Columbine tragedy and countless others have added momentum to proposed gun control measures pending before Congress. Policy makers and legislators have made this issue a top priority, and are currently debating over controversial gun control policies and initiatives. The controversy over gun control revolves around two interrelated questions of government authority: does the government have the right to impose regulations; and, assuming the existence of such a right, should the government regulate guns? There have already been numerous gun control measures taken from Capitol Hill to the local level. Groups in favor of gun control are lobbying for mandatory child safety locks, tougher background checks, and other controls that will curb gun-related violence. On the other hand, gun right supporters say that these measures and legislation would infringe upon their second amendment rights to bear arms as law-abiding citizens. However, statistics taken from polls in view of all the recent shootings show little support for these gun rights.
Statistics show that deaths from gun injuries are much higher in the United States than any other industrialized nation (www.oregonlive.com).
In addition, this numbers show that in 1996 handguns were used to kill 9,390 people in the United States, compared with 106 in Canada and 30 in Great Britain. (www.oregonlive.com).
Judging from these numbers and many similar statistics around the world, clearly something more has to be done in the United States to stop all of the gun violence. Even though control has been stymied on Capitol Hill, it is now time to get these new polices enacted in a form of legislation to curb all of this useless violence in this country related to guns. For gun violence to decrease in the United States, someone must push for changes in policy. Polices are made and enforced by means of administrative agencies of government, constituted in large part a body of law usually called rules, regulations, or general orders which public administrators promulgate or execute within authority legislators delegated to them (Boyer 267).
The Essay on Gun Control 33
... necessity of gun control is evident. Only government restrictions can successfully reduce the availability of guns. Works Cited Gun Control In the United States: A Comparative ... caused by gunshot wounds every year.As provided by Gun Control In the United States, a 12-year old child in North ... Nearly every day the civilians use the guns for the acts of violence, punishment and vengeance at home and in ...
The policy making process can be thought of on terms of five steps. They include 1) initiating, 2) preliminary drafting, 3) public participation, 4) final drafting, and 5) reviewing (Boyer 267).
For an organization to succeed and get its policy endorsed, it first must have an initiative, but even before it can think of an initiative, it must have money. Gun rights groups made nearly 2.3 million in soft money, PAC, and individual contributions during the 1997-98-election cycle, with most of the money going to the Republican side. In contrast, many groups who are lobbying for gun control must realize that raising money may be a very rigid task. One would also face the challenge of the immense organizational power of gun rights lobbyists. The National Rifle Association (NRA), who makes up nearly 90 percent of the all gun rights efforts, is more organized, more powerful, and wealthier than all gun control interest groups combined. The NRA spends millions each year on not only political contributions and lobbing expenditures, but the NRA is a key special interest group that spends millions of dollars on independent expenditures and special communication costs.
With this in mind, interest groups must know who is on their side, meaning we must form collations with our allies for financial support, and one must know who our enemies are. For many years, several key groups have been the driving forces behind gun control measures..
The Essay on Interest Groups Group Money Time
Interest Groups As Americans devote less and less time to an active participation in politics, they are increasing their participation in interest groups. As a result politicians are losing touch with the constituents that they represent. To the modern politician, the special interest and the people have become objectively indistinguishable. It is natural for people of like minds to want to form ...
