Topic
Gun control
About: Gun control is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1211 publications have been published within this topic receiving 16516 citations. The topic is also known as: firearms control & gun law.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The authors examined the frequency of national news media coverage of extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) and analyzed the content of news articles related to a sample of states that considered ERPO legislation after the Parkland shooting.
Abstract: Background Following the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, there was a dramatic increase in media coverage of extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) and in state policy proposals for ERPO laws. This study documents the frequency of news coverage of ERPOs throughout 2018 and examines the narratives used by media outlets to describe this risk-based firearm policy. Methods Using a mixed-method descriptive design, we examine the frequency of national news media coverage of ERPO legislation in 2018, before and after the Parkland shooting, and analyze the content of news articles related to a sample of states that considered ERPO legislation after the shooting. Results We find a sharp increase in the frequency of articles related to ERPOs following the Parkland shooting and smaller increases in coverage surrounding ERPO policy proposals and other public mass shootings that year. Nearly three-quarters of articles in our content analysis mentioned the Parkland shooting. The news media often mentioned or quoted politicians compared to other stakeholders, infrequently specified uses for ERPOs (e.g., prevention of mass violence, suicide, or other violence), and rarely included evidence on effectiveness of such policies. More than one-quarter of articles mentioned a mass shooting perpetrator by name, and one-third of articles used the term "gun control." Conclusions This study describes the emerging public discourse, as informed by media messaging and framing, on ERPOs as states continue to debate and implement these risk-based firearm violence prevention policies.
4 citations
•
TL;DR: In this paper, the Second Amendment applies to civil suits for trespass, negligence, and nuisance, but does not cover gun-neutral laws of general applicability like assault and disturbing the peace.
Abstract: Particularly in places with few recognizable gun control laws, 'gun neutral" civil and criminal rules are an important but often-unnoticed basis for the legal regulation of guns. The burdens that these rules impose on the keeping and bearing of arms are at times significant, but they are also incidental, which raises hard questions about the boundaries between constitutional law, regulation, and legally enforceable private ordering. Does the Second Amendment apply to civil suits for trespass, negligence, and nuisance? Does the Amendment cover gun-neutral laws of general applicability like assault and disturbing the peace? In the course of addressing these practical questions and the broader conceptual challenges that they represent, this Article fashions analytic tools that may be useful to a wide range of constitutional problems. Language: en
4 citations
•
TL;DR: The National Rifle Association (NRA) is one of the most powerful interest groups in the United States and has been a leading opponent of gun control legislation as mentioned in this paper, which has been attributed to its ability to manipulate existing irrationalities among its supporters.
Abstract: I. INTRODUCTION: ARMING THE IRRATIONAL Many Americans responded to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 by purchasing firearms. The Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that it conducted 455,000 more background checks on gun buyers during the six-month period following 9-11 than during the same period the year before.' Although a handgun is unlikely to effectively defend against a suicide attack with an airplane, an anthrax letter, or a car bomb, owning a deadly weapon made many people feel safer. One gun retailer reported, "My handgun [sales] have gone crazy. It seemed like immediately [after September 11] it was real, real crazy, people walking in right after each other wanting a gun."2 Numerous studies show that the presence of a firearm in the home increases the likelihood of violence against family members.3 Despite this, gun ownership is widespread in the United States - estimates indicate that there may be as many as 200 million privately owned guns in the country, and almost one third of households own at least one firearm.4 Although close to 30,000 Americans are killed by gunfire every year,5 the firearm industry is one of the least regulated in the nation.6 This is in large part due to the efforts of the National Rifle Association (NRA), a leading opponent of gun control legislation. This paper argues that a large part of the NRA's success is due to its ability to manipulate existing irrationalities-things that make people go "real, real crazy"-among its supporters to intensify and mobilize opposition to gun control. The first section will briefly describe the legislative power of the NRA. The second section will review the existing literature on irrationality and risk. The final section will demonstrate how the NRA exploits these irrationalities more successfully than the interest groups that favor gun control. II. THE POWER OF THE NRA Polling data consistently shows that the positions taken by the NRA are not the positions favored by the American public.7 The NRA is opposed to any new gun control legislation, no matter how sensible. The NRA has opposed bans on guns with plastic components (which can pass through metal detectors) and armor piercing "cop killer" bullets.8 It favored allowing the federal ban on military-style assault weapons to expire in 2004.9 It opposed limited measures that reduce illegal gun trafficking, such as "one gun a month" laws.10 Moreover, the NRA has lobbied against every federal firearms regulation-from the 1934 National Firearms Act, which banned machine guns, to the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which required background checks on gun purchasers.11 The NRA dominates the debate on gun control. Political scientist Robert Spitzer describes the NRA as "the fierce three-headed watchdog from Greek mythology, Cerberus, ... [dominating] and [defining] gun politics for most of the twentieth century."12 Fortune Magazine declared that the NRA was the most powerful lobby group in Washington in 2001,13 and observers of American politics have speculated that the NRA has surpassed the religious right as the most important constituency of the Republican Party.14 Many frequently cite the NRA as the paradigmatic example of an effective interest group, especially in the context of its demonstrated ability to trump public opinion that might favor stricter gun control.15 There is also a strong perception that the NRA has the ability to swing elections. Many Democrats believe the NRA and the gun control issue cost Al Gore the White House in 2000.16 Others argue that the assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill were responsible for the Republican take-over of Congress in 1994.17 Supporters of the NRA are likely to be single-issue voters-they will cast their ballot based solely on a candidate's position on gun control.18 Representative Peter Smith (R-NH) sponsored a bill to ban assault weapons in 1989 after promising the NRA he would oppose all gun control. …
4 citations
01 Jan 1992
4 citations
••
TL;DR: More effective education and screening of the overly aggressive person or the self-destructive individual are suggested, in terms of school mental health programs, screening at the police precinct level, gun permit application level, and through effective suicide prevention and crisis centers.
Abstract: Various arguments against firearms from the standpoint of their role in homicide and suicide are discussed. It is contended by some that murderers are law-abiding citizens who get into trouble because of the availability of firearms. A study in Detroit indicated that both murderers and suicidal persons are prone to misuse the firearm as they would misuse any potential instrument of destruction, independent of gun control measures. If the Second Amendment to the Constitution is to be used by those favoring the right to bear arms, the argument must involve an incorporation of an inherent responsibility toward the use of the firearm; that people wanting to use them should be able to accept reasonable rules and personality qualification as a factor in having the right to obtain them. More effective education and screening of the overly aggressive person or the self-destructive individual are suggested, in terms of school mental health programs, screening at the police precinct level, gun permit application level, and through effective suicide prevention and crisis centers.
4 citations