Gun Control Reform Activism
In reply to the discussion: Another senseless death and an idea whose time has come. [View all]branford
(4,462 posts)Ironically, I'm also fairly moderate on the issue of gun control and hardly an absolutist, do not own any guns myself, nor have any current need or desire to buy one, and live in a firearm restrictive jurisdiction (NYC). I nevertheless realize the current state of the law, including trends generally liberalizing firearms ownership and carrying rules, as well as the politics that have recently seen every state have carry options and a Congress that cannot even pass universal background checks similar to those that occur by FFL's, which would, absent very unusual mechanisms, be entirely constitutional. The only restrictions that seem to have gathered any real support at all are background checks of private sales, something most gun owners and supporters have no objection to other than the mechanism (e.g., open NICS to private parties to avoid registration lists, etc.)
Hoping that the Constitutional framework that has increasingly liberalized gun ownership will soon change is not a viable or prudent strategy, nor is quoting some book because it agrees with your perspective. I have no doubt that you sincerely believe that some of you proposals, particularly related to mental health are relatively minor, unobtrusive and little different from other restrictions. Your ultimate motives appears similarly benign. My criticisms are certainly no personal. Neither your personal beliefs or mine, however, form the legal reality, and most of your proposed measure have already lost both in the courts and legislatures. The fact that your ideas may in fact reduce gun crime is also not necessarily of any Constitutional significance. Notably, trying to piggy-back greater restrictions on background checks or licensing requirements has been tried numerous time before and failed, often miserably. Chicago and Washington, D.C. are just a couple of the more recent and very prominent examples of not only the failure of such a strategy, but the resultant power and increased resources gun rights advocates gain from such losses.
There are many methods to deal with gun violence in our country. Some actual firearm restrictions are perfectly lawful, to the extent you can generate sufficient political support to make them law. It is the lack of support, or really more often the strong, near myopic, opposition of gun rights advocates, that prevent most regulation, rather than any Constitutional problems. Ideas that are clearly unlawful or already held to be so by the courts, highly restrictive, or deal with privacy issues, will not be passed, and again heighten the resources of the opposition. Your real opposition is certainly not me or even the courts. You have to convince far more of your fellow citizens and generate the same level of enthusiasm and determination of your opponents.
As you acknowledge, so long as gun ownership is a cultural and legal priority to many Americans, there will be gun violence. However, there are mitigating solutions that gun rights and gun control advocates can find common ground, particularly among Democrats, although they focus more on social issues that guns themselves, yet avoid a continuing culture war. Those solutions include mental health treatment (your area of expertise) and social safety nets and services that most Democrats support, and will have a positive effect with respect to the prevention of all crime and or an overall healthier and happier society.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):