Gateway to Think Tanks
来源类型 | REPORT |
规范类型 | 报告 |
Assault Weapons Revisited | |
Arkadi Gerney; Chelsea Parsons | |
发表日期 | 2014-09-12 |
出版年 | 2014 |
语种 | 英语 |
概述 | Twenty years after the enactment of the federal assault weapons ban and 10 years after it was allowed to expire, it is time to consider new ideas for regulating uniquely dangerous firearms. |
摘要 | Today—20 years after President Bill Clinton signed the federal assault weapons ban into law in September 1994 and a decade after Congress allowed that law to lapse—the question of whether and how to regulate particularly lethal firearms is no longer the primary focus of the national gun debate. While the question of what to do about the proliferation of certain military-style rifles—so-called “assault weapons”—remains open, advocates for stronger gun laws have recently focused on the question of who may possess guns, rather than which type of guns should receive heightened regulation. In the wake of the December 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, President Barack Obama, congressional leaders, and gun-violence prevention advocates alike made deterring dangerous people from accessing guns the top legislative priority with a proposal for comprehensive background checks for all gun sales. In April 2013, while the Senate also considered a new assault weapons ban that only mustered 40 votes, the Manchin-Toomey bill to expand background checks garnered 55 votes. This shift in focus to prevent dangerous people from accessing guns is appropriate: A broad set of research suggests that such measures are effective in reducing gun violence. Additionally, there is overwhelming support in opinion polls for expanding background checks and similar measures aimed at restricting dangerous people from accessing guns. But the debate persists about whether and how to best regulate assault rifles and other types of firearms that may pose heightened risks to public safety. For more than 20 years, there has generally been only one policy solution offered in this debate: a ban on assault weapons. This report considers how gun laws have evolved to address different classes of firearms and looks more broadly at how federal and state laws treat rifles and shotguns differently than handguns and whether all of those distinctions continue to make sense. It also examines data on the changing nature of gun violence and the increasing use of long guns and assault rifles by criminals, with a focus on Pennsylvania as a case study. Additionally, this report offers a new framework for regulating assault weapons and other special categories of guns that balances the desire of law-abiding gun owners to possess these guns with the need to protect public safety from their misuse in dangerous hands. These policies include:
Twenty years after the successful passage of the federal assault weapons ban and 10 years after its expiration, the push for a federal ban on these guns seems stuck in neutral. But much more can be done to strengthen regulation of particularly dangerous guns and to ensure that laws regulating handguns and long guns make sense in today’s context. Arkadi Gerney is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress. Chelsea Parsons is Director of Crime and Firearms Policy at American Progress. |
主题 | Gun Violence Prevention |
URL | https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/reports/2014/09/12/96801/assault-weapons-revisited/ |
来源智库 | Center for American Progress (United States) |
资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/435856 |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Arkadi Gerney,Chelsea Parsons. Assault Weapons Revisited. 2014. |
条目包含的文件 | ||||||
文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
AssaultWeapons-repor(440KB) | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 |
个性服务 |
推荐该条目 |
保存到收藏夹 |
导出为Endnote文件 |
谷歌学术 |
谷歌学术中相似的文章 |
[Arkadi Gerney]的文章 |
[Chelsea Parsons]的文章 |
百度学术 |
百度学术中相似的文章 |
[Arkadi Gerney]的文章 |
[Chelsea Parsons]的文章 |
必应学术 |
必应学术中相似的文章 |
[Arkadi Gerney]的文章 |
[Chelsea Parsons]的文章 |
相关权益政策 |
暂无数据 |
收藏/分享 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。