Showdown at the Constitution Corral

Current Unit: Unit 1 - Constitutional Underpinnings and Federalism

In Minneapolis today, as was published in the Times new story, President Barack Obama championed further reforms in the area of gun control. He continues to champion a three-tier plan of background checks, restrictions on assault weapon sales, and an overhaul of the United States mental health system. The White House has cited marked support for the idea of universal background checks while conceding lower support for bans on things like semi-automatic weapons and limits on magazine capacities. This appears in the face of evidence that background checks may be all that the administration will get, as the recent debate has revealed the deep divisions over 2nd amendment rights advocates and promoters of gun control.

This is a problem.

The 2nd amendment is what lies at the core of this murky conflict, and it doesn't help that the wording on that document called the constitution is a little loose. The amendment doesn't impose any per se limits, but does state that a "well regulated militia" is what is necessary to the security of the free state. However there is equal argument within that same sentence that states the right of the people "shall not be infringed" in allowing them to keep and bear arms.

The 2nd Amendment has been and will be the center of controversy in the future as we eventually see the day where Bushmaster drops the AR-15 model in place of a blaster-rifle a la Star Wars. Both sides have their propaganda machines churning out editorials on full blast, with the left alternately playing the ultimate droopy dog on their own proposals and throwing japes at the NRA, and the right making fun of the hilariously inept Piers Morgan while playing down the effectiveness of any kind of gun control.

So, who's right? Well, it's a complicated issue. One could easily point to a society like the Swiss (who own their fair share of guns) or the Japanese, (who own very few guns indeed) but that's easy and still unfitting of the U.S. model; both of those countries have very homogenous populations and low income inequality, so the comparison isn't completely solid. Furthermore, you can't make gun crime cut and dry in that regulation keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, since they tend to get their guns illegally, because, well, criminals. However, it remains that someone with a history of violence could potentially obtain guns with ease from somewhere that doesn't require background checks like a gun show. Perhaps what is needed is regulation of both sides of the market; stricter criminal penalties for those caught trafficking guns and allocation of more ATF resources to preventing such trafficking instead of going after TI, and universal background checks to prevent abuses of the legitimate markets.

Society has agreed however that the costs of the current systemic abuses of 2nd amendment rights have been far too high for too long. In remains to be seen if any change is attainable.