November 27th, 2017
Written by - Nina Zlataric '19
Should the United States require Universal Background Checks for all gun sales and transfers of ownership? While this seems like an obvious question to answer, the nuances and complications of gun control in the United States offer numerous harms and benefits to a Universal Background check (UBC) system. Before we delve into the root problem, some background knowledge about gun violence in America is necessary to fully grasp the scope of this question. The Brady Act, enacted in 1993, required background checks on gun sales as well as a 5-day waiting period. This legislation has changed since 1993 and the U.S. now operates under a system that requires Background checks for all gun sales through a federally licensed dealer. In addition, if the check being conducted is inconclusive and sufficient evidence to disqualify an individual from obtaining a gun is not found within three days, the check automatically defaults and allows the individual to purchase their gun. All checks go through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), however, the “gun show loophole” allows people to buy guns from gun shows and private sellers without undergoing a background check. These transactions are perfectly legal in the status quo, however, they would all require a background check if UBCs are implemented.
Let’s first look to some harms of requiring UBCs. We can compare gun violence in America to the opioid crisis. There are many restrictions to obtain prescription drugs in America, yet the opioid crisis kills 91 people everyday due to an expansive black market. If more restrictions are put on the legal gun market, the black market for guns will increase. While overall access to guns may still decrease, it is important to note that more money going to the black market will help to fuel criminal organizations and terrorist groups that thrive off money gained on the black market. Furthermore, in a study conducted by researchers at John Hopkins University, 96% of criminal offenders obtained their guns illegally. Because these criminals purchased their guns outside legal distribution channels, it is safe to say that they would access these guns with or without UBCs. Besides an expanded black market, there are a couple flaws in the UBC system that prevent it from working effectively. The first fault is a lack of complete data. The NICS relies on information to be shared from states to the federal database. If states don’t share data, then people with disqualifying records will be able to pass background checks because their mental health records or criminal history isn’t entered in the database. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 18 states report good data submission. Because 32 states fail to submit adequate data, violent criminals are able to legally obtain guns by capitalizing on gaps in data. The second major fault with this system is the lack of a gun registry. In order to monitor transfers of ownership, the police need to check status and location of every gun in the country. It is impossible to do this without a gun registry. In an ideal world, the US would implement a gun registry and this problem would be solved, however, in reality, there are legal obstacles to accomplishing this goal. According to the 18 U.S. Code § 926, Federal law prohibits a universal, national gun registry. Without a gun registry, this system will not be able to close loopholes and straw purchases in the gun market. Overall, the system won’t work without a gun registry and effective submission of data by states. This system could potentially expand the black market which would funnel money to criminal organizations, however, this amount cannot be quantified.
Now, let’s move onto the benefits of a UBC system. The biggest impact of UBCs will be saving lives. According to Giffords Law Center, from 2009 to 2012, states that require Background Checks on private gun sales had 35% fewer gun deaths than states without. Since 1998 (when the NICS was created) 2.4 million gun sales have been prevented. UBCs could decrease the national homicide and suicide rate. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health of all 50 U.S. states reveals a powerful link between rates of firearm ownership and suicides. Put simply, less guns equates to less suicide. Another way that violence will decrease with UBCs is by protecting victims of domestic abuse. An American woman is fatally shot by her partner every 16 hours. According to the Center for American Progress, states with Background Checks had 46% fewer women shot and killed by intimate partners. This evidence strongly suggests that background checks can lower the accessibility of guns to high risk individuals that would use the gun for malicious purposes. While the black market may increase, the most efficient black market, is one in a free, legal environment. By putting restrictions on legal pathways, it will be harder for the black market to access guns.
Gun violence is a major problem in America. While the media chooses to highlight specific episodes of gun crimes, this problem is more ingrained in our country than the public realizes. Regardless of if you believe the United States should implement Universal Background checks, we cannot ignore this growing problem in our society.
Comments