Will Banning Assault Weapons Improve Gun Violence?

Last December, following the tragic shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the American Public Health Association (APHA) issued a letter calling for the renewal of the federal ban on assault weapons. The main issue was to close the loophole that made it very easy to obtain firearms from unauthorized sellers – mainly those at gun shows.

While Congress is still deciding what should be done about gun violence, several more school shootings have occurred since the Dec. 14^th Newtown shootings: On January 10^th, Taft Union School in Bakersfield California; on January 15^th, Stevens Institute of Business & Arts in St. Louis; and on January 15^th, Hazard Community and Technical College in Kentucky.

Sadly, school shootings aren’t really new. They have been around for centuries. Historians discovered that the first school shooting was recorded in 1764 in Pennsylvania when Lenape warriers (Native Americans) killed a teacher in front of his students. In 1853, a student shot and killed his teacher in Kentucky for punishing his brother; in 1891, a 70-year-old man shot students in a playground in Newburgh, New York; in 1917, a man shot a high school student in New York; and in 1946, a 15-year-old was shot at a Brooklyn school by other youth.

So why all the fuss now? What seems to have changed is the massive amount of attention these shootings are gaining through the media. Thanks to instant access to up-to-the-second information on the happenings in the nation (and the world), we are able to see all of the tragedies as they unfold. I think part of the problem stems from people’s need for attention. So basically violence gains the reward of attention. Remember when your child threw that temper tantrum at age 3? And, remember the more you yelled, the louder he got. In general terms (barring no serious medical issues), it was all about gaining attention. Perhaps that’s why we continue to see violence at insurmountable levels with large numbers of deaths and bloody horror scenes splayed across screens everywhere.

Americans may feel that controlling the weapons distribution may be the best answer. I’m not sure so about that. Research performed in 2001 regarding the impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Violence “found no evidence of reductions in multiple-victim gun homicides or multiple gunshot wound victimizations.” (Source: Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2001.) Of interest, one of the researchers for this article was from the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology at the University of Pennsylvania. At that time, the authors concluded that “the legislative process in a democratic society often results in modest policy changes that are not likely to produce large impacts.”

A follow-up study on the 1994 weapons ban focused on gun production rather than gun violence. This particular element showed more promise. If production had been significantly reduced, it would have driven the market price up to an out-of-reach purchase point by most people. This would have put fewer guns in the hands of criminals (and potential criminals). However, what actually happened was just prior to the implementation of the ban, production soared so that there would be a large supply. Hence, the price dropped and guns were less expensive and placed in a variety of hands – criminal and non-criminal, children and adults.

Despite our history, which lacks producing legislation that reduces gun violence, our congressional leaders continue to grapple over the issue with Republicans and Democrats taking their respective sides. Right now, the only focus that seems to be on the table is stricter background checks for prospective gun buyers, mainly to keep guns out of the hands of those with mental illnesses. But, think about it…what does that do for the people who already have the weapons? Quite frankly, nothing. Based on history, controlling who has guns and who doesn’t hasn’t made any impact on gun violence.

I really don’t have the answer, but I strongly believe that stricter background checks won’t reduce the violence. Overall, the problem is a holistic one…the violence seems to be a product of society. Jobs have been lost, people are in poverty, and other are suffering with poor health issues such as chronic diseases and cancers. People are reaching out for attention. Some turn to drugs, others alcohol and gambling. Others turn to violence. 

The problem is greater than simple gun control. There has to be some shift in the mindset of the American people – a mindset that not only provides peace of mind for people, but health and well-being. Unfortunately, that type of mindset cannot be done through any legislation.

References:

Chew, K. (2013). 3 school shootings since Newtown. Retrieved from http://www.care2.com/causes/3-school-shootings-since-newtown.html.

Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2001). The impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Violence outcomes: An assessment of multiple outcome measures and some lessons for policy evaluation. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17(1), 33-72.

Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2002). The impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Markets: An assessment of short-term primary and secondary market effects. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18(3), 239-266

Schneider, J. (2013). Long history of US school shootings mean Obama is right, NRA is wrong. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2013/0116/Long-history-of-US-school-shootings-means-Obama-is-right-NRA-is-wrong.