Maxwell Leasure

Professor Porter

ENG 1201

7 April 2019

Gun Control Effectiveness

In the landscape of America, mass shootings and school shootings are all too common.

Gun control is brought up in almost every political debate, and the two sides of the aisle have

vastly different views on guns. The left tends to believe access to guns should be more restricted

and some believe that they should be banned all together. The right tends to believe in more

access to guns with some believing that the sale of guns should not be restricted in any way. The

debate is heated over which way the gun policies in America should lean. Everyone has the same

goal: to save lives and protect the innocent children when they are at school. The issue comes

when people start debating the effects of gun control without researching and actually using facts

and statistics to fight for their side. There is a lot of misinformation coming from both sides of

the gun control debate that prevents the gun laws in this country that need to be reevaluated

because gun control is an ineffective way of stopping violent crime, mass shootings, and the

right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right as citizens of the United States.

The first aspect in evaluating the effectiveness of gun control is violent crime. Violent

crime is defined as any crime in which force is used or threatened upon the victim. This includes

battery, assault, rape, murder, as well as other crimes of the same nature. It is fairly well known

that these crimes happen disproportionately in certain areas of America. You can find the

majority of violent crime happens in big cities, generally areas of low-income families, people of

color, and high population. These areas also tend to have strict gun control. These are generally
areas people recognize as violent; Chicago, Baltimore, and Detroit are just a few examples. Guns

are used in violent crimes fairly often in America. “In 2014, 67.9% of homicides, 40.3% of

robberies, and 22.5% of aggravated assaults known to police were committed by criminals with

guns,” (Kleck 3). This means that over two-thirds of murders and almost half of robberies had a

gun used to commit these crimes. Although this statistic is very concerning, there needs to be

further analysis into it. Because violent crime is affected by a number of factors, looking at it

from a nationwide, or even a statewide perspective is not really an accurate representation. The

better method of looking violent crime in America is by a city by city basis. For example, let us

examine Illinois; this state has vastly different cultures. It has many rural towns and cities, but it

is also home to the city of Chicago. Chicago is one of the most violent and crime ridden areas in

America while having only slightly stricter gun control than the rest of Illinois. The same can be

said about other city and state relationships, such as Detroit and Michigan. It is important to

identify the causes of issues before attempting to solve it. There are an extreme number of

factors that influence the crime rates of different cities however there are a few that are most

prevalent, some of which are population and socioeconomic. Both of these factors are more

telling of the levels of violent crime in a given area than the strictness (or lack thereof) of the gun

control laws.

Generally, the areas with the highest violent crime are also minority neighborhoods, or at

least have a higher minority population than do the areas with lower violent crimes. This is not a

statement that minorities commit more crimes because of their race or ethnicity but a statement

that often times minorities are more negatively affected by socioeconomic factors such as

unemployment and poverty-level wages than are whites, which leads them to living in lower

income neighborhoods with more crime, and the culture of these neighborhoods leads these
minorities to committing violent crimes. Morgan Kelly explores this in depth in her journal,

“Inequality and Crime,” where she investigates the relationship between crime and inequality.

She uses factors such as percentage of nonwhite families and poverty in the analysis and finds

that “Although most crimes are committed by the most disadvantaged members of society, these

individuals face greater pressure and incentives to commit crime in areas of high inequality,”

(Kelly 8). It is a vicious cycle that continues to constantly plague our nation and lead to higher

rates of crime among those groups. According to CBS, the three most dangerous cities in

America are St. Louis, Detroit, Baltimore. These cities have 43.9%, 10.6%, and 29.6% white

populations respectively according to the World Review (CBS News). These statistics are very

different from the national average, and there appears to be, at least a correlation, between higher

minority populations and violent crime rates in cities. It would be foolish to draw the conclusion

that there is more violent crime due to the higher population of minorities however, looking at

the circumstances of which these minorities are in could explain the violent crime. There are a

number of factors that can be seen in most big cities across America: dense populations, higher

levels of poverty, higher levels of single-parent households, larger minority populations, and

finally, higher rates of crime. These are all aspects of the vast majority of big cities however, one

aspect is missing, gun control. The gun control laws in cities vary immensely, however the other

factors do not which means that gun control is not a large factor, if a factor at all, in violent crime

rates.

In the academic journal, “Does Gun Control Reduce Violent Crime?” published by the

Criminal Justice Review, the authors found that overall, gun control has little to now effect on

the rates of violent crime.

 For the most part, the evidence fails to support the hypothesis that gun control laws

reduce violent crime. The absence of any apparent impact may be partly because most

laws do not disarm significant numbers of violence-prone persons in the first place. It is

also possible that gun laws have both violence-reducing and violence-increasing effects,

the latter due to disarming of prospective victims. Opposite-sign effects may

counterbalance each other, yielding no net effect. (Kleck 20)

This journal concluded that because gun control laws do not aim to disarm large percentage of

Americans, only a select few that have been deemed as a high-risk group. These can include but

are not limited to people with a criminal record, those with mental illness, and young peoples.

Because of this reason, the number of guns in the hands of Americans is seldom significantly

altered by gun control. The study also found that there were gun laws that had negative and

positive impacts on violent crime (decrease and increase respectively). The factors analyzed

received an estimated impact of the enacted gun laws at the city level and of more than 50

factors, only 20 showed any significant effect. These 20 were then grouped into strongly

moderately, and weakly supported, whether they increased or decreased violence, and which

aspect(s) of violent crime it affected. There were only two laws in this study that were strongly

supported to decrease violent crime, ban on purchase by alcoholics and requiring a license to

possess a gun in the home. Of the 56 factors studied, these are the only two that had a strongly

correlated with either an increase or decrease in crime. There were also six factors that had

violence- increasing effects. Though these are not strongly supported, the conclusion can be

drawn that gun control has very little to no effect on the violent crime rates in America and

therefore are ineffective at lowering the rates of violent crime due to the amount of gun control
laws studied and how many were found to have little or no significant effect on violent crime

(Kleck 20).

When evaluating violent crime, looking at domestic violence is another important aspect

to examine. 55% of domestic homicides are committed using a firearm (Raissan 1). This is the

only area of gun control that has had effective policies set in place. Under current federal law,

any conviction of domestic violence, including a misdemeanor will bar the convict from

purchasing a gun (legally) for the rest of their life. This was put into effect in the 1996 Gun

Control Act. This is the act that instituted the 4473 background check required for every firearm

purchase from a FFL dealer. The study from Kerri Rasissian, “Hold Your Fire: Did the 1996

Federal Gun Control Act Expansion Reduce Domestic Homicides?” explores this effect in-depth.

The study found that one reason that this reduced the amount of domestic violence is because the

penalty for any level of conviction for domestic violence would eliminate their right to purchase

a firearm. This was an increase from the previous penalty for domestic violence. More often than

not when gun control is enacted, the reduction in gun crime is replaced by another form of the

same crime, as is the case in violent crimes and mass shootings.

The 1996 GCA expansion was successful in reducing gun-related homicides among

female intimates by approximately 17 percent and male domestic children by an

estimated 31 percent. In addition, other family members (siblings and parents), though

not directly included in the law’s language, also experience a reduction in gun-related

homicides following the expansion. These declines in gun-related homicides are

particularly noteworthy as there was no corresponding increase in non-gun homicides

among these groups. (Raissan 24)

The interesting part of this study is that it found that though the domestic homicide rate involving

a gun dropped, the domestic homicide rate not involving a gun did not increase. This means that

there was a net decrease in domestic homicides which is a very positive impact of the GCA.

Another explanation of the success of this act is the reduction is guns available to those

convicted of any level of domestic violence. Unlike mental health, the information for

convictions is accessible and standardized across the country. This means the FBI database

through which the background checks are run has access to the convictions and therefore can

reject those people from purchasing a firearm. This act helped reduced the availability of

firearms to domestic abusers and also reduce domestic violence overall. This is the only aspect of

gun control that was effective to any real extent and the only aspect of gun control that showed

any notable effect.

Mass murders are tragic events that seem to occur more often every time. Whether it is a

school, a church, or a concert, people always tweet about their “thoughts and prayers to the

victims” however no one really knows how to prevent them. Some, generally on the more liberal

side, tend to argue that the country needs to increase gun control to help prevent these mass

shootings. It is difficult to analyze the causes of these tragedies because there is not a large

sample to analyze and therefore determining how to prevent them is almost impossible to do

with any certainty. However, there are certain patterns that have emerged in the available data.

Unsurprisingly, population was the strongest predictor of mass murder incidents per state.

This is consistent with studies in criminal justice that show population as a significant

predictor variable in violent crime. In its most basic form, a higher population provides

more opportunities for crimes to occur, as well as a larger pool of victims from which to

draw. Although gun control strictness in the US has largely increased over time, there has
 been no change in the general trend of mass murder in the US overall or in GPW mass

murders in the time period this paper investigated. (Lewis 15)

This is consistent with the data available from the previously discussed areas. These mass

murders often occur in areas with dense populations due to the increased chance of someone in

that area committing the crime, the higher number of people available to kill and inflict damage

on, and the lower chance of standing out in a crowd. It is also consistent in concluding that gun

control is not a telling actor of whether these events will or will not perspire. This study also

finds that though the strictness of gun control in the US has increased overall in the time period

evaluated (2009-2015), there has been no difference in the trends of mass murder (Lewis 6). This

is in part to people who want to commit these horrible acts, will find a way to inflict the damage

regardless of whether or not a gun is available for them to use. “The states with the ten strictest

gun laws (M = 2.50, SD = .791) had more than four times as many non-GPW mass murders as

the states with the ten least strict gun laws (M = .364, SD = .505),” (Lewis 11).

This statistic shows that though some states have more restrictive gun control and fewer mass

shootings, they also see a rate of four times as many mass murders committed not using a

firearm. People, if they have the hatred in their heart will hurt and kill innocent people. Some

people are evil and will commit heinous crimes, regardless of their circumstances and this quote

proves that. When looking at the 10 most and least restrictive states with respect to their gun

laws, few mass shootings are committed however the overall rate of which mass murder is

committed is not affected.

Firearms have been influential in America since it was founded. The access to firearms is

what lead us to defeating the British in the Revolutionary war. In the Bill of Rights, “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. (Lund)” This is the second right listed in the Bill of

Rights, which is a hint to how important it was to the founding fathers. There is a common

misconception among Americans that the purpose of the Second Amendment was to allow

people to hunt and secure food for their families. While that is important, it is not the reason that

gun rights advocates quote this so often. The original intent of the 2nd amendment was to allow

American citizens to defend themselves from other people but more importantly against a

tyrannical government. When people talk about banning certain types of guns, such as the AR-15

(a gun that is not well understood by the public), they say that hunting rifles are okay because

“Who needs a 30-round magazine and a semi-automatic rifle to hunt deer?” This point is actually

incorrect in multiple ways, as an AR-15 bullet is not really powerful enough for a full-grown

buck without a near perfect shot, but more importantly because that is not why people own AR-

15s. There are plenty of stories, though many anecdotal, of people using their AR-15s in self-

defense. The majority of people that own an AR-15 own it for a variety of other reasons. Some

of these reasons are customization, caliber, accuracy, and versatility. The original intent of the

Constitution should be the interpretation our courts use. The Second Amendment, in regard to

firearms, was created to ensure that if our government ever turned tyrannical, that the American

people could revolt and overthrow it in order to remain a free country (Lund). While the

founding fathers intended for citizens to have access to the same weapons the government does,

at this day in age it would be foolish to argue citizens with enough money should be able to

purchase nuclear weapons. The question now becomes what is the limit that the people of

America should and should not be able to purchase firearms?

The Democrats tend to argue that even the AR-15 is too powerful and dangerous for the

American citizens. Some go as far as to say all semi-automatic guns should be illegal and a select
few argue to ban guns all together however that is the most extreme view and not shared by

many and therefore is mostly irrelevant. For the most part, Democratic candidates run using the

term “common sense gun control.” They say banning semi-automatic rifles with 30-round

detachable magazines will help save Americans, especially when it comes to mass murder. This

has been disproven as gun control has little to no effect on mass murder rates. On the other side,

Republicans tend to argue against any more gun control. Some argue that there should be less

gun control and more access for the average American to purchase firearms and some argue

against any gun control at all. The last group is comparable to the group of Democrats that

believe in banning all guns, they are small and most irrelevant. As a generalization, they argue

for the original intent of the Second Amendment as well as increasing the rights of Americans.

Some also say that more guns on the streets would make people safer. This has also been

disproven, much like the other side’s argument.

There are also a number of misconceptions among the American public about firearms,

especially when it comes to the AR-15, a gun almost everyone has heard of. This gun is the

civilian version of the M-16 rifle. While this may sound intimidating, the AR15 is to a M16 like

a Hummer H1 is to a military Humvee. That is, they look similar and could be mistaken from a

distance, however the military versions are much different functionally and effectively. The

biggest difference between the M16 and the AR15 is that the M16 is a fully automatic firearm.

This means that when the trigger is pulled, the gun will continuously fire until the trigger is

released, or the magazine is out of bullets. On the other hand, the AR15 is a semi-automatic

firearm which means that each time the trigger is pulled, a single bullet is fired and to fire

another bullet, the trigger must be pulled again. Semi-automatic guns are extremely popular, as

most handguns purchased are semi-automatic as well as a number of rifles and even shotguns
are. Another misconception when it comes to the AR15 is that it shoots a powerful round. Of

course, any bullet can kill a person if placed in the right spot however the most common caliber

is 5.56 NATO or .223. These are, for the purpose of this essay, the same bullet with different

names as .223 can be shot out of a 5.56 NATO AR15. These rounds are not powerful in

comparison to most, as .223 is usually rated for varmint and other small game when hunting.

Most hunting rifles are usually chambered in .308 or .30-06, both of which are much larger than

.223. A term that has been heard a number of times is “fully semi-automatic” which is not an

actual action in firearms, it is simply a misunderstanding of how an AR15 fires. The final

misconception when discussing the AR15 is that AR means “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.”

AR actually stands for ArmaLite, the company that originally developed this firearm

(Understanding AR Platform Rifles). It is evident that there is a lot of misinformation out there

about guns and gun control, which is why both sides think they are right, based on the facts they

have. It is important to ensure that the information you use to defend your position is accurate

and correct, especially with so much confusion on subjects such as gun control.

Guns are a sensitive topic in America, yet the debate rages on. This is a debate with little

to no substance because gun control has almost no effect on violent crime nor mass shootings.

Gun control is almost completely ineffective at reducing rates of violent crime, whether it be

murder, rape, or robbery and almost no effect on mass murder rates either. The opposite is also

true, that more guns would not reduce nor increase these statistics because they are much more

influenced by factors such as population and socioeconomic status than they are by the laws on

whether a gun is legal or not. In conclusion, both sides of the gun control debate tend to be

wrong due to the miniscule effect that gun control has on violent crime or mass shootings.
Knowing this, there are more pressing matters if we want to better America such as lifting

people out of poverty which would not only better their individual lives, but a lower poverty rate

can be linked to a lower violent crime rate.

 Works Cited

"Baltimore, Maryland Population 2019." Baltimore, Maryland Population 2019 (Demographics,

Maps, Graphs). N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2019.

CBS News. "The Most Dangerous Cities in America, Ranked." CBS News. CBS Interactive, 11

Mar. 2019. Web. 08 Apr. 2019.

"Detroit, Michigan Population 2019." My Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2019.

Hsiao, Timothy, and C’zar Bernstein. “Against Moderate Gun Control.” Libertarian Papers, vol.

8, no. 2, Dec. 2016, pp. 308–325. EBSCOhost,

[Link]/login?url=[Link]

b=poh&AN=119963016&site=eds-live.

Kelly, Morgan. “Inequality and Crime.” Research Repository UCD, Review of Economics and

Statistics, 82 (4): 530-539, 2000, [Link]/10.1162/003465300559028.

Lewis, J. Scott. “The Relationship between Gun Control Strictness and Mass Murder in the

United States: A National Study 2009-2015.” International Social Science Review, vol.

94, no. 2, May 2018, pp. 1–23. EBSCOhost,

[Link]/login?url=[Link]

b=poh&AN=

Lund, Nelson, and Adam Winkler. “The 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.” National

Constitution Center – The 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,

[Link]/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-ii.
Raissian, Kerri M. “Hold Your Fire: Did the 1996 Federal Gun Control Act Expansion Reduce

Domestic Homicides?” Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, vol. 35, no. 1, Winter

2016, pp. 67–93. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/pam.21857.

Philpott, Jones, Sean. “Mass Shootings, Mental Illness, and Gun Control.” Hastings Center

Report, vol. 48, no. 2, Mar. 2018, pp. 7–9. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/hast.832

Rocque, Michael. “Review of The Rise and Fall of Violent Crime in America.” Crime Prevention

& Community Safety, no. 1, 2017, p. 82. EBSCOhost,

[Link]/login?url=[Link]

b=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.483312879&site=eds-live.

Shi, Wei, and Lung-fei Lee. “The Effects of Gun Control on Crimes: A Spatial Interactive Fixed

Effects Approach.” Empirical Economics, no. 1, 2018, p. 233. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1007/s00181-017-1415-2

Smith, Victoria, et al. “Broadening the Perspective on Gun Violence: An Examination of the

Firearms Industry, 1990-2015.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, no. 5, 2017,

p. 584. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/[Link].2017.05.002.

"St. Louis, Missouri Population 2019." My Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2019.

“Understanding AR Platform Rifles: M16 vs. M4 vs. AR-15 - Guns For Beginners.” The Truth

About Guns, 16 Sept. 2018, [Link]/2018/09/ttag-

contributor/understanding-ar-platform-rifles-m16-vs-m4-vs-ar-15-guns-for-beginners/.