Latest update: 23/07/2012 

- Barack Obama - guns - USA


America's 'historic attachment to guns'

America's 'historic attachment to guns'

France24.com spoke with a specialist in US gun culture and weapons laws following the fatal shooting at a Colorado movie theatre last Friday. Dr. Robert Spitzer sheds light on the origins of and latest developments in a longstanding US debate.

By Jon FROSCH (text)
 

Last Friday, 24-year old James Holmes opened fire on the audience at a suburban Colorado movie theatre, killing 12 and injuring many more. The incident has revived the longstanding debate over guns in America, with many wondering when the US will finally implement stricter gun control laws.

In a conversation with France24.com, Doctor Robert Spitzer, professor of political science at State University of New York at Cortland and author of “The Politics of Gun Control”, offered insight into the American attachment to guns, why US gun laws are lenient, and whether or not President Obama will try to change things.

Here are some highlights from the interview.

FRANCE24: Why have gun control laws in America remained so lax?

Dr Robert Spitzer:
In the last decade, the gun issue has been pushed off the American political agenda. One reason is that Democrats at a national level thought the issue hurt them in the 2000 presidential election. Al Gore was pro-gun-control, and he lost. So Democrats started to back away from the gun issue, partly to rebuild their party by attracting more conservative, pro-gun Democrats.

US gun violence on the decline

Both the General Social Survey (GSS) and FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics show violent crime rates in the US at their lowest point since 1972, and murder rates at their lowest point since the early 1960s.

GSS has also shown that the percentage of Americans who keep a gun at home has declined from roughly 50% in the 1970s to roughly 33% today. Gallup recorded a less marked decline from roughly 50% in the 1970s to 40% today.

Secondly, George W. Bush was the most gun-friendly president in US history. So that enabled the agenda of the gun lobby, especially the NRA [National Rifle Association], to advance greatly.

Thirdly, in 2008, the very conservative Supreme Court said for the first time in US history that there is a personal, individual right of US citizens to own guns [in a decision striking down a ban on handguns in Washington DC]. The second amendment had already been interpreted for over 200 years as saying that, but in reality, the amendment refers to the right of “a well-regulated militia” to bear arms - not any ordinary citizen. The Supreme Court declaration in 2008 provided a degree of legal legitimacy that the gun lobby had long sought.

Another part of the complexity is that there are 50 states; some states have restrictive laws like New York. Others, like Colorado, don’t.

F24: Where does the American public stand on the issue?

RS: Public support for stronger gun laws exists, but gun rights people feel very strongly about their issue. Polls have shown a majority of Americans in favour of stricter gun laws. But this is a case of a relatively apathetic majority up against a small, but highly motivated pro-gun constituency that works on this issue all the time.

There is also a historic attachment to guns in America. Much of it is romanticized and exaggerated, but there certainly is a long strain in our history connecting Americans to guns; guns came to America with the earliest European settlers. In addition, there is a tradition of American individualism. Many Americans believe that the best remedy for their problems or insecurities is to deal with them on their own. Sometimes that means picking up a gun instead of asking for help.

F24: Have incidents like the shooting in Colorado last week, or the shooting of former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona last year, led to a push for stricter gun control laws?

RS: After the shooting at a high school in Columbine in 1999, the federal government enacted new gun measures, but they were ultimately beaten back before they became law.

Syndicate contentTHE DEBATES

Other than that, there have been specific legal remedies. There was a law called the Federal Assault Weapons Ban [signed in 1994], but the law was written with an expiry date and Congress let it expire in 2004. That law banned possession of certain types of assault weapons, including the weapon James Holmes used in Aurora last week. The law banned possession of large-capacity bullet clips, so people could only purchase guns that could hold 10 bullets. But since the law expired in 2004, Holmes was able to use a weapon that held 100 bullets at a time. It’s like something out of a science fiction novel, frankly.

After the shootings on the campus of Virginia Tech in 2007, Congress enacted legislation to improve record-keeping of people with mental problems, so these people would not be able to purchase guns. When someone in America goes to buy a gun, there is a background check process. The gun salesperson submits your name electronically, and checks it against a list that includes felons and those who have been declared mentally incompetent. But there is a big loophole, because before 2007, most states did not report their “mentally incompetent” residents.

Right now there are calls for stronger gun laws, but with no strong sustained national advocacy, little has happened.

F24:
Has President Obama tried to change things?

RS: Obama, in his political background, has been a supporter of gun control. However, he clearly made a decision to not press that issue when he became president. He felt he needed to spend his political capital in other areas. America is in the middle of a presidential campaign, and you would think the issue would have to be discussed by candidates. But neither candidate wants to talk about gun control. Obama does not want to inflame the right wing, and he wants to keep the focus on the issues he’s worked on.

Mitt Romney, meanwhile, is trying to paint himself as more moderate and centrist, and the gun issue is one on which his party is in thrall to the NRA. Romney doesn’t want to offend the NRA people, but he doesn’t want to champion the cause either because it pulls him away from the centre.

The current political environment is not conducive to change on this issue. Neither party at a national level wants to wrap its arms around this subject right now.

Read more
React to the article
Comment this article typing your message in the above text zone. Please note that this is limited to 1500 characters or less.
(23) Reactions

Dr Spitzer is incorrect in

Dr Spitzer is incorrect in stating that gun rights only pertain only to a militia...

Meaning of "the right of the People"

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in Heller, stated:

Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. This contrasts markedly with the phrase “the militia” in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the “militia” in colonial America consisted of a subset of “the people”— those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people”.[11

American Gun Rights

While I am sure to be lambasted for writing this I must point out just how inaccurate or perhaps just poorly informed, this article is. This of course is to be understood since a French writer attempting to accurately write about the complex subject of America’s Constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms while not actually having that right, would be very similar to an American writing about daily life Paris without having ever visited France.

I would like to point out is the author’s very misleading statement that “Polls have shown a majority of Americans in favour of stricter gun laws.”. I guarantee you that nothing could be further from the truth. One can, of course, find polls to support the author’s argument. To do so all one needs to do is quote any pro gun control source such as The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence or, for that matter any of the major pro gun control major media networks. However, if these polls are accurate how do you explain away the fact that gun sales increase when there are tragedies such as the very sad and horrific violence that took place in Colorado. How do you explain the fact that the current administration, which ran on a platform of stricter gun control laws, has not as of yet attempted to enact further laws and in fact appears to be shying away from the topic in the face of the Colorado shooting. The answer is that Americans overwhelmingly believe in the 2nd Amendment. The current administration knows this and they know that trying to force gun control laws on America is not something that the American voter will support.

I would also be very interested in learning if Mr. Frosch’s statement that our “gun laws are very lax” and that is easy to purchase a firearm is based on personal knowledge or simply from second hand sources. Has Mr. Frosch actually tried to purchase a firearm here in the United States? Has he had to fill out all the paperwork, provide all of his personal information, photo identification, and then have the F.B.I. do a criminal background check on him? Or, as I suspect, is he simply regurgitation what the media and people like Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein is spouting.

While I suspect that Mr. Frosch is a very fine man who firmly believes that he is reflecting the views if the American people, his views in this article are simple that, views, and not based on the true facts reflected here in the United States of America.

I would also like to point out that if this article is to speak to America’s Historical attachment to gun rights it must first underscore the fact that our founding fathers gave us that right not to protect us from criminals but rather to protect us from tyranny something which historically both the United States and France have in common. While I have visited France on several occasions I will not pretend to understand the French people. I will however state that I believe that there is a difference in the way we preserve the protection of or property, our families and our very lives and that those views directly affect our views on our 2nd Amendment rights. First, most Americans deeply believe that individuals have the right to protect themselves and that it is up to them, not their government to protect them. Second, Americans have come to the realization that police investigate crimes after they have already taken place. Finally, and most importantly, most Americans understand that criminals do not follow the law and therefore no amount of gun control law will stop criminals from acquiring guns; it only serves to restrict law abiding citizens.

Thank you for a very well written, if not misinformed, article. I look forward to reading more of your work. Take care and God bless.

Semper Fidelis

Retired USMC Gunny

this article

I live in the United Staes and this article is ripe with inaccuracies and needs to be fact checked with several things. One of them stating why al gore lost the 2000 election. loosing by several hundred votes in a nation of 300 million would not cause democrats to stray from the issue. Second, where is you proof on the generalizing that Bush was the most Gun Friendly president. Third the liberalism of this website shows its true colors when you talk about Mitt Romney and how he is trying to appeal to the Members of the NRA.

Guns kill people; Spoons make you fat

I didn't see a story like this after the children were massacred in Toulouse in March. Where more responsible people are armed, crime rates decline. Chicago has very restrictive gun laws and crime is out of control.

Guns in America

A lot of Americans are very suspicious of the Federal government for some reason and feel like they have to protect themselves. These same people should be worried about the large corporations power to donate money to politicians for the making of laws advantageous to the business. Economic power is slowly being taken away from the average person in the United States. In Indiana it is against the law, now, for the employer to collect union dues from the employees paycheck.

Gun control in the USA

Comments that a majority of Americans favor stricter gun control laws are highly inaccurate. Your expert is no expert when he deliberately misrepresents the American public's opinion.

40% of Democrats and almost

40% of Democrats and almost 60% of Republicans are gun owners, well over 100million Americans, violent crime is highest in the most gun restricted areas of the US and lowest with the greater gun freedoms. Mexico completely bands private gun ownership, how's that working out?

Guns are just guns

Unsurprisingly France actually has a healthy number of gun owners. However one does not hear about these mass massacres, and even when there is a shooting. There is no hysteria like this.
Guns dont kill, people do.

Gun control

From the way this guy turned his apt into a trap for anyone who walked into the door he would have killed someone even if he was caught before he shot anyone. He is just crazy. What they should have been doing is tracking the internet sale of ammo and that should have raised a red flag for police or the FBI.

gun control

more gun control? Like Hitler implimented, Stalin implimented, Mao implimented. A gun never killed anyone. If you take guns from law abiding citizens, only outlaws will have guns. Besides, mind your own damn business, and keep your white flag handy, FRENCHY......

Close