Sunday, February 3, 2013

New Jersey "One-Gun-a-Month" Law

New Jersey “One-Gun-a-Month” Law
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/new-jerseys-useful-one-gun-a-month-law.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

New Jersey, along with three other states, has a “One-Gun-a-Month law”. This law was put into affect to decrease the number of guns and gun stockpiles in America. Recently, the NRA objected to the law and said it went against the Second Amendment and denied gun owners “due process”. The United States Court of Appeals upheld the state’s law and made no changes on it.
            The recent challenge of this law, by the NRA, is wrong and has no logical reason behind it. States with these laws even allow some leeway to collectors! Studies showing improvement in the decrease of guns were done in Virginia to show this law's effectiveness. Over a two-year span, the number of guns found in criminal investigations dropped from thirty-five to sixteen percent. These facts do not lie.
            If these laws are actually taking guns out of the hands of roughly half of the criminals in an area, then they should be in effect across America. The NRA can try and substitute safety with guns and collections, but this does not help the well being of our country. It would be my hope that they will soon understand how these laws help the U.S, not hurt it.

2 comments:

  1. I agree with everything you said. I think that this could be a very good way to go about gun control, and from your statistics, it seems to be effective. Gun control, in my opinion, is necessary for the safety of the American public. There are many ways to go about doing this, but if this way works, than I say do it. One of the main problems with this issue is what will actually work and what won't, and I think that this would work, and help the gun problem in America.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a great step towards logical and safety-enhancing lawmaking regarding guns. You're completely right, the facts don't lie; if a law is taking an immense amount of guns out of criminal hands, then there's no reason it shouldn't be in effect. And, I'm sure that law-abiding gun collectors and shooters can handle only being able to purchase one firearm per month.

    ReplyDelete