INTRODUCTION

Gun violence in the United States is a novel issue; it is a conundrum that has challenged

Government officials since time immemorial. It is prevalent that mass shootings has been

plaguing the country over the past few years, certainly, these violent events have caused terror on

our populace. A report published by the Congressional Research Service (Bjelopera et al., 2013)

estimates that at least 78 public mass shootings transpired between 1983 and 2012. A report on

the other hand of Mother Jones Investigation (2017) stated that at least 23 mass shootings

occurred from 2013 to 2017 in the United States. Aside from these mass shootings, other gun

related crimes like murder and homicide have constantly increased during the past decade (Kelly,

2014). Clearly based from these facts, it can be gainsaid that gun violence has significantly

increased. Because of these recent eventualities, Congresswoman Cynthia Velasquez of New

York has sponsored a bill entitled Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act that

seeks to at least lessen these unfortunate upshots in our country.

The Researcher strongly drives for the enactment of this bill introduced by

Congresswoman Velasquez particularly because of these two points: 1.) The government needs

to enact policies that would control the continuous increase of gun related crimes, since to date,

numerous lives and dreams have been shattered because of these unfortunate incidents. 2.) The

government needs a better system in tracking and enlisting gun owners, since an adequate

database could help our law enforcement officers to locate the actual persons of interests in a

particular crime more swiftly.

This paper aims to open the eyes of the public in realizing that our country certainly

needs the enactment of this legislative initiative. In addition, this paper will provide evidence on

why it cannot be denied that the overlooking of this bill by the Congress is a big mistake.
REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ACT

This bill seek to amend the Internal Revenue Code, it aims to impose an additional tax of

$100 on the sale firearm by a manufacturer, producer, or importer. However, firearm purchases

by federal, state, and local governments for law enforcement purposes are exempt from the

additional tax. The bill also pursues to direct the Department of Justice to incorporate a national

standard on its passive identification capability in all firearms sold in the United States. Passive

identification capability means technology that: (1) enables identification by a mobile or fixed

reading device, and (2) does not transmit an electronic monitoring or tracking signal. In addition

it also strives for the establishment of the National Database of Lost and Stolen Firearms. Lastly,

the bill seeks to amend the federal criminal code and require a gun owner to report a lost or

stolen firearm to local law enforcement authorities within 48 hours of discovery. Local law

enforcement authorities on the other hand must transmit the report to the national database within

seven days.

Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act has been introduced in the 14th

Congress which met from January 6, 2015 top January 3, 2017 by Congresswoman Nydia

Velasquez. Unfortunately however, by the end of the session of the 14th Congress, the bill was

not enacted into a law.

The key supporter of this bill is Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez, a democrat from New

Yorks 7th Congressional District, she also previously served as New Yorks congressional

district representative from 1993-2012. The bill was co-sponsored by the following legislators:

Rep. Hakeem S. Jeffries, Rep. Jose E. Serrano, Rep. Gregory W. Meeks, and Rep. Charles B.

Rangel. Naturally, the bill was opposed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other pro-

gun organizations and gun rights advocates. Specifically these organizations opposed the passage
of the bill: Gun Owners of America, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership, and the

National Association of Gun Rights.

ARGUMENTS

This paper aims to solidify the stand of the researcher. The Researcher strongly drives for

the enactment of this bill introduced by Congresswoman Velasquez particularly because of these

two material points: 1.) The government needs to enact policies that would control the

continuous increase of gun related crimes, since to date, numerous lives and dreams have been

shattered because of these unfortunate incidents. 2.) The government needs a better system in

tracking and enlisting gun owners, since an adequate database could help our law enforcements

to locate the actual persons of interests in a particular crime more swiftly.

In a research study made by Webster et. al., (2012), they stated that more than 31,000

people a year in the United States die from gunshot wounds. Because victims are

disproportionately young, gun violence is one of the leading causes of premature mortality in the

U.S. In addition to these deaths, in 2010, there were an estimated 337,960 non-fatal violent

crimes committed with guns, and 73,505 persons treated in hospital emergency departments for

non-fatal gunshot wounds. Kelly in her journal article (2014) further claimed that gun violence

has killed more Americans in the past 50 years than in every single American war from George

Washingtons Colonial Army defeat of the British in 1781 to Operation Enduring Freedom in

2014. She added that every year, more than 100,000 people are shot in America more than

30,000 of them fatally. Over half of these fatal shootings are of young people under the age of

30. Based on these two studies alone, it can be ascertained that there is a definite need for the
Federal government to form drastic measures to suppress or at the very least minimize these gun

related crimes.

There is vast possibility that gun related crimes would be lessened if the Federal

government would put a clamp on gun selling and gun production by providing additional tax

responsibilities. Imposing higher taxes on these products would escalate its normal price; hence,

it is possible that due to increase in its price public patronage of guns would be narrowed. The

requirement of $100 per gun tax on purchased firearms would certainly help.

The proposed new passive identification system and the reporting of lost firearms to the

authorities immediately is a positive step towards pre-empting possible gun related crimes. These

proposed measures would deter lawless elements from performing criminal acts once they stole

guns from its original owners since they know that the authorities would be a step ahead of them

in terms of finding ways to know who perpetrated the crime because of this proposed system.

The 1000$ fine to those who would not comply with the passive identification system, and the

10,000$ fine to those who fail to report any lost firearms are hefty enough to ensure obedience

from the citizenry.

This bill although aims to penalize violators by paying a large amount of fine, it also

serves another purpose, particularly in boosting our economy. Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez

in her website mentioned this; If guns are going to be sold, then those purchasing and selling

them should pay for programs that can reduce incidence of gun violence in our local

communities. In addition, once these gun related crimes decreases, the Federal government

would save a large amount of money that it normally releases to provide hospital and medical

care to the victims of these crimes.

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

Pro-Gun advocates on the other hand negated the statements of the legislators of this bill,

stating that an increase in gun ownership among the citizenry has no significant effect in the

overall crime rate of the country. In an article published in the website of the National Rifle

Association entitled In case you missed it: More gun control laws will not reduce crimes

(2016), they mentioned that what the National Rifle Association has been saying all along is that

criminals, by definition, dont follow the law. As a result, new gun control laws will do nothing

to prevent crime and make us safer. In addition, they mentioned that that the overwhelming

majority of gun crimes are not committed by lawful gun owners; this reinforces a common

refrain among gun rights advocacy groups. They argue that since criminals don't follow laws,

new regulations on gun ownership would only serve to burden lawful owners while doing little

to combat crime.

In an article by Hallman entitled Its Up to American Gun Owners to Reduce Gun

Violence (2016), he stated that gun advocates argue that the country would be safer if more

citizens would own guns. These advocates believe that gun related laws that provide restriction

in gun ownership is the first step towards a tyrannical government.

In a nutshell, these pro-gun advocates particularly the National Rifle Association seek to

disassociate gun ownership to higher crime rates, for them the bill sponsored by Congresswoman

Cynthia Velasquez will not deter gun related crimes. In a sense, they argue that this legislation

serves no purpose but to add burden to the citizens of America, that it would only put our taxes

to waste.
REBUTTAL

In an article by Mathews (2016), he mentioned that in 2007 the Harvard School of Public

Health Researchers discovered that protestations of gun rights supporter aside, public health

researchers who study firearms generally agree that increased firearm ownership rates are

associated with higher rates of homicide. They noted that a wide variety of methodologies show

guns as a risk factor for homicide in the US and other high-income countries. Developed

countries with more guns generally have more homicide; states within the US with more guns

have more homicide; people with access to guns, particularly women are more likely to be

victims of homicide than those without access.

CONCLUSION

The researcher concludes that gun related violence or crimes and the lack of legislative

measure that seeks to regulate gun ownership have a significant interrelation. Indeed, the Federal

government, particularly the Congress made a huge mistake in not passing this bill in to a law

since these kinds of legislative measure would deter if not lessen gun related crimes. The pros

that this proposed bill offer certainly overpower the cons it may cause to certain groups or

organizations. The researcher was deeply saddened when it realized that this piece of legislation

was overlooked by our 14th Congress. The researcher however is not losing hope that other

legislative measures with the same purpose would sooner become a law and in return help

dissuade gun related crimes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bjelopera, J. P., Bagalman, E. S., Caldwell, W., Finklea, K. M., & McCallion, G. (2013). Public

Mass Shootings in the United States: Selected Implications for Federal Public Health

and Safety Policy. Washington DC: Congressional Research Service.

Kelly, R. (2014) Kelly Report 2014: Gun Violence in America. Office of the Congress Woman

Robin Kelly: Washington D.C.

Webster, D., Vernick, J., Vittes, K., Teret, S., Frattaroli S., (2012) The Case for Gun Policy

Reforms in America. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health: Bloomberg.

Follman M., Aronsen G., Pan D. US Mass Shootings, 1982-2017: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation.

January 8, 2017. March 24, 2017. Retrieved from: http://www.motherjones.com/

politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

NRA-ILA. In Case You Missed It: More Gun Control Laws Will Not Reduce Crimes. July 28,

2016. March 23, 2017.

Mathews, D. 11 Facts about Gun Violence in the United States. June 13, 2016. March 24, 2017.

Retrieved from: http://www.vox.com/cards/gun-violence-facts/guns-per-capita-

america-us

Hallman, B. Its Up to American Gun Owners to Reduce Gun Violence. December 28, 2016.

March 23, 2017. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/american-

gun-violence_us_560eb174e4b0dd85030bb944

Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act Retrieved from:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3830/text