Gun Control in the United States: Law, Culture, and Debate

Introduction: Guns and American Culture

Gun control is a particularly controversial topic in contemporary society. In the United States especially, people have grown accustomed to living in a culture centered on firearms. Factors such as the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights have led Americans to identify with an environment broadly supportive of public access to guns. The country's history has encouraged citizens to acknowledge the importance of gun ownership: by being able to protect themselves, people can guard against governmental abuse and take up arms against oppressors when necessary.

Gun Ownership as a Tool Promoting Individualism

Given conditions in the United States, it is reasonable to say that many Americans consider guns to be part of their culture — part of what it means to be American. In order to gain a full understanding of the gun debate, one must first consider U.S. history and the way Americans have lived in a community that associates guns with self-reliance. By enacting laws promoting gun ownership, the United States essentially encouraged Americans to view their society as one providing them with all the resources necessary to remain safe. As Kopel observes, "One illustration of the American ideals of classlessness (and of individualism and self-reliance) is reflected in the selection of the archetypal armed American hero."

The traditional image of a hero in other countries involves individuals belonging to a particular group or institution. In contrast, the American version of the hero is a rather ordinary individual who embodies values of freedom and independence. To a considerable degree, this is the classic cowboy of the Western frontier — an environment in which owning a gun was seen as the only reliable means of staying safe (Kopel).

Gun control in a country that regards firearms as central to its tradition of fighting for freedom is an especially contested concept. By accepting guns as part of American culture, individuals implicitly acknowledge that society can promote unequal power relations. As a consequence, a person who is disadvantaged — whether because of physical limitations or social circumstances — may use a weapon to protect themselves from potential threats. In order to prevent powerful individuals from exploiting the less powerful, the United States has attempted to create an environment grounded in equity. Even those who are privileged retain the right to defend themselves by whatever means are available, with firearms serving as one specific form of protection. The depth to which guns have permeated American consciousness is evident in everyday language, as Kopel notes: "the degree to which guns have permeated American consciousness can be seen in how American speech is loaded with gun metaphors: big shot; going off half-cocked; cocksure; misfire; shoot for the moon; primed; a gunner; jump the gun; triggered; flash-in-the-pan; keep your powder dry; top gun; straight shooter; loaded for bear; target date; set your sights on it; square shooter; take another shot at it; a long shot; draw a bead on it; high caliber; stick to your guns; he's a pistol; son of a gun; shoot from the hip; faster than a speeding bullet; riding shotgun; bring out the big guns; fire away; bite the bullet; a shotgun approach; lock, stock, and barrel; on target; and on."

The Revolutionary War and the Second Amendment

Even though the threats present during the Revolutionary War no longer exist in today's United States, many Americans continue to consider those historical threats and the ideology behind the Second Amendment. The amendment was introduced in the Bill of Rights to guarantee that citizens would no longer be vulnerable to governmental abuse.

Civil libertarians tend to be particularly interested in the Second Amendment relative to other provisions in the Bill of Rights. Federal courts also consider the topic especially controversial and appear uncomfortable addressing it directly. Lower courts tend to adopt interpretations that lack clarity and have little support from historical precedent. This is largely because the provision can be read in multiple ways, and the specific case under consideration always influences how federal judges ultimately interpret the Second Amendment (Lund, 103).

Many Americans feel that opposing gun ownership for the general public amounts to acting against the country's Founding Fathers. Guns are a part of the nation's history and were central to the colonists' ability to resist British authority and ultimately win the Revolutionary War. Although the country's law-enforcement situation has changed significantly since the late eighteenth century, many Americans remain unable to leave their traditions behind and continue to lobby for the government's ongoing support of the right to own guns.

Gun control laws are obviously shaped by the Second Amendment, as people tend to interpret it in accordance with their own interests. The amendment contains complicated clauses and phrasing that makes it difficult for readers to reach a definitive conclusion about its exact purpose. Concepts such as "militia," "the people," and the type of arms the text refers to can be especially ambiguous. This ambiguity allows both gun-ownership supporters and advocates of gun control to interpret the text in ways that support their preferred outcome before the courts (Heller).

Interpreting the Second Amendment

The most prominent Supreme Court decision regarding the Second Amendment is United States v. Miller, yet it provides limited guidance on many of the questions currently under debate. When considering the amendment, pro-gun communities believe it directly affirms the individual's right to own firearms, while anti-gun communities argue that it was intended primarily to ensure the existence of a well-regulated militia.

Individuals supporting gun control point to the measurable harms guns have caused in recent years. "It has been estimated that economically the cost of gun violence is on the order of $100 billion per year" (Chemerinsky, 479). Furthermore, the majority of murders, numerous robberies, and a range of other crimes are committed using firearms. In response, gun supporters argue that such statistics are irrelevant to a constitutional interpretation of the Second Amendment (Chemerinsky, 479). In one respect, the amendment stands as a prime example of how a constitutional provision can be interpreted in multiple ways depending on the reader's perspective. This dynamic has allowed the NRA's legislative success to be characterized as "a textbook example of a special interest group capturing the legislative process, and the remedy is to file lawsuits asking courts to impose gun controls that would otherwise be passed by a truly representative legislature" (Lytton, 154).

Conclusion

The contemporary debate in the United States has failed to produce a definitive answer to the question of whether gun control is effective. While advocates on both sides have developed compelling arguments, the country's cultural values and historical background make it difficult for authorities to take decisive action. Many individuals and organizations turn to the courts to address the issue, preferring direct legal action to the slow and uncertain process of persuading Congress to enact new legislation. Until a genuine cultural consensus begins to emerge — something that appears unlikely in the near term — the gun control debate is likely to remain one of the most contentious and unresolved issues in American public life.

Works Cited

Chemerinsky, E. "Putting the Gun Control Debate in Social Perspective." Fordham Law Review Vol. 73, Issue 2, Article 2.

Cheng, X. (2002). "Analysis of States' Gun Control Restrictions." Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1517

Dowd, D.W. "The Relevance of the Second Amendment to Gun Control Legislation." 58 Mont. L. Rev. 79 (1997).

Heller, S. "The Right to Bear Arms: Some Prominent Legal Scholars Are Taking a New Look at the Second Amendment." The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 21, 1995.

Kahan, D.M. "The Gun Control Debate: A Culture-Theory Manifesto." Washington and Lee Law Review Vol. 60, Issue 1, Article 2.

Kleck, G. "Policy Lessons from Recent Gun Control Research." Retrieved November 30, 2014, from http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3824&context=lcp

Kopel, D.B. "The Ideology of Gun Ownership and Gun Control in the United States." 18 Qty. J. of Ideology 3–34.

Kwon, I.G., Scott, B., Safranski, S.R., & Bae, M. "The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws: Multivariate Statistical Analysis." American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Jan. 1997), pp. 41–50.

Lund, N. "Second Amendment, Political Liberty, and the Right to Self-Preservation." 39 Ala. L. Rev. 103 (1987–1988).

Lytton, T.D. "The NRA, the Brady Campaign, & the Politics of Gun Litigation." Retrieved November 30, 2014.