U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Continuity and Change in the American Gun Debate (From Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence, P 441-453, 2003, Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, eds. -- See NCJ-203338)

NCJ Number
203349
Author(s)
Franklin E. Zimring
Date Published
2003
Length
13 pages
Annotation
This paper examines the overall gun control debate in America, such as changes in the firearm and violence debate over the last three decades, what has remained constant in the American gun debate, and the future of the American gun policy debate.
Abstract
Before the late 1960's guns and gun control had not been a major issue at any level of American government. Before 1968, there were no published studies on the relationship between gun use and the death rate from assault. Since 1970, there are three consistent elements of the gun debate: (1) the free lunch syndrome or a tendency to couple small operational changes with the full weight of firearm control symbolism; (2) the gender gulch or gender as the predictor of handgun ownership; and (3) the focus on handguns and special handgun regulation as the greatest priority in new policy. There are four important changes in the character of public debate about government and firearms: (1) from episodic to consistent public priority; (2) from ignorance to special pleading -- the growth of information about firearms and their effects; (3) from irrelevance to ambiguity -- the second amendment and its importance in the right of the people to bear arms; and (4) from crime to violence -- the shift of the public’s traditional anxiety being about crime and criminals to that of lethal violence. It seems much easier to predict the volume of debate about changes in gun policy than the magnitude or direction of policy change in the United States in the next decade. What is needed to improve the gun debate at the top end of the policy community is careful attention to the differences between types and intensities of firearm regulation. References

Downloads

No download available

Availability