Pistol control (or firearm rule ) is a collection of laws or policies governing the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification or use of firearms by civilians.
Most countries have rigorous firearm guiding policies, with only a few laws categorized as permissive. Jurisdictions governing access to firearms typically restrict access to only certain categories of firearms and then limit the category of persons to be licensed to have access to firearms. In some countries such as the United States, gun control can be set at federal or state level.
Video Gun control
Terminologi dan konteks
Arms control refers to the domestic regulations of firearms manufacture, trade, ownership, use, and transportation, particularly with regard to the class of weapons referred to as small arms (revolver and self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, assault rifles, submachine guns and rifles light engines).
The use of the term gun control is sometimes politicized. Some of those who support the law prefer to use terms such as "armed violence prevention", "weapon security", "firearms regulations", "illegal weapons", or "criminal access to weapons".
In 2007, it is estimated there are, globally, about 875 million small arms in the hands of civilians, law enforcement agencies, and armed forces. Of these 650 million, or 75%, firearms are held by civilians. US civilians number 270 million of this amount. 200 million more is controlled by the military power of the country. Law enforcement agencies have about 26 million light weapons. Non-state armed groups have about 1.4 million firearms. Finally, gang members hold between 2 and 10 million small arms. Together, the arms arms of armed groups and non-state armed gangs is at least 1.4% of the global total.
Maps Gun control
Civilian firearms regulations
Except for some exceptions, most countries in the world allow civilians to purchase firearms subject to certain restrictions. A 2011 survey of 28 countries on five continents found that the main difference between different regime firearms regimes is whether civilian weapons ownership is seen as a right or privilege. The study concludes that both the United States and Yemen differ from other countries surveyed in view of gun ownership as a basic right of civilians and have a more permissive regime of civilian gun ownership. In the remaining countries included in the sample, possession of civilian firearms is considered a privilege and laws governing firearms possession are also more stringent.
International and regional civilian firearms regulations
At the international and regional levels, diplomatic attention tends to focus on cross-border illegal trade in small arms as a special area of ​​concern rather than civilian-held firearms. During the mid-1990s, however, the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) adopted a series of resolutions relating to civilian possession of small arms. It calls for the exchange of data on the national system of firearms regulations and to initiate international studies on this issue. In July 1997, ECOSOC passed a resolution outlining the responsibility of UN member states to competently regulate civilian arms possession and urged them to ensure that their regulatory framework encompasses the following aspects: safety and storage of weapons; penalties for unlawful ownership and misuse of firearms; a licensing system to prevent unwanted persons from possessing firearms; exemption from criminal liability to promote the surrender by citizens of illegal, unsafe or undesirable weapons; and, the recording system to track civilian firearms. In 1997, the United Nations published a study based on member country survey data entitled United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulations which was updated in 1999. This study was intended to initiate the establishment of a database on civilian firearms. rules that will be run by the International Crime Prevention Center, located in Vienna. who should report on the national system of civilian firearms regulation every two years. These plans never achieve further results and UN efforts to establish international norms for civilian-held firearms are blocked. In response to pressure from the US government, the mention of civilian ownership rules on small arms was removed from the draft proposal for the 2001 UN Program of Action on Small Arms.
Although this issue is no longer part of the UN policy debate, since 1991 there have been eight regional agreements involving 110 countries concerning civilian possession of firearms. The declaration of Bamako, adopted in Bamako, Mali, on 1 December 2000 by representatives of member states of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). The provisions of this declaration recommend that the signatories shall procure the possession of light and light weapons illegally as criminal acts in accordance with national law in their respective countries.
Study
The high level of death and pistol injuries are often referred to as the main impetus for gun control policy. A critical review of the National Research Council of 2004 found that while some strong conclusions are assured from current research, the state of our knowledge is generally poor. The result of the scarcity of relevant data is that gun control is one of the most politically-laden topics in American politics and scholars remain deadlocked on issues. Specifically, since 1996, when the Dickey Amendment was first incorporated into the federal spending bill, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is prohibited from using federal funding "to advocate or promote arms control," which thwarted the investigation of gun violence at the agency at the time. The author of the provision of funds said that this is an exaggerated interpretation, but the amendment still has a terrible effect, effectively halting research related to federal-funded firearms. Since the amendment, the CDC continues to research gun violence and publish studies on it, although their funding for the research has dropped 96% since 1996, according to Mayors Against Illegal Guns. According to a spokesman, the CDC has limited funds and has not produced a comprehensive study aimed at reducing armed violence since 2001.
General
A 1998 review found that suicide rates generally declined after the weapons control laws were enacted, and concluded that "These findings support arms control measures as a strategy to reduce suicide rates." A review of 2016 found that a law that prohibits people under arrest warrant for domestic violence from accessing weapons is associated with "reduction in intimate partner killing". Another 2016 review identified 130 studies of limited weapons law and found that the application of several laws simultaneously was associated with a reduction in weapon-related deaths.
According to a UN study in 2011, after identifying a number of methodological issues, he stated "despite such challenges, significant literary bodies tend to show that firearms availability is primarily a risk factor rather than a protective factor for killing.Exclusively, quantitative studies tend to point to demonstrating the assassination association-destruction of firearms. "
United States
Cross-sectional study
In 1983, a cross-sectional study of all 50 US states found that six states with the most stringent weapon laws (according to the National Rifle Association) had suicide rates of about 3/100,000 people lower than in those countries another, and this state suicide rate is 4/100,000 people lower than the state with the most unlimited weapon laws. A 2003 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine sees restrictions on weapons law and suicide rates in men and women in all 50 US states and finds that countries whose arms laws are more strict lower suicide. rates between the two sexes. In 2004, another study found that the effects of state weapons laws on weapons-related killings were "limited". A 2005 study looked at 50 states in the US and the District of Columbia, and found that no weapons law was associated with a reduction in murder or suicide gunfire, but that the law "hiding the problem" could be attributed to an increase in firearms. murder rate. A study in 2011 found that laws on firearms regulation in the United States had a "significant deterrent effect on male suicide". A 2013 study found that in the United States, "A higher number of state firearms laws are associated with lower firearm death rates in the state." A 2016 study published in The Lancet found that of the 25 laws studied, and in the time period examined (2008-2010), nine was associated with a reduction in firearm mortality (including murder and suicide), nine people were associated with increased mortality, and seven had unconvincing associations. The three most powerful laws related to the reduction of firearm mortality are laws that require a universal background check, background checks for ammunition sales, and identification for weapons. In the accompanying comments, David Hemenway notes that this study has some limitations, such as not controlling all factors that could affect weapon-related deaths other than gun control laws, and the use of 29 explanatory variables in the analysis.
Other studies comparing weapons control laws in different US states include a 2015 study that found that in the United States, "tighter state firearms laws are associated with lower release rates" for non-fatal weapon injuries. A 2014 study that also saw the United States find that children living in states with strict gun laws are safer. Another study specifically looking at suicide rates in the United States found that the four laws of weapons being examined (waiting periods, universal background checks, rifle locks and open carrier rules) were attributed to "much lower firearms suicide rates and proportions suicide resulting from firearms. "The study also found that these four laws (except waiting periods) were associated with a decrease in overall suicide rates. Another study, published in the same year, found that countries with permission to purchase, register, and/or license laws for pistols had lower overall suicide rates, as well as lower firearms suicide rates. A 2014 study found that it states that required licenses and inspections from weapon dealers tend to have lower weapons kill rates. Another study published in the same year, analyzing panel data from all 50 states, found that tighter gun laws could simply reduce arms deaths. A 2016 study found that US military veterans tend to commit suicide with weapons more often than the general population, thus possibly increasing the state's suicide rate, and that "the veterans' tendency to live in countries without weapon laws could aggravate this phenomenon." California has a very tight arms sales legislation, and a study of 2015 found that it also has the oldest weapon found in state crimes in the US. The same study concluded that "These findings indicate that tighter gun sales legislation and gun dealer regulations do make it more difficult for criminals to get the first new weapon purchased at retail outlets." Another study in 2016 found that gun legislation tighter states in the United States reduce suicide rates. Another study in 2016 found that US states with loose gun control legislation had more arms-related child-injury hospital receipts than states with tighter weapons control laws. A 2017 study found that suicide rates are declining more in countries with universal background checks and mandatory waiting law than in states without this law. Another study 2017 found that countries without universal background checks and/or waiting time statutes have steeper increases in their suicide rates than countries with this law. The third year study of 2017 found that "the law of waiting period that delayed the purchase of firearms by several days reduced the killing of weapons by about 17%." A 2017 study in the Journal of Economics found that delays in arms purchases were required to reduce "suicide-related firearms between 2 to 5 percent without statistically significant increases in non-firearms suicide", and "unrelated with statistics of significant changes in murder rates. "Another 2017 study shows that laws that prohibit the possession of weapons by people who are subject to intimate violence orders that restrict orders, and require that persons to release any weapon they possess, associated with lower levels of intimate partner murder.
Reviews
A review of published studies on weapon control released in October 2003 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was unable to determine the statistically significant effect resulting from the law, although the authors suggest that further research may provide more conclusive information, that "insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness".
In 2015, Garen Wintemute and Daniel Webster reviewed studies that tested the effectiveness of weapons laws aimed at keeping weapons out of the hands of high-risk people in the United States. They found that some laws that prohibit the possession of weapons by persons who are under the command of domestic violence or who have been convicted of minor offenses are associated with lower levels of violence, as are laws that establish more procedures to see if people are prohibited from possessing weapons under this law. They also found that some other weapons regulations intended to prevent individuals prohibited from obtaining weapons, such as "strict permit licenses" and "comprehensive background checks", "are negatively related to the transfer of arms to criminals."
A systematic review of 2016 found that restricted arms licensing legislation was associated with lower levels of weapon injury, while the law of carrying concealed ones was not significantly related to the extent of the injury. Another systematic review found that tighter gun laws were associated with lower weapons kill rates; This association is very strong for background checks and licensing laws to buy.
Study of individual law
Other studies have examined trends in firearms-related deaths before and after the weapons control laws were enacted or revoked. A 2004 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found evidence that child access prevention laws are associated with a low rate of suicide among adolescents aged 14 to 17. Two years of study 2015 found that the permit-for-purchase law passed in Connecticut in 1995 was associated with a reduction in suicide and gun killings. One of these studies also found that the repeal of Missouri's permit-to-purchase law was associated with a "16.1% increase in suicide gun rate", and a study of 2014 by the same research team found that the revocation of this law was associated with a 16% increase in murder rates. A 2000 study designed to assess the effectiveness of the Brady Pollution Prevention Act found that the law was not associated with a reduction in overall murder or suicide rates, but it was related to a decrease in suicide gunfire rates among age-old individuals 55 years or more. A 1991 study looked at the Washington, DC's Firearms Control Act Act of 1975, which prohibits its inhabitants from possessing all weapons except for certain rifles and sporting rifles, which are also required to be disassembled, disassembled or stored with a trigger key in the owner's home. The study found that the law was associated with a "rapid decline in killings and suicide by firearms in the District of Columbia." A 1996 study re-analyzed this data and reached very different conclusions about the effectiveness of this law.
Study and other debates
Kleck and Patterson analyzed the impact of 18 major types of weapons control laws on every major type of violent or violent crime (including suicide) in 170 US cities, and found that weapons laws in general have no significant effect on crime rates or violent suicide rate. Similarly, a 1997 study found that gun control legislation had little effect on mortality rates in US states compared to socioeconomic variables.
Professor Michael Huemer's philosophy argues that gun control may be morally wrong, even if the results will be positive, since individuals have a prima facie right to have weapons for self-defense and recreation.
Canada
Rifles and rifles are relatively easy to obtain, while semi-automatic pistols and rifles are limited.
In connection with the Criminal Law Amendment Law, a law on arms control legislation passed in Canada in 1977, several studies have found that it is not effective in reducing murder or robbery. One study even found that the law may have actually increased the robbery involving firearms. A 1993 study found that after the law was passed, the weapons suicide decreased significantly, as did the proportion of suicide committed in the country with weapons. A 2003 study found that this law "might have an impact on the suicide rate, even after control for social variables," while a 2001 study by the same research team concluded that the law "might have an impact on murder rates, at least for victims older ones. "A 1994 study found that after the law was enacted in 1978, suicide rates declined over time in Ontario, and that there was no evidence of method substitution. The same study found that "This decline may be only partly due to legislation."
In 1991, Canada imposed a Bill C-17 weapons control law. According to a 2004 study, after the law was passed, suicide and gun-related killings, as well as the percentage of suicide cases involving firearms, declined significantly in the country. A 2010 study found that after this law was passed, suicide guns declined in Quebec among men, but admitted that this may not represent causal relationships. In 1992, Canada announced the Canadian Firearms Act, which aims to ensure that weapons are safely stored. A 2004 study found that although the suicide gun rate decreased in the Quebec region of Abitibi-TÃÆ' Â © miscamingue after the law was passed, the overall suicide rate was not. A 2008 study reached similar conclusions with regard to the entire province of Quebec; The study also found that C-17 does not seem to increase the rate at which the suicide rate of firearms decreases. Other researchers have criticized this 2008 study for looking too short a time period and do not take into account the fact that the rules in C-17 are being implemented in stages.
A 1990 study compared suicide rates in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada's metropolitan area (where gun control laws are more stringent) with people in Seattle, Washington area in the United States. The overall suicide rate is basically the same in two locations, but the suicide rate between 15 to 24 years is about 40 percent higher in Seattle than in Vancouver. The authors conclude that "restricting access to a gun may be expected to reduce suicide rates in people aged 15 to 24 years, but... it probably will not reduce the overall suicide rate."
A 2012 study saw a law on weapons control passed in Canada from 1974 to 2008 and found no evidence that this law has a beneficial effect on the level of gun killings in the country. According to the study, "other factors found to be associated with murder rates are average age, unemployment, immigration rate, percentage of population in low income groups, Gini income parity index, population per police officer, and prison level."
A 2013 study of Canada's 1995 arms control law, the Firearms Act, 1995 reported little evidence that this law significantly reduces the level of lethal gun violence against women.
Australia
In 1988 and 1996, the weapons control laws were enacted in the state of Victoria, Australia, twice after mass shootings. A 2004 study found that in the context of this law, overall gunfire-related deaths, particularly suicide, plummeted. A 1995 study found preliminary evidence that a weapons control law was enforced in Queensland, Australia reduced the suicide rate there.
A 2006 study by lobbying-related researchers, Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran found that after Australia enacted the National Arm Firm (NFA), a weapons control law, in 1996, suicide-related suicides might have been affected, but no other parameters appear. has. Another study in 2006, led by Simon Chapman, found that after the law was enacted in 1996 in Australia, the country went more than a decade without mass firing, and gun-related deaths (especially suicide) plummeted. The latter of the study also criticizes the first to use time-series analysis despite the fact that, according to Chapman et al., "Calculating mortality rates and then treating them as numbers in time series ignores the natural variability attached to the amounts that make up the numerator. "Chapman et al. also said that Baker and McPhedran use the Box-Jenkins model incorrectly. A 2010 study looking at the impact of NFAs on weapon-related deaths found that the law "has no major effect on reducing gun killings or suicide rates," although David Hemenway has criticized the study for using structural break tests despite the fact that such tests can skip the policy effect in the face of inaction, or when the effect occurs over several years. Another study, published in the same year, found that a weapons repurchase program in Australia reduced the suicide rate associated with weapons by nearly 80%, while non-weapon death rates were not significantly affected. Other studies have argued that although weapons suicide rates fall after the NFA is in place, the NFA may not be responsible for this decline and "changes in social and cultural attitudes" may be at least partly responsible. In 2016, Chapman co-authored another study that found that after the NFA was passed, there was no mass shooting in the country (as of May 2016), and that weapon-related death rates declined faster after the NFA than before. I t. The study also found, however, that non-weapon suicide and murder rates declined even more quickly after the NFA, leading the authors to conclude that "it is impossible to determine whether changes in firearm deaths can be attributed to reform of weapons law." Many supporters gun control cites Australia as a successful weapons control case, but opponents of the law argue differently. According to research, violent crime and Australian armed crime have declined since the early 90s. After the purchase of weapons, crime decreases at the exact same rate, prompting to question whether it is a repurchase that leads to a reduction in crime, or if it will continue without seizing 26,000 firearms.
Other countries
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments