PA Bill Number: HB829
Title: In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Description: An Act amending the act of April 12, 1951 (P.L.90, No.21), known as the Liquor Code, in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Last Action: Signed in House
Last Action Date: Jul 3, 2024
Common-sense gun control isn't so simple :: 04/27/2018
Students walked out of schools again on April 20 to rally around what they call common-sense gun control. However, just putting “common-sense” in front of something doesn’t make it right. Rhetorically, it may sound good – when you frame the argument as saving lives by restricting access to dangerous weapons, how could anyone be against it?
Yet millions of Americans are against gun control legislation. Most of them are not gun-worshipping maniacs. There are rational people who believe in the right to self defense and believe owning a gun ensures that right.
Pew conducted a poll in late February, after the tragic mass school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school in Parkland, Fla. The poll asked Americans, gun owners and non-gun owners alike, their opinions on gun control proposals.
The poll found some overlap between the two groups. About 83 percent of all respondents supported barring gun purchases from individuals on no-fly or watch lists. Nearly 90 percent of both gun owners and non-gun owners supported measures restricting gun access from the mentally ill.
While these proposals have been described as “common-sense” gun control, they’re hardly the cure-all for gun violence that gun control advocates believe. These proposals won’t even make much of a dent in gun violence statistics, but they will lead to civil liberty violations.
The no-fly list is one of the worst civil liberties offenders. It is a secretive list full of people suspected of being terrorists. As of February 2017, there are 1.6 million people on the list , 16,000 of which are U.S. citizens.
Jim Geraghty, a senior political correspondent of National Review, wrote about the flaws of the “no fly, no buy” proposal in February.
If we could be certain that everyone on the no-fly list was a genuine threat to others, this would be a different debate,” Geraghty wrote. “But the seemingly-innocuous proposal of banning gun sales to those on the no-fly list would allow the government to deny you Constitutional rights based upon a secret process with little or no independent review of those decisions.
As Geraghty notes, once you are on the list, it is incredibly difficult to be removed. Like most governmental processes, appealing the situation takes ages. There is no guarantee it would even work to prevent future mass shootings. Omar Mateen, the Pulse nightclub shooter, was under FBI suspicion for years but was removed prior to his act of domestic terrorism. Law enforcement, including the FBI, were warned about the Parkland shooter on numerous occasions and failed to act. Relying on a list compiled by the government to keep people safe just isn’t likely to work.
After Parkland, many lamented that the mentally ill can get a hold of guns. Even the president proposed looking at ways to restrict gun access to people with mental illness. But federal law already prevents gun ownership to those who have been committed —voluntarily or involuntarily — to a mental institution. Some gun control advocates think the federal law doesn’t go far enough, and have proposed everything from limiting gun access to those who merely seek psychiatric treatment to expanding the definition of mental illness.
When considering any of these policies, it is important to consider just how many people it would impact.
“Survey data indicate that half of all Americans will qualify for a psychiatric diagnosis at some point in their lives, while a quarter of them do in any given year,” Jacob Sullum, a senior editor at Reason , wrote. “Does [Gov] Rick Scott or Wayne LaPierre think the government should strip 160 million people, or even just 80 million, of their Second Amendment rights because their mental illnesses might predispose them to commit mass murder?”
People with mental illnesses aren’t even more likely to commit violent crimes. According to the American Mental Health Counselors Association , only 3-5 percent of all violence, including firearm violence, is attributable to serious mental illness. The AMHCA also notes that those with mental illnesses are 12 times more likely to be victimized compared to the overall U.S. population. Policies further limiting gun access to the mentally ill may discourage them from seeking help if they are afraid talking about their illness may cause them to lose their constitutional right.
Gun control advocates may have the best of intentions when they promote “common-sense” gun control, but they often fail to consider the civil liberties they would be trampling on with their proposals. Laws that stigmatize large swaths of the country without actually protecting anyone are far from being considered as common sense. It’s time to drop that rhetorical trick.
Lindsay Marchello ( @LynnMarch007 ) is a Young Voices Advocate and an Associate Editor with the Carolina Journal.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/common-sense-gun-control-isnt-so-simple
