Public Safety vs. Partisan Politics: The Battle for Gun Control

Is it possible to imagine a future where a law similar to the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 could be reinstated, or has the political landscape become too polarized for that to be possible? The original ban, officially known as the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, aimed to prohibit the manufacturing of certain semi-automatic firearms for civilian use, specifically targeting assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Enacted as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, it passed the Senate with 52 votes in favor, including notable backing from Republican Senator Bob Dole. The bill was approved in the House by a much narrower margin (216-214), showcasing a mix of bipartisan support and contention. Today, it remains unclear whether such legislation could once again find enough bipartisan backing to become law.

Since the expiration of the ban in 2004, gun violence has escalated into a persistent crisis in the United States. Over one million Americans have been shot in the past decade, and firearm-related fatalities have dramatically increased, averaging around 43,000 deaths annually. This alarming trend is underscored by a gun-related homicide rate that is 26 times higher than that of other high-income countries. In 2020 alone, firearm casualties surged by 34.5% compared to the previous year, raising urgent concerns about public safety.

While mass shootings account for only a small fraction—around 1%—of all gun violence in America, their cultural and emotional impact is far greater. Mass shootings instill fear and anxiety in the general population, as many Americans come to recognize that no one is immune to such horrific events. These incidents disproportionately affect children, with school shootings becoming a leading cause of death among young people, surpassing car accidents in 2020.  Beyond the physical damage, the emotional toll of these situations on children and their parents is immeasurable. As a parent, sending your child to a place that is supposed to be safe is deeply unsettling, especially when evidence shows that schools are not always secure. For children, participating in drills can be frightening, as they face the uncertainty of whether their school might be next.  The rise of mass shootings in schools and public spaces has heightened the urgency for legislative action.

The Second Amendment plays a crucial role in the ongoing debate over gun control stating how "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.". The interpretation of this amendment has evolved significantly since it was ratified, and it continues to be a focal point for both advocates and opponents of gun restrictions. Organizations like Everytown for Gun Safety and Sandy Hook Promise, which attract more Democratic-leaning voters, argue that semi-automatic firearms are primarily designed for harm and thus should not fall under the protections of the Second Amendment. They advocate for stricter regulations to reduce the availability of such weapons. In contrast, groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA) which tend to attract Republican-leaning voters contend that banning semi-automatic rifles is a direct infringement on Second Amendment rights. They argue that these firearms function similarly to popular shotguns and other rifles used for hunting and personal protection, and therefore should be accessible to law-abiding citizens.

Amid this contentious backdrop, recent legislative efforts have emerged to address gun violence more effectively. Bill H.R. 698, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2023, is one such initiative aimed at tackling the ongoing epidemic of gun violence in the United States. Introduced in the House on February 1, 2023, the bill seeks to restrict access to semi-automatic weapons, which are often used in mass shootings. Initially proposed by Representative David Cicilline, the bill has been taken up by Representative Lucy McBath following Cicilline’s resignation. Advocates argue that if fewer semi-automatic weapons were readily available, the incidence of mass shootings would decrease.

Historical data supports this hypothesis. During the original Assault Weapons Ban from 1994 to 2004, studies indicated that the number of mass shootings fell, and the increase in annual incidents slowed down. In fact, the  Journal of Trauma and Acute Surgery quantified that, “Mass-shooting fatalities were 70% less likely to occur during the federal ban period”.  After the ban expired, however, there was a sharp rise in mass shootings, highlighting the potential impact of such legislation.

The polarization of American politics presents a significant challenge to reinstating any form of an assault weapons ban. In today’s political climate– where compromise is increasingly rare– it remains uncertain whether a sufficient coalition can be formed to support such measures. The debate around gun control often reflects deeper societal divides, with each side firmly entrenched in its views. Advocates for stricter gun laws face an uphill battle, especially in a landscape where many lawmakers prioritize Second Amendment rights and gun ownership as a fundamental aspect of American identity.

Despite these challenges, public sentiment around gun control appears to be shifting. Recent polls indicate a growing majority of Americans support stricter gun laws, particularly in light of high-profile mass shootings. Advocacy organizations continue to mobilize grassroots support, pushing for legislative changes that could lead to the reinstatement of an assault weapons ban or similar restrictions. However, it is unlikely that either Republicans or Democrats will support bills that deviate from their party’s established positions, regardless of the potential consequences.

As mass shootings and gun violence continue to plague the country, the increasing political polarization raises a critical question: will the urgency of addressing these tragedies outweigh political considerations in the minds of Americans?

Natalia Riley is a sophomore at Brown University concentrating in International and Public Affairs and Economics. She is a staff writer for the BULR Blog and can be contacted at natalia_riley@brown.edu.

Priyanka Nambiar is a freshman at Brown University looking to concentrate in Behavioral Decision Sciences. She is an editor for the BULR Blog and can be contacted at priyanka_nambiar@brown.edu.