The Gun Lobby which contains, among others, the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union. Both are very strong special interest groups that contend that the second amendment guarantees a citizen the right to keep and bear ( be equipped with) arms, and that this right can not be infringed upon by the government. The gun lobby has the words of the constitution on its side and therefore does not present and argument for the right to have a gun; the majority of its argument is in response to those who support the government in controlling gun use.

The gun-control lobby which is made up of organizations such as Gun-free, and Handgun Control Inc. interpret the meaning of the second amendment in a completely different way. They believe the right outlines is and extension of the rights out lined in the rest of the bill of rights. These are the rights to personal security and liberty. Because at the time these amendments were drafted there was no standing army and no police system in effect a "well ordered militia" was necessary to national security and an individual's security was defended by their right to bear arms. Gun-control advocates' arguments, that are continually gaining support in the judiciary, is that with the establishment of these security systems the right to bear arms in not necessary to ensure national and personal security, thus the right to bear arms is more a privilege that an inalienable right. Because the amendment is not about the right to have a gun, the gun-control lobby argues that the government can and should do more to limit, restrict and regulate the use of firearms in the United States.

There is also very little support for the anti-gun-control argument that the gun regulations and restrictions are unconstitutional. the Supreme Court decided in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, that the possession of a firearm is not protected by the second amendment unless it has some reasonable relationship to the preservation of a well ordered militia (which is recognized today as the national guard ) This decision shows that the gun-control issue is more a political one then a judicial one. If the letter of the law was observed then organizations like the NRA would have no constitutional basis to demand open and unregulated gun policies. The fact is, however, that there is a substantial portion of the population who believes in their right to keep and bear arms and that that right can not be infringed on by the government. Because we live in a democracy these people have the right to see that their interests are addressed. They have put a great deal of money towards seeing that this issue, which they see as a very personal one, is not dismissed by congress. The NRA contributes large sums of money to aid the campaigns of anit-control candidates for congress and other strategically important political offices. They also exert a great deal of influence over the Republican party in general. the line in this issue is most often drawn between the two parties, Democrats being pro-control and Republican being anti-control. The fact that the NRA has made itself a part of the GOP's platform says a lot for its power to influence policy.

Further evidence of the anti-control lobby's influence is the fact that when the assault weapons ban came to a vote four years ago, it was passed in the house by only two votes, 216/214. The assault weapons ban was a proposal to ban the use, ownership and manufacture of 19 types of military style, high power, rapid fire weapons. (such as the Mac 10, the AK 47 and the uzi) these arms were deemed highly dangerous, and unnecessary to the security of individuals. Another gun-control proposal that has met with strong opposition from groups like the NRA, was the Brady Bill. This bill was passed but not without creating a firestorm of controversy. It is a federal law that imposes a five day waiting period on the purchase of a hand gun. Mr. Brady, for whom the bill is named, was injured in the attempted assassination of then president Ronald Regan. Brady was a staunch anti-control advocate before his accident, however through the urging and actions of his wife he became the poster boy for gun control.

The NRA believes that any regulations or restriction infringe on an individuals civil liberties and right. They urge any gun owners to support them with the maxim that "Gun control effects all guns and all gun owners." In the past portrayed the federal government as Nazis in an ad campaign to try and repeal the assault weapons ban. This act prompted many, including former president Bush, to resign their lifetime membership to the NRA and some to start their own, less extremist lobby, that falls somewhere in the middle of the debate.

The future of this issue is hard to foresee. The NRA, although highly controversial is still a strong fighting force in congress. The gun-control advocates have had their share of victories, and their ranks increase as the numbers of gun-related deaths and crimes increase. There is also the relatively new moderate gun lobby that has wooed people from both sides, and gaining strength year by year. It would seem that the pro control side is winning the war, but the fact of the matter is that most states have extremely lenient laws that pertain to guns. Most states do not requires a gun owner to have a permit to purchase either a handgun or a rifle, there is no registration of any type of gun and the owners do not have to be licensed. Furthermore there is no national ballistics reports done on guns that would make it easier for law enforcement to track down the owner of a gun use in the commission of a crime or federal overseeing of a database that would contain a record of all legal gun owners in the country. These measures would surly make law enforcement's job more expedient but it would entail a high level of government involvement which is objectionable to many, even those in favor of gun-contol. This topic has been a hot issue for many years and shows no sign of cooling off. It will take a long time for the different sides to be reconciled to a single course of action, but if and when that occurs it is sure to a compromise of individual freedoms, public safety and personal security.

http.//www.nra.org

http.//www.gunfree.org

http.//www.2ndlawlib.org

http.//www.firearm.org

http.//handguncotrol.org

Michelle Mojica

Professor Malone

Polsc111

Gun Control and The Congress

No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344

Guns kill more U.S. Americans in one year than were killed in battle during the last five years of the Vietnam War. Fifteen children in the United States die every day from gunshots, and firearm injuries are now the leading cause of death for teenage boys. Despite this, a number of congressional members who credit the National Rifle Association for their election say repeal of the assault weapons ban passed in 1994 is their No. 1 legislative priority. Shortly after taking charge of the House in January, Rep. Newt Gingrich, RGa., promised the National Rifle Association in writing that no gun control legislation would move out of committee or on the House floor as long as he is speaker. Many gun control advocates now where without a doubt convinced that the NRA (National Riffle Association) had total control of Congress.

However, supporters of the 2^nd amendment say that guns do not kill people, people kill people. The Constitution of the United States clearly says that all citizens have the right to bear arms. However, not everyone today is able to own guns legally. The congress passed the Brady bill. This Bill only allows for law-abiding citizens to be able to purchase a gun, and even they must wait 5 days before they are given the gun. This was out into effect in order to bring down the number of murders in the heat of passion.

The Republican congress seems to favor the NRA when making gun control laws. This is because of generous contributions from the NRA to the Republican Party. However, Congress has not neglected the issue of gun control totally. With laws like the Brady Bill, there is some measure of safety taken thus a compromise.

Ayse Yalcin

Often people with similar interests organize formal groups. Many Scoial groups have little contact with government, but they sometimes back or oppose certain government policies. When these organized groups seek to influence government policies they are referred to as interest groups and also referred to ad lobbies. There are many interest groups who regularly spend much time and money trying to influence government policies. The number of interest groups in the U.S. is rising rapidly. The actions of interest groups are often due to their own self interests.

Interest group are also a means of access to political participation. They make it possible for people to be heard on their views by the government. Through advocacy, interest groups make it possible for government to be aware of the problems that exist in society. These groups keep up with current developments in Washington through a process call program monitoring. When a program does not operate according to expectation. interest groups get involved to persuade administrators to alter them in order to promote the group's goals. They sometimes file lawsuits to stop the actions which they consider as being unlawful.

One of the largest interest groups in the United States is the NRA, The National Rifle Association. The NRA was incorporated in 1871 to provide firearms training and encourage interest in the shooting sports. It is now directed by a 76 member board of directors elected by the voting members. The NRA structure includes division representing their firearm safety effort, firearms training, law enforcement programs, junior shooting activities, hunter services, competitions, gun collecting, and defense of the Second Amendment without which all the activities of NRA would not be possible.

The common interest shared by all members of the NRA is an appreciation of the shooting sports, belief in the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, commitment to responsibility, safety and freedom.

The purchasing of a firearm in the United States is a right of every citizen. However this process is regulated to a certain extent by the government to prevent gun from getting into the wrong hands. The 1994 Brady Act was big step in the process of gun control. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act serves to prevent purchase of a firearm by those with a criminal record. The Brady Law mandates a seven-day waiting period and a criminal background check for all potential handgun and the law also has succeeded in reducing the number of "back door" gun dealers in the U.S. by tightening licensing requirements.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act(PL 103-159), also referred to as the Brady Act or the Brady Law, took effect on February 28, 1994. The law requires a five day waiting period on the sale of a handgun by individuals who hold a federal firearms license (FFL) to a non licensee in any state that does not require, by statute, a background check before the sale of a handgun can be completed.

Statistics show that the Brady Law has been affective in denying the purchasing of a handgun by individuals who are prohibited. In 1994 FFLs were denied permission to complete the sale of a handgun for 3.24% of all transactions which were initiated in states which maintain statistics an all proposed handguns transactions. Denials based on a felony disposition accounted for 70.34% of all denials in which the reason could not be ascertained.

The Statistics that were conducted by show the clearly the number of attempted purchases and number of denials.

In 1995, in the months January through December, based on the background checks done, the state of Arizona reported 88,703 checks and 2,229 denials. The state of Arkansas reported 28,298 check 537 denials. The state of Kentucky reported 59,500 checks and 1.129 denial. The state of South Carolina reported 53,157 checks and 2,106 denials.

At the time of the Brady Handgun Prevention Act was implemented, 32 states did not required that a criminal background check be conducted as a condition for sale of a handgun. the study shows that the Brady Law is working in denying the sale of a handgun to those with a criminal record or other prohibited purchasers. From the law's inception. in March 1994 through the end of the June 1996, an estimated 102,822 prohibited individuals including 72,325 felons were stopped from buying a handgun from a retail dealer because of the Brady Law.

Gun Control and Civil Liberties Teresa Bautista

Title 18, U.S. Code, Sections 241 and 242 of the Constitution, ordains as a crime the violation of anybody's civil rights. It states, without qualifications, that the individual's right to own and carry weapons will not be infringed. In the past, the right to bear arms was crucial because there was no standing militia, and guns were necessary to the security of a free state. However, political circumstances change, and now that we do have a standing militia should people still have the right to keep and bear arms Taking in to consideration the crime, accidents, and wrong doings involved with the freedom of bearing arms, it is greatly debated weather or not this freedom should be restricted.

There are presently thirty-one states that permit law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed firearms against criminals. Gun-rights groups like the NRA believe that like all rights that are protected by the bill of rights, each individual American possesses the right to keep and bear arms. One the other side, gun control advocates praise the Brady Act because it has prevented large numbers of people, including law-abiding citizens, from buying handguns. However, the majority of the states are not subject to the Brady's 5-day waiting period. It is statistically proven by the NRA that six of every 10 violent crimes occur in states and cities. such as New York, that have never been subject to the 5-day wait because they already have restrictive gun-control laws. States that have been subject to the 5-day wait have experienced worse crime trends since the Brady Act too effect.

There are a few cases in which the Supreme Court has ruled addressing the second amendment-related issues. In the cases such as U.S v. Cruikshank (1876), Presser v. Illinois (1886), Miller v. Texas (1894), U.S. v.Miller (1939) and U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1900), the Court recognized that the right to bear arms is an individual right. The right to bear arms is an individual liberties. These decisions support the generations-old understanding. Enacting gun Laws usually results in failure. In 1976, Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns. Fifteen years later, D.C.'s homicide rate had tripled. California imposed a 15-day waiting period on handgun sales in 1975, and banned "assault weapons" in 1989, yet its homicide and violent crime rate rose above the rest of the country's. In South Carolinas in 1975 , handgun sales were limited to one per month to individuals. Within fifteen years the states crime rate doubled. So regardless of laws that are imposed in order to control gun ownership, people, legally or illegally find ways in obtaining guns.

A professor at the University of Chicago, John R. Lott, Jr. has concluded that "allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes, and it appears to produce increase in accidental deaths. If those states which do not right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders: 4,177 rapes, and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly. The estimate annual gain from allowing concealed handguns is at least $6.214 billion. When state concealed handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5% and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by 5% and 7%."

The right to bear and keep arms will always be debated. It can be said that possessing a gun may infringe lives. However taking that freedom away infringes individual rights and all that civil liberties and the Second Amendment stands for.