Many articles have come up bringing forward their opinions on what current and previous legislation is doing about gun violence across America and much controversy has developed as result of current efforts of the new President. Although many people disagree, President Trump’s current actions are supporting the widely argued idea that the solution the previous government decided on to solve the gun violence issue across America was not a successful response to the dispute and is a huge problem of unconstitutionality.
The Obama Administration’s Law to end gun violence in america was too broad. The Administration victimized a vast group of people that in no way deserved to have their constitutional rights taken away. According to Swanson’s article, …show more content…
Instead of passing the law on fear, legislation needs to create an answer that will help solve the issue of gun violence. The Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy, which has many experts in mental health and gun violence protection, reviewed the policy presented by the Obama Administration and as stated by Swanson’s article “We [The Consortium] argued that the rule, in the form it was written, amounted to a substantially overbroad categorical prohibition, and we recommended an improved process that would incorporate additional findings specifically related to violence risk. But the Obama administration finalized the rule as it stood, against our recommendation”(Swanson). Although repealing this policy on a case by case basis would be a long and tedious process, a rational solution needs to come …show more content…
Instead of having the Federal Government determine an individual’s ability to use a gun, or having the government do case by case repeals, there can be a new system of letting doctors and medical experts make the final decision about the individual; similar to limiting or completely removing one’s ability to drive an automobile. Another solution could be having a special weapons card for military grade firearms, similar to a FOID card. These new cards could restrict those with mental health issues but not completely take away the constitutional right to defend themselves. Whatever comes about next, these huge decisions need to based on facts, statistics, and evidence; not
The Obama Administration’s Law to end gun violence in america was too broad. The Administration victimized a vast group of people that in no way deserved to have their constitutional rights taken away. According to Swanson’s article, …show more content…
Instead of passing the law on fear, legislation needs to create an answer that will help solve the issue of gun violence. The Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy, which has many experts in mental health and gun violence protection, reviewed the policy presented by the Obama Administration and as stated by Swanson’s article “We [The Consortium] argued that the rule, in the form it was written, amounted to a substantially overbroad categorical prohibition, and we recommended an improved process that would incorporate additional findings specifically related to violence risk. But the Obama administration finalized the rule as it stood, against our recommendation”(Swanson). Although repealing this policy on a case by case basis would be a long and tedious process, a rational solution needs to come …show more content…
Instead of having the Federal Government determine an individual’s ability to use a gun, or having the government do case by case repeals, there can be a new system of letting doctors and medical experts make the final decision about the individual; similar to limiting or completely removing one’s ability to drive an automobile. Another solution could be having a special weapons card for military grade firearms, similar to a FOID card. These new cards could restrict those with mental health issues but not completely take away the constitutional right to defend themselves. Whatever comes about next, these huge decisions need to based on facts, statistics, and evidence; not