New York Times
NBC
Image: New York Times
In reaction to the recent mass shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas that killed 26, a bipartisan group of senators has introduced Fix NICS (or National Instant Criminal Background Check System) Act, a measure that would require states and federal agencies to address possible plans to adhere to current laws regarding background checks for gun purchases. Specifically, states could take steps to upload criminal and mental health records into the system. Compliance would reward the state or federal agency with financial incentives, while failure to comply with this measure would bar federal agencies from political appointees bonuses.
This proposed bill is preceded by two similar laws that attempted to fix the reporting system for background checks -- the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 and the National Criminal History Improvement Program. According to NBC News, this bill has “the best chance of any effort to pass through Congress in recent years.”
To me, this proposed legislation is necessary and addresses the error in the system that allowed the Sutherland Springs shooter Devin P. Kelley to purchase guns, when he otherwise would have been barred from doing so because of his domestic violence conviction. However, this bill is rather narrow in its effect -- the bill aims to enforce laws that are currently in place. I believe that broader legislation for stricter gun purchasing regulations is necessary in order to further address the abnormal number of mass shootings in the US.
Discussion Questions:
What do you think about the Fix NICS Act? Do you think it will be enough to reduce the mass shootings in the US? If not, what measure do you believe the government should take regarding gun control?
6 comments:
A criticism of the new act is that it is somewhat narrow in its focus; many people claim the new policy to only emphasize the reporting of any infractions to the law to the NICS database. What research has show is that many incidents have gone unreported to NICS, and of these incidents, it was also found that a 2014 domestic violence conviction should have prevented the purchase of firearms. There is also the problem of black market gun sales and private auctions which arguably also need tighter laws as well. It appears that the NICS law is somewhat niche and I would argue for more expansive laws as well, although such an outcome would be very unlikely. Although mass shootings would be prevented (there are millions of felony charges unrecorded in NCIS according to NRA as well), there are many other ways to obtain guns both legally and illegally. However, this act is an important step in the right direction.
*purchase of firearms for the texas shooter
I agree that it is too narrow, but in the meantime, it is a good start until we can reach more consensus in Congress to enact a broader, more comprehensive approach to gun legislation. It makes sense to strengthen background check processes. If we are able to pass this legislation, it would be a good idea to revisit a ban on bump stocks. The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock device to modify a rifle to fire more rapidly. After the Las Vegas shooting, people believed that restrictions on bump stock sales would be a reasonable first step to address what happened. However, Congress lost its will to battle the NRA to ban these products; Massachusetts became the only state to ban bump stock sales on its own. This ban in Massachusetts is another small, narrow first step, but it is a start that points to the importance of doing something.
While it may seem too narrow,I definitely think that this new bill well help reduce the amount of mass shootings because I’m hoping that it would reduce the likelihood of past convicts, mentally ill, and emotionally unstable people from acquiring and improperly using guns. We have to start somewhere.It doesn’t guarantee the removal of mass shooting but it definitely makes it harder for people with malicious intent beyond self defence from owning a gun. At least the government is making conscious steps to alleviate the issue. I also feel it would be helpful to order to recheck those individuals who currently own guns using this process to ensure that everyone is held at the same standards. While this may receive some backlash, people should not be worried unless they are guilty of a crime or possible unable to pass the test. It maybe helpful that Congress also work to prohibit individuals from owning mass artilleries. If guns were used for self defence, as permitted by the 2nd, than one would not need a militaristic weapons, let alone a whole stock of them to protect themselves.
I think that even if the bill is a little narrow, the fact that there are changes in the gun purchasing system, making it more difficult for mentally unstable and past convicts to get a gun, is beneficial in terms of reducing the number of shootings. Progress is progress, and this bill being passed is better than nothing being done at all. While we cant completely stop mas shootings, we can reduce the chances of them, and this bill might be a small step in the right direction. People are still going to be able to get guns in other ways, but the NICS act will make it more difficult to for the "bad guys" to get a weapon legally.
I believe that this is a strong step in the right direction. While I do not know how much about the NICS system and whether or not this makes the bill too narrow, it would appear as though this is the most progressive and best option we have at the moment. Especially with the many recent events of shootings and terrorisms, limiting the ability to gain possession of a gun seems like a good way to prevent many deaths.
Post a Comment