Guns
For Conservatives:
Viewpoint: Liberals are generally in favor of gun control legislation in order to better protect the people of the United States.
Reasoning: The Second Amendment to the Constitution reads:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
This text is one of the most important and highly contested sections of the Constitution, in large part due to its wording. In the minds of liberals, gun control legislation does not infringe upon the rights of American citizens due to the Constitution’s use of the word “militia.” During the 1700s, the United States was comprised of 13 colonies, each housing individuals who formed militias. These militias trained and armed recruits for the American Continental Army, which at the time was the prevalent force fighting for independence from Britain. Many times throughout the war, the militias were called upon to fight with the Continental Army, which often was not sufficiently armed on its own. Had these individuals not possessed and brought their own weapons, their value in the war would have been significantly diminished. Liberals generally argue that this situation, occurring at the same time the Constitution was being written, compelled the Founding Fathers to include the Second Amendment in the final draft. They maintain that because militias no longer exist nor are needed, the Second Amendment does not permit individual civilians to possess firearms.
In addition to a legal perspective, liberals have many ethical reasons for wanting gun control legislation in the first place. In 2021 alone, there were 692 mass shootings in the United States. While there is no officially accepted definition of a mass shooting, Gun Violence Archive qualifies it as an instance where four or more people, not including the shooter, are shot or killed at the same general time and location. Many liberals refer to the large number of deaths by gun in the United States as a reason to restrict American citizens’ from legally buying firearms. However, they have varying beliefs on the ideal reach of potential gun control legislation.
A significant number of liberals, though not all, do not feel that all guns should be entirely banned from the market. Instead, they advocate for Americans to have fewer guns as a result of firearms being harder to obtain. They want to achieve this in several different ways, whether that be increasingly intense background checks during the gun-purchasing process, or extending and enforcing gun licensing and registration laws.
Despite some slight difference of opinion regarding this aspect of gun control, a theme that is consistent with the general liberal view is that there should be an absolute ban on assault rifles. Assault rifles, which include automatic and semi-automatic guns, can fire multiple bullets without requiring a manual reload. Today, many shootings in America have involved the use of automatic weapons. Many liberals argue that when the Second Amendment to the Constitution was drafted, it simply referred to muskets and single-shot pistols, the weapons in use at the time. Therefore, they argue not only that an assault rifle ban would limit the total number of shootings, but also that the Founding Fathers would never have intended individuals to own such advanced and dangerous weapons in the first place. Some liberals do acknowledge that many of the perpetrators of mass shootings obtained their guns illegally and therefore would not abide by any gun control law, regardless of its extremity. Still, they argue that when guns are harder or impossible to get legally, fewer people will have them, so it will be more difficult for criminals to access firearms illegally.
To further promote their cause, liberals point to other countries in which gun control legislation has been effective. In Australia, after the Port Arthur Massacre in 1996 in which a man killed 35 people and injured 23 people with a semi-automatic rifle, the Prime Minister enacted the National Firearms Agreement. The bill forbade the use of automatic rifles, semi-automatic rifles, and pump-action shotguns across the entire country. Additionally, as part of a nationwide gun buyback scheme, authorities retrieved 640,000 weapons from civilians. In the wake of these measures, gun-homicides in Australia fell by 59 percent. Using these statistics, many liberals advocate increased regulation of individually-owned firearms in the United States.
Sources:
The Top 3 Arguments for Gun Control – ThoughtCo
Port Arthur Massacre: The Shooting Spree That Changed Australia’s Gun Laws – NBC News
Understanding The Second Amendment: Why Yesterday’s Rights About Guns And Militias Don’t Make Sense Today – Huffington PostMASS SHOOTINGS IN 2020 – Gun Violence Archive
US mass shootings are on pace to match last year — the worst ever, Gun Violence Archive data show – CNN
Assault weapons must be banned in America – The Washington Post
For Liberals:
Viewpoint: Conservatives generally feel that Americans citizens do and should have the right to bear arms. Most conservatives are opposed to gun control legislation that would restrict what they believe is a fundamental right.
Reasoning: The Second Amendment to the Constitution reads:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Many liberals argue that the use of the word “militia” in this text translates differently today than it is interpreted. They say that militias have become obsolete, so the only people for whom the Second Amendment applies are members of the National Guard, the modern-day descendants of militia members. Conservatives tend to feel differently.
In the 2008 Supreme Court Case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 5 to 4 that the Second Amendment applies to all individuals in the United States. Justice Scalia, who is the author of the Heller opinion, explains his view. He points out that the text of the Second Amendment, written above, contains a prefatory clause (A well… free State) and an operative clause (the right… infringed). Scalia notes that the operative clause begins with the words: “the right of the people,” a phrase that, at every other point in the Constitution where it appears, precedes the description of a right that unambiguously applies to the individual.
This explanation, however, leaves the question of the actual purpose for the inclusion of the prefatory clause unanswered. A prefatory clause was a standard feature at the time when the Second Amendment was drafted. It is intended not to put a limit on the operative clause but to explain the operative clause’s purpose. Scalia argues that the reason that the prefatory clause is part of the Second Amendment is to prevent the elimination of the militia. It does not, according to him, suggest that the the Founding Fathers believed the existence of militias to be the only justification for individual firearm ownership.
“The threat that the new Federal Government would destroy the citizens’ militia by taking away their arms was the reason that right — unlike some other English rights — was codified in a written Constitution” ~ Justice Scalia, Heller
Not only do most conservatives believe that American citizens are legally permitted to own firearms, they are entirely in favor of the fact. As opposed to liberals, who see guns primarily as destructive weapons meant to kill people, conservatives generally feel that guns are essential for protection. According to American Police Beat, the average time that it takes for the police to arrive at their destination is ten minutes. In a situation in which an armed criminal is shooting at victims, conservatives feel that victims should have the option to arm and defend themselves — a recourse that gun control legislation might inhibit.
Many liberals argue that gun control legislation will prevent both the criminal and the victim from obtaining the weapons in the first place. Conservatives disagree. Gun control legislation involves implementing boundaries on purchasing firearms legally. However, a national survey conducted in October 2015 of inmates in state prisons found that, of males ages 18-40 who admitted to having a gun at the time of their arrest, 90 percent had obtained the firearm illegally. Such methods often involve the underground gun market, in which guns are swapped and shared among gangs and drug dealers. Many conservatives point to these statistics as evidence that gun control legislation will not make it more difficult for criminals to become armed. Instead, it will just decrease the number of guns owned by law-abiding citizens. As a result, fewer people will have the weapons necessary to defend themselves in dangerous situations.
A common liberal argument is that gun control legislation has enjoyed much success in countries like Australia, where a nationwide gun buyback scheme eliminated 640,000 firearms from civilians. Beyond arguing that this process would be unconstitutional in the United States, many conservatives believe it precipitated the rising number of stabbings in Australia. A criminology report in 2013 found that the percentage of people killed by guns had decreased from 25 percent in the 1980s to 13 percent in 2008/09 and 2009/10. However, in the last ten years, the percentage of knife murders has risen from 30 to 41 percent. Furthermore, gun buyback programs have been implemented in many U.S. cities, and research indicates that they typically do not reduce the prevalence of gun violence. The most common explanation for this phenomenon is that those most prone to committing crime do not submit to gun buyback programs. According to one July 2021 study, there is “no evidence that [gun buyback programs] reduce suicides or homicides where a firearm was involved.”
Conservatives typically support some gun control measures — for example, implementing universal background checks and preventing people with mental illnesses from owning guns. However, they remain strongly opposed to policies like assault weapons bans that would restrict, in their minds, their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
Sources:
Of Course the Second Amendment Protects an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms – National Review
Conservative Perspectives on Gun Control – ThoughtCo
Average-Police-Response-Time to a 911 call? – Women’s Self-Defense Institute
Knife killings on the rise in Australia as gun murders fall, says new criminology report – The Weekend Australian
How dangerous people get their guns – The Conversation
Just How Far Apart Are The Two Parties on Gun Control? – FiveThirtyEight