Figure 1. Possession of firearm Source: Unsplash.
One of the primary objectives of the government is to protect and safeguard the lives and properties of its citizens. To ensure national security, they put in place laws and regulations and they create a viable structure that will enable their enforcement. However, based on reoccurring experiences and happenings in the United States in relation to mass shootings, one can deduce that the government is not performing its obligation and duty in protecting the lives of its citizens and in eliminating the proliferation of such events which put in danger the lives of United States citizens and tourists at large.
This negligent attitude of the government has further legal implications as it has essentially endangered the fundamental human rights of citizens. The government should be held accountable for its ineptitude towards the lives and properties of its people. Victims of the church attack in Sutherland springs, Texas sued the Air Force and Department of Defence, alleging that the government was negligent in its duties and obligations. This can only be overturned by the reformation of certain national laws and regulations by the government.
Figure 2. Protesters for the reformation of the Gun Control Act. Source: Unsplash.
So far, most victims and families of the victims have only been entitled to compensatory relief according to the AEAP guidelines set out by the government and the victims may obtain funds from their state victim compensation programs which of course cannot be considered satisfactory for the loss of ones life when it comes to mass shootings. Mass shootings have created an unsafe environment for everyone in the society, ranging from children, young adults, middle aged adults and the old ones.
2021 has been classified as the year with the highest number of mass shootings in the history of the United States, with over 68 people dead and 15 severely injured. The recent FedEx shooting in Indianapolis where the accused shooter killed over eight innocent citizens and later proceeded to kill himself has further verified the fact that this issue is reoccurring and if proper care and attention is not directed towards the eradications of such events, lots of lives will be lost.
Figure 3. Kids are the future, not the guns. Source: Unsplash.
US President Joe Biden described this situation as an “epidemic and an international embarrassment”. Several cases of gun violence have been reported amongst major cities in the US. In Colorado, a shooter killed over ten people including the police officer who first reported to the crime scene. Recently, in a souther California office, an armed man who killed four people and critically wounded a fifth before opening fire shut down all exits preventing the interference of police officers.
It is apparent, in light of these recent activities several security measures have to be adopted. Some of the actions the US government ought to take include the establishment of public/private partnerships which is of key importance in the handling of this issue whereby there is a keen relationship between the government and the private sector to serve as a force multiplier for public safety. Whether it is an intelligent or private security response to critical incidents, the level of public safety is increased at a very little cost to the taxpayer. The Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002 federal law ensures the implementation of penalties for companies who are negligent in adequately protecting their employees. Although with the legal reformation of laws pertaining to gun violence and mass shootings in the United States, such step is almost impossible to come by as those in support of gun control, who seek tighter restrictions on the sale and circulation of firearms, are quite the minority.
Figure 4. Police in the United States. Source: Unsplash.
The lucid possession of arms by citizens has been described by some to be their constitutional rights according to the second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which was ratified on 15 December, 1791 and thereby eradicates the possibility that such law or regulation will further stir up an infringement. The passing of the Gun Control Act in 1968, which ended mail order sales of all firearms and ammunition banning the sales of guns to felons, fugitives, the mentally ill, and those dishournably discharged from the armed forces. Proved to be more effective at punishing ineligible individuals who were in possession of firearms than preventing someone from obtaining one, it seems as the best and only way to tackle this issue is for a unified stance from both the Democrats and the Republicans in addressing the loopholes and risks those existing legislations have created or for a total overhauling of the Gun Control Act.
The Biden-Harris Administration that new gun control laws will be passed to establish universal background checks across all states. Nevertheless, although this does not appear to have the votes in the Senate, it is move in the right direction.
Comments