Gun politics

The phrase Gun politics refers to the views of different people within a particular country as to what degree of control (increased gun rights vs. greater gun control) should be enforced upon the private ownership and usage of firearms, and to what extent ownership influences crime and the balance of power between the individual and the state.

Approaches

In summary, those who support greater restrictions on firearm ownership believe some subset of:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• that there is no fundamental right to own firearms
• that gun control legislation will reduce violent crime
• that guns are more dangerous to the owners than intended targets because most gun related deaths are a result of domestic violence, accidents and suicides
• that guns are often of little use as self defense for the typical owner because in the incidents where a hostile encounter with an armed criminal occurs, the criminal is usually more experienced and skilled with his/her weapon
• that even against unarmed criminals, the presence of a gun serves most often simply to escalate the likelihood and/or severity of violence
• that citizens have no need to own guns to protect themselves against crime, since this is the task of the government
• that citizens of First World countries today have no need to protect themselves against their governments if they are vigilant enough to confront government wrongdoing before violence is necessary, or that even if such a need should arise, it would be hopeless anyway to take up individual small arms against the sort of modern military technology that a government could bring to bear.
• that guns, being devices implicitly designed to kill, raise the level of violence in any disagreement between people. Can kill becomes the highest level of arbitration in conflict resolution

Those who favor maintaining or extending the private ownership of firearms believe some subset of:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• that owning firearms is a fundamental right (this view is rare outside the United States, where the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution helps maintain its popularity)
• that the government has no right to interfere with an individual's right to own firearms as long as the individual is not harming or intimidating fellow citizens
• that guns in the hands of the populace decrease crime
• that citizens have a right to self-protection
• that an armed populace decreases the overall risk of violent crime, because it acts as a deterrent for criminals who cannot know whether their next prospective victim - or someone nearby - will turn out to be armed
• that law-abiding citizens have a responsibility to provide their own protection because governments cannot be held civilly or criminally responsible for failing to provide such protection
• that carrying firearms properly makes one safer, not less safe; for the same reason that police forces carry firearms
• that gun ownership protects citizens from the excesses of government, and provides the possibility of revolution, if necessary
• that the government should do a better job of enforcing existing laws rather than creating new ones

Degrees of gun control

There are many areas of debate into exactly what kinds of firearms should be allowed to be privately owned, if any, and how and where they may be used.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In the United States, full-automatic weapons are technically federally legal, but have very restrictive requirements. They must have been manufactured and registered before May 19, 1986, require a single payment of a $200 transfer tax, approval must be met in writing prior to purchase from the local sheriff or chief of police, the ATF, submitting a photograph and fingerprints, and waiting around 6 months. Written persmission must be given by the ATF at least 30 days in advance if one wishes to take his full-automatic firearm out of his state. Due to the static number of full-automatic firearms on the market (fixed at 1986 levels), their collective value continues to increase. Most full-automatic firearms for sale cost in excess of $8,000, which for many seeking to make a legal purchase is the most prohibitve factor. Several states have decided to prohibit the sales of full-automatic firearms altogether. In most US states however, one can buy many semi-automatic firearms over the counter if the buyer meets basic legal requirements, and after completing the proper paperwork and a criminal background check.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Internationally, many countries have an outright ban on full-automatic weapons, and some countries ban nearly all kinds of firearms.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In Switzerland, however, every male between the ages of 20 and 42 is considered a candidate for conscription into the military, and following a brief period of active duty will commonly be enrolled in the national guard until age or debility ends his service obligation. During their national guard enrollment, these men are required to keep their government-issued selective fire combat rifles and semi-automatic handguns in their homes, together with a specified quantity of government-issued ammunition, sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that each reservist is always combat-ready. In addition to these official weapons, Swiss citizens commonly purchase surplus-to-inventory combat rifles, and shooting is a popular sport in all the Swiss cantons. Ammunition (also MilSpec surplus) sold at rifle ranges is supposed to be expended at the time of purchase.

Related Topics:
Switzerland - National guard - Selective fire - Semi-automatic - MilSpec

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The case in Switzerland demonstrates that the widespread possession and use of military-grade small arms is wholly compatible with one of the lowest murder rates in the world. Gun control advocates point out, however, that the degree of training Swiss receive in gun care and use, and the fact that the owners of these guns are known to the government, in and of itself constitutes a kind of gun control.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Another hot issue is whether individuals have the right to carry a handgun concealed on their person, even if it is perfectly legal and easy to own a pistol in general. In the United States another area of dispute is whether any requirement that firearms be registered constitutes a violation of the Second Amendment by impairing the exercise of that explicitly protected right. There is the reasonable perception that firearms registration - by making it easier for government officers to target gun owners for harrassment and confiscation - constitutes an easily exploited encroachment upon the personal privacy and the property rights of the private citizen. Gun control advocates excuse the intrusive imposition of a registration requirement by arguing that it is merely a reasonable precaution similar to the registration of privately-owned motor vehicles?the primary counterpoint being vehicle ownership's lack of explicit Constitutional protection.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~