On April 11, 2022, President Biden announced plans to increase restrictions on ghost guns: unregistered, kit-assembled, or 3D-printed guns without serial numbers in light of recent gun violence during the pandemic (which Bryan wrote about here). Currently, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) does not consider ghost guns to be firearms, which means that they aren’t affected by weapon sale restrictions that involve background checks, even though they work the same as other guns once assembled.
Biden’s “crackdown” on ghost guns essentially amounts to treating ghost guns as other firearms, requiring background checks and serial numbers for gun kits/parts. His new rules also involve a requirement for gun sellers to keep records “for as long as they are in business,” rather than being able to get rid of them after 20 years (Bloomberg). The president also announced a nomination for the new leader of the ATF, Stevel Dettelbach, a former US attorney for the Northern District of Ohio pending Senate confirmation.
While a step in the right direction, Washington Post Columnist Paul Waldman expresses disappointment in the limited size of the step, and I’m inclined to agree. Requiring serial numbers for ghost guns will help law enforcement track down those responsible for shootings, yes, but “in their statement, the Justice Department notes that ghost guns were involved in just 692 ‘homicide or attempted homicide investigations’ in a six-year period running from 2016-2021,” with the overall number of gun homicides around 100,000 with incomplete 2021 data (Washington Post). Every little bit helps, but only going after ghost guns, which are involved in less than 0.7% of gun homicides, is not enough. Waldman says, “it shows how limited the administration’s tools are in the absence of legislation— which, of course, will by stymied by Republicans and a few pro-gun Democrats, unless the political incentives change.”
Those opposing gun restrictions, as always, are up in arms (pun intended), claiming that more restrictions infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, which is an argument that I fail to understand, especially when the currently planned restrictions amount to registration and background checks. It might take longer to purchase a gun, sure, but you can still purchase one, and this only applies to ghost guns.
Those who are less enthusiastic about these restrictions I can understand, as I am in the same boat, but with opposition in Congress and the difficulty passing legislation that comes with that, it’s hard to do much more. I don’t think these restrictions are going to majorly reduce gun violence, especially since those who really want to get a firearm without registering it are likely going to find a way to get one anyway, but if they can still do something, that’s definitely better than doing nothing.
Questions:
What Are Ghost Guns, and What Is Biden Trying to Do About Them?
Those who are less enthusiastic about these restrictions I can understand, as I am in the same boat, but with opposition in Congress and the difficulty passing legislation that comes with that, it’s hard to do much more. I don’t think these restrictions are going to majorly reduce gun violence, especially since those who really want to get a firearm without registering it are likely going to find a way to get one anyway, but if they can still do something, that’s definitely better than doing nothing.
Questions:
- What do you think about these restrictions? Are they enough?
- How big of an effect do you think the restrictions are going to have?
- Do you think there’s a realistic way to decrease gun violence that doesn’t infringe upon the Second Amendment right to bear arms? If so, how?
What Are Ghost Guns, and What Is Biden Trying to Do About Them?
Biden vows to crack down on ghost guns – 'weapons of choice for many criminals' | US gun control | The Guardian
Biden announces new rule on "ghost guns" aimed at preventing gun crimes - CBS News
Opinion | Biden's small steps on guns are both welcome and dispiriting - The Washington Post
(Good luck on your AP tests everyone!)
Biden announces new rule on "ghost guns" aimed at preventing gun crimes - CBS News
Opinion | Biden's small steps on guns are both welcome and dispiriting - The Washington Post
(Good luck on your AP tests everyone!)
9 comments:
I don't think these restrictions are going to do much for gun violence in our country. As you stated in your article it counts for less than 1% of total gun violence in our country, and with how difficult it is to get legislation through and many people disagreeing to pass these restrictions it does not seem to be worth it. I also agree with what you have to say this does not infringe on people's ability to gain access to a firearm, they are still going to be able to obtain one if they desire so, it is just going to take more time than it did before if this legislation is going to get passed. I do not have a realistic way to decrease gun violence, considering how our political parties are polarized coming to agree on an idea seems to be impossible. Many people on the left want to create drastic changes to gun laws, and many people on the right want little restrictions on guns, coming to an agreement on gun control seems impossible.
I think those restrictions are enough for ghost guns since they do relatively less harm but are just as dangerous as guns, so holding ghost guns on the same standard as the average firearm prevents a potential loophole for unqualified people to obtain them and helps bring the legislation up to date. However like Freja said it has little impact on overall gun violence since ghost guns account for less than 0.7% of all gun homicides. I think there is no realistic way to decrease gun violence without infringing upon the Second Amendment right to bear arms, but I think it’s worth infringing if it protects the safety of others. For example, Roe v. Wade infringed on women’s rights to privacy and freedom of choice protected by the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th amendments of the constitution in order to protect the unborn life of the baby, which is similar to what is happening with gun violence. I agree that currently it is very difficult to decrease gun violence considering the polarization of politics in the federal legislature. Like you wrote in your article the restriction only adds additional registration and background checks and doesn't really infringe on 2nd amendment rights but it already has backlash, so a stricter law would find it even more difficult to pass.
These changes are very important and I feel should be just as restricted if not more than regular guns. Ghost guns can be created by just about anyone with access to a 3-D printer and with no identification, it can lead to dangerous consequences. According to ABC10, "Major California law enforcement agencies have reported that approximately 30% or more of all the guns they recover in crimes are privately manufactured firearms"(ABC10). Without registration, people are able to use them and they won't be able to be tracked. With normal guns they are sold and often have lots of registration that needs to be done so that it is legal. Ghost guns don't have any registration which allows for easier access to firearms and that creates a huge problem. Knowing that people who have a restraining order on normal guns are still about to get firearms is a horrifying thought. Restrictions on these kinds of weapons is extremely necessary but finding a way to limit them is the harder part. The 2nd amendment protects the right to bear arms but restrictions to protect public safety are just as important.
To me, ghost guns pose an extremely larger threat than registered guns. With 3D printing, cartels and organized crime gangs can begin manufacturing their own weapons, use them however they'd like, then dispose of them without tracing. When bullets are found at crime scenes, they generally have a pattern of nicks that's characteristic of the kind of gun they were fired from, this then can be corroborated with evidence from nearby crimes, guns used in prior events, firearms sales etc. With ghost guns, investigators get none of these luxuries. A bullet from a ghost gun could be laying at a crime scene, and that gun/bullet has no ties with anyone in the database, and by the time the investigators get their lab results back, that gun has already been disposed of. From a crime protection standpoint, ghost guns are an absolute nightmare. I see Colin's point that ghost guns were involved in relatively few homicides recently, and most criminals won't be able to afford them, but these ghost guns will eventually be extremely prevalent for the syndicates and the larger gangs that have the money and connections where mass-manufacturing weapons is advantageous. Maybe not now, but in 5 years when everybody catches on, it will be more widespread. Not to mention, obtaining these guns has 0 background-related barriers to entry, even outside of a gang violence standpoint, these ghost guns could accidentally end up in the hands of children. It's a slap in the face to gun safety, and national security.
I think it's good that restrictions be placed on 3-d guns as it makes sense to have those restirctions on the books even if the government has trouble regulating it. I think initially there will be some effectiveness to these restrictions but I think Joe Biden would need to pour more resources into the ATF as well as review how well these restrictions are going. any kind of restriction or rules the government inputs needs to be fine tunned after some results of them. restrictions on guns and whatnot be it good or bad needs to b studied in order to be effective in the long term. As for the infringement on the second ammendmment it depends on if you interpret the right for states to have militias or as sense of individuals owning rights. if its the latter than yes any restrictions on guns is an infringement on the second ammendment. Though that isnt particuarlly bad since we also have restrictions of speech and relgion if its deemed too extreme for society, the same should be treated with guns in that regard.
I think that the restrictions are good and important as they aim to prevent the spread of a more "backdoor" gun trade, and thus they will work to increase safety and prevent access to such weapons. I don't understand how it is reasonable not to consider these guns as firearms and not subject people to background checks amongst other registration processes when attempting to obtain them, and believe it is a good idea to reclassify ghost guns as firearms given their destructive capabilities. With this in mind, I don't think that regulating this subset of "gun trade" will have a major impact in limiting violence as is evidenced by the 0.7% involvement of such weapons in homicides, and other firearms are the predominant weapons used in instances of violence. In order to prevent the devastation caused by access to guns within the U.S. while not infringing on peoples' second amendment rights there need to be tightly enforced regulations which reduce gun accessibility through increasing systems which ensure accountability and proper screening, not which ban gun ownership entirely. While ideally sure it would be great to simply ban gun ownership this reality is not realistic given constitutional foundations and large, predominantly Republican support for such ownership. Increased polarization as we've studied indicates that there will be no compromises over the issue of gun rights and accessibility in the U.S. in the near future, and that the issue will ensue and be a frequent focus on policy agendas. Hopefully there can be increased regulation however, and this act is a good, but small step in that direction.
I support gun restrictions because it seems like every day there is some new death(s) on the news that was caused by a gun. They seriously need more and more restrictions to prevent more deaths which is why I like gun restrictions. I totally understand the idea of the Second Amendment right to bear arms but at some point, guns are used in the wrong way more often than they are used in the right way. In terms of these restrictions, I support the notion of these restrictions but not necessarily the legislation itself. As you mentioned, these restrictions will have minimal impact on eliminating deaths caused by guns. They certainly aren’t enough to eliminate the problem that guns impose. These restrictions will do something to ghost guns and are definitely something much needed but there needs to be even more restrictions if we want to eliminate as many deaths as possible.
It’s going to be really hard to decrease gun violence while not infringing on the Second Amendment. I think it's possible to restrict guns a good amount to decrease gun violence while not making it impossible (just not easy at all) to attain a gun. Any further restrictions will be met with fierce opposition from Second Amendment supporters like the NRA and the conservative right. With the way the US legislation system works and the amount of opposition against restrictions, it's going to be really hard to decrease gun violence especially in the US.
As others have said, I believe that the restrictions on ghost guns are a step in the right direction for the America. I think that ghost guns are things that have needed to be addressed for a long time, especially considering that they allow for prospective gun owners to potentially complete bypass any other mandatory background checks/restrictions put upon American gun stores.
I deeply agree with Amitai in his statement that it is not reasonable that these ghost guns have not required background checks and registration processes in the past. Despite the small amount of ghost guns that are actually used for homicide, I think the limitation is still an important step even if it only saves as little as a dozen lives(though, I expect this number to be much higher). In addition, I believe that this legislation has another purpose as well: proponents of pro-gun legislation often state that those who want guns will get guns no matter if the legal methods are no longer available. While there is still a long way to go if the United States wants to limit firearms, these ghost gun restrictions are a step in the right direction towards limiting the scope of these counterarguments.
I agree with Waldman’s statements and the stance that the government isn’t doing enough to limit gun violence. The numbers speak for themselves and it’s clear that even with Biden’s new restrictions there will still be a vast amount of gun violence that goes unaccounted for.
The effects of the restrictions are probably going to correlate to the number of ghost guns used for violent crimes. Since there are very few crimes committed with ghost guns, I doubt that there will be much of an effect at all. On top of that, if people truly wanted to get a gun they would find another loophole to get around Biden’s new restrictions.
The Second Amendment is very clear when it states that individuals have the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, this makes it very difficult to prevent people from owning guns if they meet the requirements such as age, background check, etc. without violating constitutional rights. I think the only way to decrease violence would be to strengthen the restrictions that are already in place such as putting more effort into background checks and examining motives for owning guns. I think the reason that this issue has been present throughout time is because of the difficulty and hassle of making progress in limiting access to firearms which results in a sort of gridlock.
Post a Comment