Gun control in America is one of the most fiercely debated subjects of this generation. Mass shootings of innocent school aged children along with easy access to weapons, have struck fear in everyday American citizens. The Constitution’s 2nd amendment gives its citizens the right to bear arms. It provides this right for one reason. Deter, or if necessary, fight a tyrannical government. Gun rights activist are adamant about fully protecting their right to bear arms while gun control advocates want to be safe in their own country. There is a compromise. “On Jan. 5, 2016, President Obama unveiled his new strategy to curb gun violence in America. His proposals focus on new background check requirements that will enhance the effectiveness of the
…show more content…
The strategy laid out by the President could be a very effective way to appease both sides of this argument, if a detailed plan, adequate funding, and proper oversight were instituted. The program’s effectiveness will require multi agency cooperation at local, state, and federal levels along with mental health facilities, without violating HIPA or privacy rights. Over the years funding has been a major issue. This is an expensive task. The Brady act of 1993 has not been effective thus far. Frank Campbell, the man who was charged with heading up the background checks required in the Brady act said “There’s been no publicly stated reason by Congress or the President why they ask for so little in their budgets,” Campbell tells The Trace. “It doesn’t make any sense.” (Yablon) The lack of …show more content…
It is a clear violation of privacy. “"You just worry that you're going to see searches of the databases and an expansion for purposes that were not intended when the information was collected, Chris Calabrese, an ACLU privacy lobbyist, told The Daily Caller”. (Good). This goes hand in hand with the fear that some citizens have of a tyrannical government. The government should not use this system to limit firearms or monitor those with guns. That would be another violation of the constitution. There has to be a way to do background checks without weapons
The strategy laid out by the President could be a very effective way to appease both sides of this argument, if a detailed plan, adequate funding, and proper oversight were instituted. The program’s effectiveness will require multi agency cooperation at local, state, and federal levels along with mental health facilities, without violating HIPA or privacy rights. Over the years funding has been a major issue. This is an expensive task. The Brady act of 1993 has not been effective thus far. Frank Campbell, the man who was charged with heading up the background checks required in the Brady act said “There’s been no publicly stated reason by Congress or the President why they ask for so little in their budgets,” Campbell tells The Trace. “It doesn’t make any sense.” (Yablon) The lack of …show more content…
It is a clear violation of privacy. “"You just worry that you're going to see searches of the databases and an expansion for purposes that were not intended when the information was collected, Chris Calabrese, an ACLU privacy lobbyist, told The Daily Caller”. (Good). This goes hand in hand with the fear that some citizens have of a tyrannical government. The government should not use this system to limit firearms or monitor those with guns. That would be another violation of the constitution. There has to be a way to do background checks without weapons