In class, we have learned about the history of guns in this country and how gun control has become a controversial issue, especially in this current political climate. Several aspects of the gun debate were analyzed in the documentary we watched, including gun use in the past vs. now, sales made from gun sales, and hunting. One point that stood out to me was regarding the use of assault weapons. As we have learned from recent mass shootings, assault weapons such as AR-15s are used quite often. Yet, a survey done by Morning Consult and Politico this year showed that '"7 in 10 voters, including 54% of Republicans, supported 'a ban on assault-style weapons.' Even higher percentages supported a ban on high-capacity magazines and a purchase age of at least 21 for any gun."' So why haven't assault weapons been banned? As a matter of fact, there was a nationwide ban passed in 1994, otherwise known as the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Joe Biden and other Democrats stood behind the ban and claimed that assault weapons "are a threat to the national security of this country." But the ban was set to expire a decade later, unless Congress voted to renew it. This obviously didn't happen, as at the time it was supposed to be renewed, Republicans held a majority in both the House and the Senate. One of the reasons for letting the ban expire was because of the mass incarceration that it caused, which involved African-Americans being disproportionately incarcerated and an increase in prison populations. Republicans brought up this issue when criticizing Democrats who supported the ban, which made it hard for Democrats to restore it (Obama made it a goal to renew the ban when he was elected in 2008 and after the Sandy Hook shooting but failed to do so). But after recent mass shootings such as Parkland and Las Vegas, talk about the renewal of the ban has returned, and Democrats have shown their support. One idea that needs to be considered is whether the ban was beneficial or not. Critics say that it was highly ineffective, and Democrats feel that it has significantly reduced the "number of people killed in mass shootings." Another aspect to consider is that people will always have a way to obtain weapons illegally, regardless of whether the ban is in place. There is also the issue of appeasing hunters, since they strongly feel that they should be allowed to use assault weapons for their activities and they shouldn't be grouped with people who use them for harmful purposes. In my opinion, I think that there should be a ban because while it may not prevent every mass shooting or people from illegally purchasing assault weapons, it will reduce the number of mass shootings to a large extent. As for hunters, I think that the safety of the public outweighs their desire to use high-caliber weapons; they still will be able to use other effective weapons for hunting, just not ones that can kill several people at a time.
source: https://www.npr.org/2019/08/13/750656174/the-u-s-once-had-a-ban-on-assault-weapons-why-did-it-expire
I think these are really good points to make. Building off of what you said about hunting, isn't hunting a sport? So while it makes sense that you would want to use more accurate and easy weapons, isn't the fun part actually hitting the target with a weapon that takes a lot of skill to use? Additionally, by encouraging hunting, we normalize guns. This, in addition to lots of guns in movies, is not a really good trend that we want to be encouraging. Just some other thoughts I had when reading your post!
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, I think there are many very compelling points in this post. I found it really interesting how you pointed out that those who hunt consider it a sport, and using weapons that take more work and knowledge to use(like older, non-automatic guns) seems like it would be considered more skillful and more respectable in terms of the sport. I was curious, so I looked up the most common guns used by hunters, finding this article: https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/6-guns-every-hunter-should-own/. After reading through the list, it seems that the reasons they choose the different preferred weapons is not about the skill it takes to use them, but rather the impact it will have on how they hunt and what they are hunting. I think my main takeaway from this exploration was that the sport of hunting is about more than just the ability to work a gun skillfully, and new, advanced weapons allow a broader range of options for how you can hunt. While it was interesting to see how hunters view guns differently, I still agree with both you and Manasi that normalizing guns(especially semi-automatics) is extremely dangerous and that the right to safety from potential gun violence should be prioritized over the right for people to hunt with whatever weapons they might choose.
DeleteIn my opinion the 1994 ban leading to disproportionate arrests for black americans is not a guns right issue. Republicans use that as a talking point the same way they do with the disproportionate amount of black abortions when abortion is legal. To me those arguments are made to centralize power (for the NRA/ against Roe V Wade) and not out of genuine concern for the marginalized group. Institutional racism is reflected in the police force so it is unsurprising it is also reflected in who they chose to arrest. I think that speaks to a larger issue with racism in our police (seen also in black shootings and now black people being shot in their own homes -
ReplyDeleteFormer Fort Worth police officer charged with murder for killing Atatiana Jefferson in her own home), and so is not a valid argument against an assault rifles ban. If you don't trust the people whose job is literally to protect you to protect you fairly, then maybe there's a problem with the job. (also legalizing weed would massively reduce the black prison population but for some reason I don't see many republicans supporting that?? weird...)
I think you made a good point about how even with gun bans and regulations, this won't always stop the people from getting guns. Those that are fully motivated to get some form of weaponry probably won't stop merely because the law stops them from getting those guns. They could probably turn to a private seller or other markets where there are truly no gun restrictions or regulations. So while I think that we need to address the gun issue outright, I also think that we need to crack down on the other means of getting guns that are unregulated such as gun shows etc, where I don't believe that they even require background checks.
ReplyDelete