California on Gun Violence

            Historically, the State of California has been one of the strictest states on gun control. Has this meant a decrease in gun-related crimes? Not exactly. While the state has banned assault rifles, high-capacity magazines, and particular types of ammunition, the rate of gun-related murders has remained in the top 5 amongst other states with 3.4 murders per 100,000 people with approximately 2,000 killed by gunfire each year.

            So why aren’t California gun laws making a difference? The answer is laws banning particular guns or gun components do not remove firearms from gangs, criminals,and the black market. While law-abiding citizens may register or turn in newly banned weapons or participate in gun buy back programs, those who disregard the law are easily able to store and hide guns in their homes or backyards for decades. Many gun-related crimes are committed with firearms 20+ years old.

Why doesn’t California make laws that affect criminals? The answer is obvious; these types of laws are more expensive, difficult to manage, and do not sound as pretty on paper as gun bans. Policies that could address criminals would include more comprehensive background checks, gun registrations, gun licensing, and/or searches and seizures.

Instead of considering policies like these, the California legislator has chosen a mindset that gun bans magically remove guns hidden in someone’s closet or buried in their yard with some type of magical fairy dust. The harsh reality is little to nothing will be able to pull the thousands of illegally possessed firearms currently in circulation. Additionally, sending law enforcement to conduct home inspections, which has been suggested in some municipalities, would be unconstitutional, expensive, and most likely increase criminal activity in other neglected areas.

California and others can establish more detailed background checks, and require a training course where gun owners can learn safety precautions and procedures to using a firearm. In this type of system, gun-owners would have flawless records, and be ready to safely use and practice with the firearms, as well as steps in order to securely store them from unauthorized users. Gun-ownership licenses would inform government agencies if a licensed gun-owner has committed a felony or any other offense, and that his or her firearm should be confiscated. It would create a more cut and dry enforcement effort.

California needs to address gun ownership at the source and as something that will not see results till far down the road. That is the ugly truth. Legislators need to restrict WHO can purchase firearms opposed to what they can purchase. There should be a priority here; restricting gun ownership once the firearms are out in the public has been and always will be completely ineffective.