of Representatives, 1993)

• The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (103rd Congress, 1994)

o Defines various types of firearms

Shotguns—Autoloaders

Competition Rifles—Centerfire & Rimfire

Centerfire Rifles—Single Shot

Centerfire Rifles—Autoloaders

o It’s unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon

o It excludes antique firearms

o Defines a semi-automatic assault weapon – any caliber or copy of a firearm, examples as follows: Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models); Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI, Colt AR–15, INTRATEC TEC–9

o In total banned 19 types, models and series of assault weapons

o Ban on large capacity ammunition feeding devices

o Congress allowed the ban to expire on September 13, 2004. (Gifford Law Center, 2018)

• National Instant Criminal Background Check System (“NICS”)

o This system provided states with incentives to perform a background check under license dealers (it does not reference private dealers)

o It also provides additional information for those who are prohibited from purchasing firearms

o It references those who have been committed to a mental institution by a federal agency or departments

With each law, there is a further restriction on those who cannot obtain a firearm. Each law was a reaction to various traumatic events in the country. From the assassinations to mass shootings the need for gun control is evident. How much control is needed without oppression to the 2nd amendment right? The following image provides an overview of background checks by states as of 2016. The map in figure 1. shows there are still several states the purchase of firearms without the federal check. This is due to exceptions in the law.17.7% leads to a decrease in gun sales. It seems that the higher the fatalities during the incident the more the decrease in gun sales. A mass shooting with extensive media coverage had a correlation of increase gun sales.

“Nevertheless, these events offer an important lens for understanding connections between gun violence and public opinion, with implications for gun violence prevention as a whole… Sharp increases in gun purchases after mass shootings, including shootings in Newtown, Connecticut; San Bernardino, California; Orlando, Florida; and Parkland, Florida, have been documented by the media (Liu, 2019).”

The data show that after several prominent media covered incidents there seems to be a type of influence over the volume of firearm sales. The paper had two hypotheses; 1st, that people will fear victimization and go acquire more arms for a faster response if it happens in their area, 2nd the rights to obtain certain type of firearms may be restricted in the future. This last belief can be tied to the fact that gun control is often a weighted topic for politicians. Figure 4: Total Gun Related Background Checks Seasonally Adjusted, showcases mass shooting and non-shooting events showing the increase or decrease of firearm background check.

Figure 4: Total Gun Related Background Checks Seasonally Adjusted

Figure 4 validates the increase in background check after certain mass shooting events. More people felt that they needed firearms. This provides validation for the study’s 2 hypothesis on restricting access as well as the need to want to protect one’s self. With each mass shooting there are additional firearms which fall under previous legislature. Gun control has become a hotbed of debate. Since the creation of the 2nd amendment the country has been wrought with finding a balance, allowing arms and keeping the public safe.

Conclusion

America has had a very complicated relationship with gun control. Over the centuries there have been several laws and regulation to minimize danger of firearms to the public. With constantly changing regulations the impact of guns sale can be attributed to events that may increase the restrictions on purchasing a firearm. The visions our fore father thought of when creating the 2nd amendment was centered towards having an available immediate force of protection utilizing citizen as America did not have a standing army at the time. Now several centuries later is it necessary for the average American citizen to have an assault rifle? There is not a well-defined answer identified in this research to answer this question. We can however create efficient laws to minimize those who may do harm to others.

There are several mass shooting incidents that point to the fact that those with mental illness may be more likely to commit these atrocities. Research shows that less than 50% of all mass shooters have evidence of mental illness. Also, less than 3% of violent crimes with firearms are committed by those with mental illness. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System was established to keep firearms out of the hand of criminals. There were bans on certain types of firearms due to various assassination attempts. Yet the amount of mass shooting has steadily increased over the last three decades. Restrictions are keeping people with bad intentions away from firearms, however, with many loopholes in regulations, it is easily navigable. With private owners having the ability to sell to whomever they would choose without a criminal check; it is very little legislation that would prohibit this without crushing amendment rights. Is gun control a good thing? The simple answer is yes, high capacity magazines, and military style firearms are not necessarily something needed for the average citizen. Denying this option, to an everyday citizen, is unlawful and a violation of our rights and freedoms. There should be better intercommunication in potential individuals who should not have a gun. Mental health reporting should be clarified and enhanced to provide nationwide support in keeping firearms away from those who do not need them.

Exemptions Private Sale Exemption provides dealers without a license to bypass the federal mandate. This allows convicted felons, domestic abusers, and other ineligible people to legally buy guns. This allows those who would fail the background check from a Federal Firearm Licenses dealer (FFL). The next exemption, permit holder, may skip federal background checks with certain firearm license. Concealed handgun permits allow purchasers in 25 states to bypass the federal system with an alternative background check. There is another exception which allows a person to purchase a firearm if their background check is not returned within 3 days from an FFL. This loophole has led to a mass shooting. About 91% of the background checks, come back within minutes. There are about 9% that needs additional investigation, however agents have only three days to investigate and return the results before the default proceed is allowed (Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2018). Loopholes allow easier access for those who may be prohibited from accessing firearms. Several mass shootings can be contributed to those who obtain firearms legally.

Incident

In during the 21st century there have been numerous mass shooting. This becomes national news and draws the attention to gun control restrictions. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s definition of mass murder, which is the killing of four or more individuals (Lewis, 2018).” Some well know mass shooting will be discussed in reference to those who legally obtain firearms. According to American Psychiatric Association (APA), “It noted that registries like NICS can be helpful in some situations, but they are minimally effective in identifying people at acute risk of harm to self or others. In addition, they can unfairly stigmatize individuals with mental illness (Kapoor, 2018).” Since 1982 there have been 119 mass shooting in the United States, according to a database created by Mother Jones an investigative website (Mark Follman, 2020). Figure 2 categorizes data collected in the database to identify if the weapons were obtained legally or illegally by the shooter. The figure 2 shows that a majority of weapons used in mass shooting incidents were obtained legally. Each legal firearm went through the federal or state background check approval process.

Figure 2: Killer Obtained Weapons Legally?

Mass shooting such as Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Sandy Hook Elementary School and Santa Fe High school are examples of incident when the process of the system failed. The mass shooting of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was done by one person who had a history of violence and abuse. The shooter and his brother had over 40 calls to local authorities in the previous 10 years. Even though he posted on social media about becoming a “professional school shooter,” no action was taken to prevent him from acquiring firearms (Philpott, 2018). The shooter was able to obtain 10 guns, including the AR style rifle that he used during the school shooting. School shootings have led to new legislature that allows guns in various capacities on school campuses.

Figure 3: State That Allow Guns on School Campuses

Another example of an incident that happened in 2015, a young man shot and killed nine African American worshipers at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Although he should have failed a background check because of his history of unlawful controlled substance use, his background check was not processed within three days. Due to the recent Coronavirus pandemic there was a large increase in gun sales. In the month of March 2020, there were 3.7 million background checks processed (Williams, 2020). This increase was more than 1 million additional background checks from the previous year (FBI, 2020). With so many background checks, entering the system in such a short time it created a lag in processing. While conducting research for this paper, I went into a gun store. The usual wait time at the counter was increased by the social distance factor as well as the an unusually long line at the gun department. I was told by an associate working there that the process time which was usually less than 20 minutes was now over and hour wait. A person with a concealed firearm permit, such as myself was able to purchase a firearm within minutes. There were no limits on the number of guns that could be purchased. I witness someone buy five (5) firearms in line before me, however, they could only buy 2 boxes of ammunition. This was not due to any laws or regulations, but due to the supply of inventory.

During December of 2019 and arm man, whom had frequent that particular house of worship open fire and killed two worshipers during the service. The shooter was familiar with the pastor and the church. The shooter in 2008 was charged with felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, this charge was then reduced to misdemeanor deadly conduct. He was not on a watch list. He was not perceived as a national threat; even thought he had been arrested on numerous occasions and charged with various incidents of assault as well as a protective order against him (Vera, 2019). The shooter was diagnosed with various mental illness, yet he was able to obtain a firearm. Due to his death, it is unclear how he obtained the firearm.

Learning from the trend of mass shootings, one paper looks at various variables that could potentially be a precursor to identifying potential incidents. Using the Poisson model, the study looked at the factors of state specific serious mental illness rate and poverty percentage, and population size as an offset variable in a Bayesian framework. Thus, they are trying to find a correlation between poverty, gun ownership, mental illness while reliant on using population size to offset the number of zeros accounted for in states without mass shootings. Any variable associated with the state provided no significant evidence of being a factor in the mass shootings. The two Poisson regression models utilized in the study examined the incidence rate in the frequency of mass shootings has been increasing in recent three decades of 1982-2018 (Lin P-I, 2018). It was determined that none of the variables had a significant impact on the prediction of mass shootings. There is, however an increase in the amount of mass shooting even as there is a decrease in time occurrence and media coverage. It is believed that this can validate a hypothetical “contagious effect.”

“A “contagion” effect has been suggested wherein the occurrence of one mass shooting will increase the likelihood of another mass shooting occurring in the near future. Although contagion is a convenient metaphor used to describe the temporal spread of a behavior, it does not explain how the behavior spreads (Meindl, 2017)”.

A person may model the behavior that has given someone an elevated social status. A shooters visibility has increased, the media will delve into every aspect of that person’s life. There social media, education, family life, and mental stability will be put into a spotlight for the public. This will present a picture for the public, allowing them to perceive the shooter in a particular way. If the media presents the fact that there were numerous mental issues that should have been caught, it will sway public perception of mental illness and gun control. There has been a trending pattern that those with major mental illness are able to obtain firearms. According to “Mass Shooting, Mental Illness, and Gun Control,” 3% of violent crimes are perpetrated by those with mental illness. The study concluded that statistically there is no correlation between mental illness and mass killings using weapons (Philpott, 2018). Without the correlation of mental illness and mass shooting could there be a possible relationship of another category? Could there be another connection to mass shootings such as the purchases of firearms after an incident.

Cite this page