cuchulainn
Member
from the Kentucky Post
http://www.kypost.com/2003/11/19/kylifemain111903.html
http://www.kypost.com/2003/11/19/kylifemain111903.html
Americans and guns
Debate pits the rights of individuals against controlling the use of arms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Kerry Duke
Kentucky Life editor
When it comes to the issue of guns in America, there is never a cooling off period.
The debate over guns and controlling them always simmers hot, boiling over whenever a high profile shooting occurs, a new gun law is proposed or an advocacy group steps up its campaign.
Those who advocate gun control laws point to the daily headlines on gun violence and grim statistics on senseless slayings as proof of the need to curb handguns.
Those who advocate for gun rights point to the Second Amendment and counter anti-gun arguments by noting that crime rates have actually fallen as more and more states have allowed citizens to carry concealed weapons.
These are not just theoretical arguments. They shape laws, affect court decisions and influence politics. They end up on agendas at city hall, the state capital and Washington. Consider:
• Anti- and pro-gun sides are marshalling forces for a fight next year in Congress over renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban. The law, which outlaws the sale of semiautomatic assault weapons in the United States, expires in September 2004 unless Congress and President Bush renew it.
• Anti-gun forces are readying to battle a bill in Congress that would grant gun manufacturers and dealers immunity against many lawsuits, including ones already in court brought by shooting victims and municipalities. The lawsuits target gun makers for not adding safety features and gun dealers for practices that make it easy for criminals to get guns. Anti-gun forces claim the law would allow gun makers to build defective firearms and dealers to negligently sell to traffickers without recourse. The bill also seeks to prevent lawsuits that have merit and are in progress, such as one filed by the victims of snipers in the Washington, D.C. area against the dealer who sold the guns to both the accused and has been unable to account for over 230 weapons sold, including one used in the shootings. Pro-gun forces, like the National Rifle Association, characterize the law more as "tort reform," saying it will protect firearms manufacturers and dealers from malicious lawsuits aimed at bankrupting a law-abiding American industry. Already 33 states have enacted laws blocking such lawsuits.
• Since 1998, at least 33 municipalities, counties and states have sued gun makers, many claiming that manufacturers, through irresponsible marketing, allowed weapons to reach criminals. No suits have been successful in collecting damages. Among the lawsuits filed was one by the city of Cincinnati, which was dropped earlier this year because of concerns Congress would grant immunity to gun manufacturers and make the case more difficult to pursue.
• Gun rights advocates have made gains as an increasing number of states have enacted legislation permitting citizens to carry concealed weapons. In 1986, a total of 30 states had laws allowing some form of the concealed carry of weapons. By this year, the number had grown to 43. In 1986, 19 states forbade guns to be carried altogether; by this year, the number had dwindled to five.
• Kentucky passed legislation seven years ago that established a permitting system under which most law-abiding residents are able to obtain permits to carry concealed weapons. The Kentucky State Police report that there are currently slightly more than 77,000 permits to carry concealed weapons in force in the commonwealth.
• Legislation to permit Ohioans to carry concealed weapons bogged down this fall over disagreements between the House's version of the bill and the Senate's. And an Ohio Supreme Court decision upheld the state's ban on carrying concealed weapons in a case arising in Hamilton County, Ohio.
• Gun-control forces have won on other fronts. New Jersey's state legislature this year voted to require all new handguns sold to be so-called "smart guns," as soon as the technology is in place. Smart guns, which are still in development, use microchips inside the gun that allows only their owners to fire them.
Earlier, the state took another gun-control lead as the first to require guns to be sold with trigger locks.
Gun-control advocates say smart guns can help prevent accidental deaths or suicides as well as curb some homicides by rendering the weapon useless if stolen. Tennessee, New York and Ohio are considering similar smart-gun measures.
Every American, armed or otherwise, has an opinion on the role guns should play in our society.
Should handguns be outlawed? Is tough gun registration the answer? What about waiting periods, sales at guns shows and mail order weapons?
Because the Second Amendment was written hundreds of years ago in a different time, is it still relevant?
Is it only applicable today to the right of state militias to arm themselves?
Could our forefathers, who loaded single shots into muskets, have ever envisioned a world of weapons that rip off 400 rounds per minute?
Indeed, many who argue for gun rights say gun ownership is such a fundament right of individuals that its erosion might lead to the erosion of other individual rights such as free speech, right of assembly, right to worship and freedom from non-lawful search and seizure.
They contend more gun control laws wouldn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals since they don't obey laws anyway but only make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own them.
They say falling crime statistics point up that law-abiding gun owners and concealed carry laws are helping reduce crime.
When it comes to laws, they say there are plenty already on the books and that the problem is they aren't enforced.
Publication Date: 11-19-2003