Our Blog

High rates of firearm mortality and injury are often cited as the main driver of gun control policies. [23] A 2004 challenge by the National Research Council of Canada found that while some solid conclusions from current research are warranted, our knowledge is generally poor. [24] The result of the lack of relevant data is that gun control is one of the most explosive issues in U.S. politics[25] and scientists remain bogged down on a variety of issues. [25] Notably, since 1996, when the Dickey Amendment was first incorporated into the federal spending law, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been prohibited from using its federal funds “to defend or promote gun control,” thereby thwarting gun violence research at the agency at the time. In its 2010 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that because of the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, the guarantee of the individual right to bear arms applies to state and local gun control laws, not just federal laws. [17] The passage of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act by Congress in 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-159, 107 Stat.

1536, marked the first major federal gun control legislation since the GCA in 1968. The act was named after James Brady, the White House press secretary who was seriously and permanently injured in an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981. The Brady Act amended the GCA and required the U.S. Attorney General to establish a national system of immediate background checks and immediately implement certain transitional provisions until the federal system becomes operational. Under these transitional provisions, a gun dealer who wished to transfer a handgun had to obtain from the proposed purchaser a declaration known as the Brady Form, which included the purchaser`s name, address and date of birth and an affidavit attesting that the purchaser was not a member of the classes of persons prohibited from purchasing a handgun. The merchant then had to verify the identity of the buyer and provide a copy of the Brady form to the jurisdiction`s Chief Enforcement Officer (CLEO). With few exceptions, the merchant had to wait five business days before closing the sale, unless the CLEO informed him that there was no reason to believe that the transfer was illegal. Other studies have examined trends in gun deaths before and after gun control laws were passed or repealed.

The California Supreme Court held in Merrill v. Navegar, Inc., 28 P.3d 116 (Cal. 2001) that firearms manufacturers cannot be held legally liable if their proceeds are used for criminal activity. The closely watched case stems from a 1993 shooting at an office tower in San Francisco that killed eight people and wounded six. Similarly, in Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders v Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 273 F.3d 536 (3d Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the dismissal of an action brought by Camden County, New Jersey, which had accused several firearms manufacturers of causing public nuisance and negligence in the distribution of handguns. The Third Circuit also upheld the dismissal of the City of Philadelphia`s action in City of Philadelphia v Beretta U.S.A.

Corp., 277 F.3d 415 (3d Cir. 2002). The three laws most closely associated with reducing firearm deaths were laws that mandated universal background checks, background checks for ammunition sales, and firearms identification. [41] In a companion commentary, David Hemenway noted that this study had several limitations, such as not controlling for all factors that could influence firearm-related deaths other than gun control laws, and the use of 29 explanatory variables in the analysis. [42] Congress derives its power to regulate firearms from the trade clause of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution. Under the trade clause, Congress can regulate interstate commerce and trade with foreign countries. In reviewing federal laws enacted under the trade clause, the United States.