Gun Control: Public Opinion and its Implications for Politicians and Public Policy

Gun Control Final
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name
Instructor’s NameDue Date
Gun Control Final
Introduction
Over the years, America has had its fair share of problems and matters of generational concern, but none comes closer to gun control. Gun control has been one of modern America’s most polarizing and politicized facets. It is almost impossible to have a political debate without its mention, state, and political affiliation notwithstanding. With numerous mass shootings occurring in recent years, the debate over gun control has become even more heated, with both proponents and opponents of gun control holding strong opinions. Some argue that America’s best trait and her podium of glory is guns and the second amendment, while many argue that guns are the reason she’s bleeding. A complex combination of elements, including historical patterns, political ideology, media exposure, and previous anecdotes, has influenced public opinion on gun regulation in the United States. This study looks at the characteristics of public opinion on gun control, the efficacy of various gun control measures in decreasing gun violence, and the consequences of these results for public policymakers.
Gun control is the formulation of laws, restrictions, and policies that check firearms manufacture, sale, registration, and modification. The second amendment has for generations been America’s bragging rights, giving citizens the right to self-defense and owning these firearms (Cook & Ludwig, 2000). However, this has resulted in an ungovernable spike in murders and illegal gun ownership. It is even more absurd when one considers that The US is the only country on earth with more firearms than there are people. Political decision-makers frequently consider their voters’ opinions; hence, public opinion on gun restriction is important in crafting legislation. Politicians must comprehend public sentiment toward gun control to develop relevant and effective laws.
According to recent surveys, most Americans support gun regulation. There is, however, a broad range of viewpoints on the implementation of particular measures, their efficacy, and whether they would go against the Second Amendment of the US Constitution (Lott, 2010). Public opinion is, therefore, the yardstick with which gun control will be reviewed in this review. The American public’s opinions about gun regulation will be examined in this essay, along with historical patterns, contemporary attitudes, and the variables affecting those attitudes. It will also discuss the Second Amendment issue and academic studies on gun control laws, including how well different laws reduce gun violence. The article will next examine the effects of public opinion on gun control legislation and the difficulties decision-makers face when trying to combat gun violence. Lastly, the report will recommend the next policy actions based on academic research and popular opinion.
Public Opinion on Gun Control
Several factors have always shaped public opinion on gun control in America. These include political affiliations, demographics, personal experiences, and social class. The most common of which is political affiliation. The two superior political factions in the US are the Democrats and the Republicans. Tentatively, the Democrats are more liberal and explorative in their policy-making and ideals. This leftist viewpoint has rendered most Democrats to support stringent gun control laws. Republicans, on the other hand, are generally more restrained in supporting gun control laws and tend to cite the second amendment more than before. A racial factor can be cited in the slightest degree, as many democrats tend to be liberal Americans and minority groups. According to Kwon & Scott (2019), with every passing mass shooting or genocide, racial bias is blamed, and as a result, political sides are taken. Every day, this political standoff keeps claiming more American lives as the politicization of this issue becomes a massive thorn in America’s backside.
On the other hand, not all Americans are swayed by political bias. Personal experiences tend to change the views of most Americans. Research has continually demonstrated that American families affected by gun violence are five times more likely to support gun control laws and restrictions than those without (Spitzer, 2018). Being a victim puts people in a tough spot, and realizing the damage guns have done to society inexplicably changes the stance of many individuals. Many wealthy people are also more likely to oppose many gun control propositions. The poor and many people from low-income communities have faced multiple problems in their communities and are, therefore, more likely to support gun laws. In the past, the general public’s views on gun regulation have changed, often in response to prominent instances of gun violence.
Nevertheless, after the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the public’s support for gun control laws declined as people turned their attention to national security matters. Political affiliation, gender, race, and age affect public opinion on gun regulation (Kwon & Scott, 2019). For instance, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to support tougher gun control laws, and women are more likely than males to support such laws. Also, compared to White people, Black Americans, and Latinos are more inclined to support tighter gun control laws.
Scholarly Research on Gun Control Policies
It, therefore, only makes sense that some of the brightest and most educated brains have dedicated their time and research to examining gun control. Academic research on gun control laws has been a valuable data source for activists and legislators. Many legislative suggestions have been made, such as universal background checks, assault weapon prohibitions, and limitations on large-capacity magazines. The efficacy of different gun control measures in decreasing gun violence has been studied. The Brady Campaign (2021) has indicated, for instance, that states with stricter gun restrictions have lower rates of gun fatalities and that background checks can cut gun violence by blocking access to weapons by those who are not allowed to acquire them. Nonetheless, there is also discussion over the Second Amendment’s potential effects and the effectiveness of certain regulations, such as restrictions on assault rifles.
America has seen more than its fair share of gun control laws and statutes, and each has had varying levels of effectiveness over the years. Some are exclusive to specific states, while some are federal. The most renowned of these laws is the background checks law. As straightforward as it is, it is also the most polarizing. These checks seek to ensure that firearms are not sold to or accessed by people who are legally prohibited from owning them or those who have been diagnosed with mental health issues. Notwithstanding the Brady Act’s effectiveness, gaps still make it possible for someone to purchase weapons without a background check. For instance, licensed dealers are not required to conduct background checks on sales made privately or at gun fairs. In the United States, 22% of gun owners purchased their most recent handgun without undergoing a screening, according to research by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (Kalesan et al., 2016). Another loophole that makes this legislation hard is that the seller is legally allowed to proceed with the sale whenever the FBI background check takes more than 72 hours. Background check expansion initiatives have encountered strong resistance from lawmakers and pro-gun organizations. A measure to extend background checks to all weapon purchases, including private sales and gun fairs, was approved by the House of Representatives in 2019. The Senate has not, however, approved this legislation.
The other ban is the assault weapons ban. This statute prohibits civilians from owning, modifying, or selling military-grade rifles and equipment. This means that rifles with high-capacity magazines firing many rounds at once are not for use in the civilian world. This law has been among the hardest to enforce since the black market reigns supreme when military-grade rifles are involved. Most school shootings in America over the past three decades have seen the use of military-grade rifles and equipment. It was successful for many decades after its inception, and the statistics showed that mass shootings were lower during that period. However, following its expiry in 2004, the ban has never been renewed, and the results have been evident. The assault weapons prohibition has encountered substantial resistance from pro-gun organizations and legislators, despite clear evidence of its efficacy. According to the National Rifle Association (NRA), the restriction would violate the Second Amendment’s provisions and have no impact on lowering gun violence.
Others include the red flag laws, which permit law enforcement agencies, friends, family, and professionals to legally withdraw weapons from people thought to have mental health issues and may harm themselves and others. Only about ten American states have this law enforced, and the numbers have significantly gone down since many gun lobbyists claim that it violates the basic rights of protection of individuals. The law also requires an astronomical level of trust between the government, the police, and the people (Spitzer, 2018). Concealed carry laws have also greatly impacted modern society (Johnson & Kuhl, 2020). They give individuals the to carry weapons but only in a hidden state and may serve to prevent erratic shootings. This has also worked greatly in preventing sudden and erratic murder cases, and has compelled its citizens to be more responsible with their weapons.
Waiting periods have also been massively successful in saving the lives of Americans. An individual is mad about something or angry at a group of people, and he swears to hurt them out of rage. He quickly walks into a gun dealership to acquire a firearm. But he is made to wait a few weeks, and he revokes his intent to hurt. Waiting periods seek to alleviate such problems. They eliminate erratic intentions and increase the chances for more deliberation and probably professional psychiatric help. Spitzer (2018) concurs that by prolonging the acquiring of a handgun until after an emotional episode has passed, deferring a gun purchase may induce a “cooling down” interval that lessens aggression. Making it more difficult to obtain a gun may also reduce the window of opportunity for potential violent offenders to use their firearms. Last but not least, a need for a wait may discourage people from buying guns if they have evil but transient motives.
Finally, gun buyback programs give citizens the ability and freedom to trade their weapons with government officials. Under gun buyback schemes, people can give their guns to the police in return for money or other benefits. Some of these benefits include coupons and even sporting event tickets. These initiatives aim to restrict the availability of weapons and keep them from getting into the wrong hands. Gun buyback schemes have been implemented in several American towns and states. The gun buyback program’ efficacy is debatable. Although some studies claim they have no impact on decreasing gun violence, others contend they might help eliminate weapons from circulation (Gius, 2014). Yet, research has consistently demonstrated buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun crime because they largely incentivize law-abiding persons to sur...