The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that state and local governments can no longer restrict an individual’s right to own a firearm. However, the Court’s decision and supporting arguments left room for lawmakers to impose some restrictions on ownership and prevent easy access to guns while still protecting this basic right. In handing down its decision, the Court focused its attention on a case that challenged a 28-year-old Chicago ban on handguns. The decision is an extension of the Court’s 2008 ruling that the Second Amendment was not intended just for militias and did, in fact, extend to individuals.
While the ruling doesn’t guarantee cities will modify their gun ban laws, it does open the door for residents to legally challenge those laws and win. Officials in these cities, where there are high rates of gun crime, are upset and fear the Court’s decision will interfere with their ability to craft gun laws that reduce crime. That fear, however, may be unfounded. The Court made certain to note that the right to own a firearm is not the same as the right to possess and carry a firearm in any manner for whatever purpose. To that end, the Court does support restricting firearm ownership for felons and the mentally ill and encourages state and local efforts to close loopholes that allow individuals to purchase guns without a background check.
What we’re left with is a hybrid situation – one that protects an American’s basic rights while still leaving room for local governments to craft the laws that will keep their streets safe. These lawmakers, especially those in urban areas, should also look at the root causes of crime and gun violence. Cutting citizens off from guns does little to help reduce crimes when would-be criminals buy their guns on the black market.
There is not much data that shows gun bans in America reduce gun deaths but there is extensive research on the key role community centers, job creation and neighborhood and police partnerships play in keeping citizens safe. If officials in Chicago and other cities are serious about gun violence prevention, they would, instead of looking for work around to the Court’s ruling, begin to think of new ways to reduce gun crimes.
