With Obama's final term in office coming to a close soon, he has made a recent effort to try and strengthen gun control laws in the United states.  His plan has 3 major parts. First, he will require anyone selling a fire arm to obtain a license to do so and anyone purchasing a fire arm will have to submit to a background check.  Second, he wants to improve communication between the national level and state level governments to increase the amount of information found on a normal background check.  Lastly, he wants to increase funding for mental health treatment by 500 million dollars and require all information about patients wanting to self harm or do harm to others to be reported so it can be found on a background check (President Obama's 2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control). However, this legislation also includes a dismissal form that could be filled out and would then allow a person to purchase a fire arm if their mental condition improved.  All of Obama's points are very valid points and will definitely work to reduce the number of armed crimes in the united states. However, when a person fails a background check or has been convicted of a crime that keeps them from purchasing a weapon, they are basically put in a "gun time out" and can purchase a firearm in as few as 10 years later on down the road in some states ("Gun Ownership by Convicted Felons." 6).  His ideas are great when they are looked at from a very broad perspective, but when you break down the laws, he is not doing much to decrease the kind of people who can purchase guns.  The limitations on who can and cannot purchase a weapon are virtually the same but the background checks would just be slightly more inclusive.  I agree that this will help, but the legislation Obama has proposed will not be enough to make a large, lasting impact on the current gun violence situation in the united states. 

By using Obama's proposals as a starting point and building on them, I believe that the violent gun problem can be greatly reduced and many injures and deaths can be avoided.  To start, increasing the time that a convicted felon or anyone that fails a background check is barred from purchasing a fire arm or ammunition from 10 years to their full life time. However, the exemption waver for a previously mentally ill person would still be in effect, as long as they can pass a full mental evaluation. The clause would be very similar to the one that is already in effect for previously mentally ill people today when they go to purchase firearms and ammunition. The legislation would be extended to cover everyone, and the 10-year period would just be extended to 125 years (something way longer than a viable human lifespan). This is necessary because on average 77% of people convicted of a crime will be convicted of another one within 5 years (Slifer).  Although no data could be provided for a 10 year period on how many convicts committed another crime the point can me made that people convicted of a crime have an overwhelming higher percentage chance of committing another crime. Putting the stricter limits on when convicted criminals can buy guns it could save a lot of lives by keeping guns out of the hands of people that have already proven that they are not afraid to break the law.

Obama's plan to make more a more inclusive database is a good start on trying to expand back ground checks, but his legislation has yet to increase what disqualifies someone from buying a firearm. As of the year 2016, the things that disqualify someone from purchasing a fire arm are,

"Has been convicted of, or is under indictment for, a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year ...  Is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance ...  Is underage ...  Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution ...  Is subject to a court order restraining him or her from harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner, his or her child or a child of a partner or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child or Has been convicted of a misdemeanor offense of domestic violence (Categories of Prohibited People Policy Summary)."

Although the laws are already generally inclusive, they could be expanded.  All felony charges disqualify a person from purchasing a gun, but only a few misdemeanors do.  This is where I believe the laws could be expanded. As of now the laws only cover domestic violence misdemeanors.  These laws should be expanded to anyone with two or more convictions from violent crimes, such as assault. This would target more people with violent tendencies and repeat offenders. It would keep guns out of their hands so they cannot turn violent crimes into deadly crimes through the use of firearms. This saves innocent lives.   The second place to expand the misdemeanors is by making it illegal for anyone with 2 or more drug/alcohol related charges to purchase a gun. These charges could include possession of controlled substance, DUI or drunken disorderly. The correlation to crime and drug and alcohol abuse is blatantly obvious. 80 percent of all inmates' misuse alcohol and drugs, and half of all inmates in the United states are considered to be addicted to one or the other (The Facts on Drugs and Crime in America 1). The law already covers drug abuse. By expanding the legislation to convictions, the abuse of controlled substances becomes easier to track and can be recorded in the data base easier so it shows up on a background check.  The simpler it is to compile all the useful information, the harder it will be for criminals, drug addicts and alcoholics to get their hands on guns.

 Background checks are a great first step for keeping fire arms out of the hands of criminals and increasing the legislation on who and who cannot buy guns is a necessity to reducing gun violence and gun deaths, but they can only do so much. There are a few other simple things that could be put into law that would help reduce gun violence and gun related deaths. Personal gun safety is the way that the individual stores his or her guns and in his or her house or car and how they handle those guns in public and private areas.  If laws would be put into place requiring all guns to be locked in a metal cabinet and the guns must have trigger locks on them if the owner is not occupying the home at the time. If the owner is occupying the home, the owner should only have guns unlocked for security reasons. Therefore, if the guns are being used for security reasons in the home, only one gun per person able to own a gun in the house should be out and unlocked.  Laws requiring all ammunition stored in a home to be stored in a different location in the home, out of reach of children, when the owner is not home would also be helpful to reduce gun related deaths. When the owner is in the home, if they have guns out for security reasons, guns should be kept unloaded until they are ready to be shot and ammo should be kept out of reach of children or on the owner's person, not in the gun.   A gun can not kill without ammunition and leaving the ammunition in a firearm is like leaving the key to your house in the lock, it allows anyone walking by to have access to it. This includes strangers, children and even friends and family that could have dark motives behind taking a gun.  Although these legislations would be hard to enforce, they would allow for accountability if a gun owner did not properly secure their guns in their home and then their guns were used in a crime or an accidental death had occurred. For example, in 2015 the 43 cases were reported where a toddler found a gun and shot themselves or someone else, resulting in extreme injury or death.  "Roughly once a week this year, on average, a small child has found a gun, pointed it at himself or someone else, and pulled the trigger (Ingraham)." All of these accidental deaths could have been prevented if guns were just locked.  The parents and guardians of these children should be held responsible for these deaths.  By giving the the gun owners a sense of responsibility, they would be more likely to follow the laws on personal gun safety, creating a safer space for children and insuring they stay out of the hands of people who should not have guns in the first place. 

My idea for gun tax would be just what it sounds like- a tax on a person's guns.  It would be like a property tax, but it would be a flat rate assessed per gun.  So for example, if there is a $20 gun tax per gun per year, and you own 5 guns, you would pay $100 a year to keep your guns legally owned.  If the gun tax was not paid for 2 years in a row, then the government could come and take your guns or confiscate them until the tax is paid.  This tax would do a few things. It would make people more aware they they own guns, as a lot of gun owners have guns, but never use them, or use them very seldom.  This tax would be a reminder to make sure that guns are properly maintained.  It would also make guns more expensive, hopefully reducing the amount of guns in the united states. Since there are estimated to me over 350 million guns in the united states, even just a $3 tax per gun would generate over a billion dollars.  The money from the tax could be used to finance the better background checks, by hiring more employees.  The more people that the government has imputing information the more inclusive the background checks will be.  The extra money can also be used to finance public gun safety classes.  These classes could be made mandatory for anyone purchasing their first fire arm.  The classes would be hands on. A hands on experience would lead to better retention of the information covered in the course.  The class would cover gun safety including proper storage of fire arms and ammo, how to properly clean different types of guns and proper shooting techniques. Not only would these classes educate gun owners on the safe handling and storage of fire arms, which could reduce the rate of accidental injury and death from fire arms. It might discourage anyone who might be irresponsible people gun from buying a gun in the first place, just because they do not want to take the educational class to learn about safe fire arm handling.  Although these classes are not mandatory now, when some National Riffle Association members have said that they support required gun training courses when applying for a concealed carry permit (Armbruster).  This support from one of the most pro-gun groups in the country shows that there would be support from both the right and the left if mandatory gun handling classes when buying a firearm were introduced into law.

A lot of people think that the only way to end gun violence is to completely ban guns in the United States. However, all that would do is take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, and but them into the hands of criminals that can purchase the guns on the black market illegally.  By law abiding citizens being able to own, and carry (open carry or concealed carry) it creates a quick line of defense against criminals with weapons that want to harm a civilian or a group of civilians.  There have been multiple instances of situations of this occurring. The first example is when a 47 year old Uber driver in Chicago shot and injured a man that was firing into a crowd.  The driver had a concealed carry permit and charges were not filed against the driver.  The Uber driver saved his and many others lives by taking quick action with his own firearm (Ziezulewicz, Geoff). The average police response time in Chicago is around four minutes (Eloy, Mitchell).  Four minutes is a long time for a gunman to be shooting into a crowd of people.  There is no telling how many people the criminal could have killed if police would have had to respond.  The second example is an unusual example.  It is unusual because it is a story where a man, Aaron Guyton, with a concealed carry permit saved his and many other's lives, without having to fire any shots.  When a shot gun wielding man came to his church, Aaron Guyton, a member of the church in South Carolina confronted the man with his concealed carry and disarmed the man, with no one getting hurt (Dellinger and Vaughn).  Both of these are perfect examples of how guns can be used as life saving tools in every day situations and are irreplaceable for immediate defense and response to deadly threats to civilians. 

Although in these cases no one was hurt but the criminals, all too often it happens that the criminals inflict massive amounts of damage on the general population. For example, "Twenty-six people -- 20 students and six adults -- were shot and killed at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14." The shooter broke into the school with a riffle and two pistols. He opened fire on 1st grade students and teachers. He killed 26 people before taking his own life.  The Sandy Hook shooting was found to have almost no motive.  The shooter was found to have significant mental health issues and was said to be obsessed with school shootings. Investigators believe that the shooting was premeditated, but the shooter had no individual target. Another example is a mass shooting that took place in Charleston, South Carolina on June 17, 2015. Nine people were killed when a racially motivated gunman opened fire. He killed three men and six women before fleeing the scene, leading police on a man hunt.  The shooter spent 48 minutes inside the church talking to the people of the congregation and his future victims before deciding to open fire. The shooter, a 21-year-old white male, was said to be a racist and had been planning a shooting. 

 Both of these instances could have been prevented if better laws had been in place protecting guns in the house hold and if background checks were necessary anytime a gun transferred owners.  The Sandy Hook shooter got his guns after killing his mother and getting the guns from her house.  If the guns had been secured in a locked metal gun cabinet then the Shooter would not have had access to the guns and 26 people, 20 of which were under the age of 7 years old, would be alive.  The same goes for the Charleston church shooter. He was given that gun as a birthday present.  If he would have had to go though a background check to receive that gun, even as a gift, they would have seen that he had two prior drug related arrests.  Although this is not enough to bar him from having a gun now, if the changes I am proposing were to me made, he would not have been able to be in possession of that firearm. 

With just these two examples expressed in this paper, if the changes I have proposed would have been put into effect before these shootings, it is possible that 35 people might still be alive and the many others that were wounded in these two shootings would be living much easier lives.  Although gun ownership is a massive part of American culture, it even has its own amendment in the constitution, something needs to become more restrictive about who can and cannot be trusted to own guns. When the Second Amendment was written it was over 200 years ago.  It took two minutes to reload a rifle back then. Now, a semi automatic AR-15 can be reloaded with a 30 round clip in seconds and all the rounds can be shot in less than a minute.  The improvements of firearms have exceeded what the law was written for.  Shootings are happening at a rate of over one a day. With racial tensions also seeming to be increasing, the United States is in a fragile state right now.  Something needs to be done about the gun violence in this country very soon before it becomes even more divided and we are looking at a second civil war.  People need to be more considerate of other people's beliefs and views and not feel personally attacked when someone does not look or think like them.  This could help solve racially motivated shootings.  Accidental killings, and violent crimes are a problem that can only be solved by reducing the amount of guns in criminal's hands.  New legislation needs to pass making who can buy a gun more restrictive, and people who can buy guns need to be more carful with how they store the guns and how they keep and store ammo.  On a personal level, if you own guns, keep them locked up and out of reach of children, keep your ammo in a separate location and always practice safe gun habits.

