Rohan Gulati ’13: In the wake of the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary school and a mall in Portland, Oregon, the issue of gun control has once again come to the forefront of Americans’ dialogue. Many Americans find that such discourse is insensitive and an attempt to politicize a recent tragedy. They would prefer that we have this discussion “some other time.” I wholeheartedly disagree with this claim. Part of our national grief involves some sort of action to prevent the heinous crimes committed last week from ever happening again. To this effect, I propose the following: a reinstatement of the federal assault weapons ban, restrictions on magazine size, stricter rules regarding ammunition purchase, and an end to the loophole that enables people to buy firearms through private dealers without undergoing a background check.
A federal assault weapons ban would prohibit the possession of semi-automatic rifles, pistols, or shotguns that have certain modifications, such as folding/collapsible stocks, flash suppressors, pistol grips, and compensators. These modifications are seen in military grade firearms; no civilian who is using a firearm responsibly should need a recoil compensator. A similar type of ban was instituted from 1994 until 2004. Unfortunately, this law had too many exceptions, making it ineffective for preventing access to assault weapons. For example, semi-automatic rifles with two or more of the aforementioned modifications were banned. Gun manufacturers subsequently made weapons with only one type of modification, thus skirting the ban. A revised bill would prohibit any modification outright.
Magazine restrictions serve as a solution that is equitable for both sides of the debate. In the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut and Aurora, Colorado, the shooters used AR-15 type rifles with 30 and 100 round magazines respectively. Magazines that large are simply unnecessary for hunting, target shooting, or even self-defense; they only enable the mass slaughter of innocent civilians. Restricting magazine sizes to no larger than six rounds would at the very least slow down any shooting rampage, as it would force a shooter to change magazines frequently. This hindrance could mean the difference between life and death.
The gun used in Newtown was a Bushmaster M-4 Carbine, Bushmaster’s version of the popular AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. It is designed to use .223 Remington cartridges, which is why many news articles refer to the gun as a Bushmaster .223. A quick search for this cartridge yielded a plethora of online ammunition dealers. It is astonishing to note that a 20 round cartridge costs roughly 25 dollars. Coupled with the fact that online ammunition purchases occur without any sort of background check, it is clear that it is much too easy to buy ample ammunition. As such, I propose restrictions on online ammunition sales as well as an increased excise tax on ammunition. Pigovian taxes would serve to decrease demand, which would lower the amount of ammunition in the primary market. Consequently, the black market’s supply of ammunition, which comes solely from the primary market, would also decrease.
Private gun shows, which take place across the country, provide legal means for individuals to buy guns and ammunition without background checks. Many gun advocates believe that restrictions on private sales amount to government intrusion and violate the Second Amendment. However, the government already requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background/criminal checks; to say that requiring unlicensed dealers to do the same infringes upon our rights is foolhardy and irresponsible. Our civilized society cannot permit criminals or the mentally ill to purchase tools with the capability of inflicting harm on a large scale. These gun shows, as well as licensed gun dealers, should be forced to conduct strict checks of criminal history and mental health on potential buyers to prevent firearms from ending up in the wrong hands. Like ammunition, the black market gets most of its firearms from legally purchased weapons.
After every shooting spree, people are quick to place blame without reason. I don’t wish to blame this tragedy entirely on current gun laws. The factors involved in the most recent shooting include irresponsible gun ownership as well as a failed mental health system. However, when current laws make firearms and ammo accessible to all, it enables people who want to commit such atrocities. The Second Amendment, or at the very least its interpretation, needs to be revised to take into account the power that modern firearms possess. It is the duty of both the government and society to ensure that calamities of this magnitude never happen again.