Do Background Checks Actually Work to Deter Crime? - Essay Sample

Introduction

Background checks identify people who do not qualify to buy firearms and then prevents those individuals from accessing them. The idea behind it is to prevent tragic and unnecessary gun-related violence and deaths in the United States. A federal law known as the Brady Act was enacted in 1993 that requires federally licensed arms dealers to carry out background checks on potential gun buyers. Between February 1994 -when the Act became effective - and 2015, more than three million individuals have been denied a gun permit or transfer. However, questions arise as to whether such checks actually prevent crime. This essay looks at why background checks are not effective in deterring crime.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

There is no ideal consensus on how effective background-check laws are. For example, a study conducted in 2000 on the Brady Act found that the law-which requires initial waiting periods as well as the background checks-did not decrease either murder or suicide rates. Other studies found that the checks helped keep guns out of criminals' reach although they were uncertain whether that resulted in less violence. In a 2003 review, a task force by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) filed 'inconsistent findings' as to whether limited gun access via background checks actually works. It also found inadequate proof as to whether an assortment of other firearm laws is effective. All in all, the CDC also admitted that the findings did not mean that gun laws are ineffective; it just that they needed to conduct more studies on the topic (Vernick, Alcorn & Horwitz, 2017).

Researchers on gun policy state that, while they wish to carry out better studies on background checks, they are hampered by a number of factors. A notable problem is that excellent studies on the usefulness of background checks are quite rare. One reason for this is that getting good test cases to carry out research on is quite difficult. There are not much variations or changes in laws to be studied in modern times. Most of such legislations have been in use for a long time. The federal government is also to blame because it does not fund good research into the topic. For instance, there were federal restrictions passed back in 1996 that prevented the CDC from using its funding to promote or advocate for gun control. Such a step made the CDC to withdraw from firearm research almost completely.

To abide by the Brady Act, The Federal Bureau of Investigations put in place the NICS (National Instant Criminal Check System), an integrated catalog of records made up of three distinct national databases. It has information about people's criminal and mental health records as well as any civil disorders associated with them that could affect their admissibility to buy or own guns, such as restraining orders for domestic violence. However, in spite of the clear effectiveness of the NICS, there are a number of weaknesses in federal law that enables dangerous people to access guns.

The biggest gap in the background check requirement is that private, unlicensed firearms dealers are not required by federal law to carry out background checks. Such a situation means that ineligible individuals like domestic abusers and convicted felons can legally purchase firearms, although they would not pass a background check if buying from a federally licensed dealer. This is unless that state's law requires a check to be done for those sales. The good news is that several states have put measures to avoid that by requiring unlicensed dealers to carry out background checks on some gun buyers, if not all of them.

It is also worth looking at what recent incidences of mass shootings say about background checks. The firearms used in some of the most high profile such incidences were bought legally by individuals who passed the checks. What these incidences prove is that the background check system currently being used contains some gaping holes. For instance, in July 2015, FBI director James Comey admitted that Dylann Roof should never have given the green light to buy a gun. He is the person accused of murdering nine people at a church in South Carolina that year. Roof managed to purchase a firearm because his admission to a drugs charge was not accessed by the FBI examiner who oversaw his check. Also, certain states are incompetent when it comes to submitting records to the NICS, thus allowing people with mental health issues to obtain firearms. For example, Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter who killed 32 people in 2007 was found to have a history of mental illness.

An important statistic in this discussion has to do with the number of firearms sold without carrying out background checks on the buyers. Although there is no exact number on this, the figure could be quite big. For 2004, roughly 18% of gun transactions were done by private dealers, the buyers' friends or family members, or 'other' sources. Most of these sources were not licensed sellers and hence were not subject to background checks. Also, 7% of weapons were gotten from gun shows, and it is likely that many of the sales were subject to checks. All this data may mean that criminals will always find a way to obtain guns even without the background checks (Miller, Hepburn & Azrael, 2017). Hence, the checks do not deter them and are not of much use. Another conclusion is that some gun owners obtained them from personal connections as opposed to from dealer or any other source.

Conclusion

A recent study showed that gun control laws passed in the states of Colorado and Washington are not effective, just as many pro-gun citizens argued would be the case. Several years back, the two states passed legislation requiring a background check to be done for every firearm purchased-irrespective of whether it is private or commercial, long gun or handgun. The state of Delaware also passed a similar law. At the moment, every time a gun is sold at a licensed dealer, a background check is conducted via the NCIS. In most cases however, such a check is not required although it is advisable for private purchases. All in all, many states ask for pistol permits, for which a background check is required to obtain, in order to buy a handgun privately.

Results of the study showed that in both Washington and Colorado, the new legislation hardly had an impact. It had little or no measurable effect given that residents did not abide by it while law enforcement officers did not put any effort to enforce it. All in all, the law did not analyse whether gun-related violence would go down or not. Rather, it checked whether a law requiring background checks to be conducted for every firearm sale resulted in increased such checks.

References

Miller, M., Hepburn, L., & Azrael, D. (2017). Firearm acquisition without background checks: results of a national survey. Annals of internal medicine, 166(4), 233-239.

Vernick, J. S., Alcorn, T., & Horwitz, J. (2017). Background checks for all gun buyers and gun violence restraining orders: state efforts to keep guns from high-risk persons. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 45(1_suppl), 98-102.