DC and Gun ControlDC and Gun Control

Alex PeckAlex Peck

Arthur KonerArthur Koner

Period 5Period 5

The 2The 2ndnd Amendment and the Amendment and the ControversyControversy

Gun control advocates… Gun control advocates… this right doesn’t extend to this right doesn’t extend to military-type weapons and military-type weapons and assault firearmsassault firearms

The government The government is infringing on our is infringing on our civil liberties by civil liberties by trying to deny law-trying to deny law-abiding citizens abiding citizens their absolute right their absolute right to “bear arms”to “bear arms”

“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.”

But who is right? Safety or Liberty?

What is more important?

DC Gun Ban: Problems (according DC Gun Ban: Problems (according to the NRA)to the NRA)

The ban on firearms for The ban on firearms for home self-defense clashes home self-defense clashes with Congress’ reason for with Congress’ reason for passing the Gun Control Act passing the Gun Control Act (1968)(1968)

American citizens need to American citizens need to choose between protecting choose between protecting their lives and obeying the their lives and obeying the lawlaw

The District is not legally The District is not legally obligated to protect its obligated to protect its people, so the citizens people, so the citizens shouldn’t be criminalized shouldn’t be criminalized for self-defensefor self-defense

=

Congress and DC LawsCongress and DC Laws

• All DC budget reforms must All DC budget reforms must pass through Congress.pass through Congress.

• All DC laws must sit in All DC laws must sit in Congress for review periods Congress for review periods of 30-60 days during actual of 30-60 days during actual sessions.sessions.

• Why? – The federal Why? – The federal government is located in government is located in DC, so it has complete DC, so it has complete control over what happens control over what happens there.there.

• The District of Columbia The District of Columbia isn’t a state, so it doesn’t isn’t a state, so it doesn’t have sovereignty from have sovereignty from congressional controlcongressional control

Crime-fighters: National or Crime-fighters: National or State?State?

► The federal government has The federal government has control over crime-fighting control over crime-fighting policy (US v. Miller, Gun policy (US v. Miller, Gun Control Act of 1968, Brady Control Act of 1968, Brady Handgun Violence Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, etc.)Prevention Act of 1993, etc.)

► Gun control is not really a Gun control is not really a crime fighting issue. It is an crime fighting issue. It is an issue of constitutionality.issue of constitutionality.

► Firearms can cause violent Firearms can cause violent crime, which would harm crime, which would harm the general economic well-the general economic well-being of an area, leading to being of an area, leading to decreased commerce. This decreased commerce. This is why Congress can make is why Congress can make gun regulation laws.gun regulation laws.

OR

?

Supreme Court or NRA: Who’s Right?

NRA: the 2nd Amendment give individuals the absolute right to bear arms.

Supreme Court: Only the power of states to form militias is absolutely protected under the 2nd Amendment.

Again…What’s more important? Safety or Liberty?

People should be able to protect themselves, but should it come at the expense of constitutional legitimacy?

Gun Control Act (1968)Gun Control Act (1968)1.1. You are under 18, except with the written You are under 18, except with the written

consent of a parent or guardian. consent of a parent or guardian. 2.2. You were convicted in a federal court of a You were convicted in a federal court of a

crime punishable by imprisonment for crime punishable by imprisonment for more than a year, unless that crime was more than a year, unless that crime was related to business practices. related to business practices.

3.3. You were convicted in a state court of a You were convicted in a state court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for crime punishable by imprisonment for more than 2 years, unless that crime was more than 2 years, unless that crime was related to business practices. related to business practices.

4.4. You are a fugitive. You are a fugitive. 5.5. You are addicted to any substance or You are addicted to any substance or

unlawfully use a substance. unlawfully use a substance. 6.6. You have been determined to possess You have been determined to possess

mental deficiencies or have been mental deficiencies or have been committed to a mental institution. committed to a mental institution.

7.7. You are an illegal alien in the US or have You are an illegal alien in the US or have a nonimmigrant visa. a nonimmigrant visa.

8.8. You were dishonorably discharged from You were dishonorably discharged from the armed forces. the armed forces.

9.9. You renounced your US citizenship. You renounced your US citizenship. 10.10. You have a restraining order issued by a You have a restraining order issued by a

court. court. 11.11. You have been convicted of a domestic You have been convicted of a domestic

violence misdemeanor. violence misdemeanor.

YOU CANNOT OWN A FIREARM IF:

Brady Handgun Violence Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993)Prevention Act (1993)

Purchasers must wait up to 5 days for a background Purchasers must wait up to 5 days for a background check to take place before they can buy a handgun. If it check to take place before they can buy a handgun. If it takes longer than 5 days, the purchase can take place takes longer than 5 days, the purchase can take place regardless.regardless.A previous background check could bypass the wait.A previous background check could bypass the wait.This only applied to a licensed handgun seller that is This only applied to a licensed handgun seller that is selling to a private individual.selling to a private individual.Sales between private parties couldn’t be restricted – Sales between private parties couldn’t be restricted – Congress is unable to regulate intrastate commerce.Congress is unable to regulate intrastate commerce.The waiting period provision expired with the introduction The waiting period provision expired with the introduction of the National Instant Criminal Background Check of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) by the FBI.System (NICS) by the FBI.

Printz v. United States Printz v. United States (1997)(1997)

The provisions of the The provisions of the Brady Bill are Brady Bill are unconstitutional.unconstitutional.

At first, the rulings At first, the rulings were negligible.were negligible.

Later, this case Later, this case became crucial in became crucial in supporting limits on supporting limits on federal power and federal power and states’ rights.states’ rights.

United States v. Lopez United States v. Lopez (1995)(1995)

Alfonso Lopez carried a Alfonso Lopez carried a handgun + cartridges to his handgun + cartridges to his school.school.

Federal Government: Federal Government: possessing a firearm in an possessing a firearm in an educational area would lead educational area would lead to violent crime, affecting to violent crime, affecting the general economic the general economic condition of the area due to condition of the area due to less travel in the arealess travel in the area

Supreme Court: possessing Supreme Court: possessing a gun near school has a a gun near school has a negligible effect on negligible effect on interstate commerce. A law interstate commerce. A law banning guns near schools banning guns near schools has no economic relation.has no economic relation.

• It reduced Congress’ authority in passing gun control laws and bolstered the case of gun rights advocates

What does all of this mean?What does all of this mean?

• Printz v. United States: a victory for states’ rights– Unconstitutional for the

chief law enforcement officer in each local jurisdiction to conduct background checks

– Gives more power to the individual and states; Congress can’t regulate law enforcement in that aspect.

• US v. Lopez: a victory for states’ rights– It revives the role of the

states in public policymaking and lessens the role of the federal government.

– This could affect other federal interstate regulatory laws, such as the Clean Water Act.

States’ Rights and Gun States’ Rights and Gun Rights?Rights?

If you favor both states’ rights and the If you favor both states’ rights and the right of a person to bear arms, what right of a person to bear arms, what happens if a state passes gun control happens if a state passes gun control laws?laws?

Solution - Either pick a side or stay out of Solution - Either pick a side or stay out of the battle: You can’t be fully supportive the battle: You can’t be fully supportive of both sides of an argument!of both sides of an argument!

The only way to avoid being a hypocrite The only way to avoid being a hypocrite is to choose which is most dearest to is to choose which is most dearest to you: States’ rights or the individual?you: States’ rights or the individual?