Entetainment 411: NRA and bad law block a way to catch killers

A gun enthusiast looks at a Smith & Wesson display at NRA's annual meeting April 14 at America's Center in St. Louis. Amitai Etzioni: Stamping code on shell casings makes it easy for police to ID gun that fired shot NRA is fighting method and could win because of 2008 Supreme Court ruling, he writesEtzioni: Court ignored 70 years of precedent and guaranteed individual right to be armedThis Second Amendment ruling hampers states making any gun-related law, he says Editor's note: Amitai Etzioni is professor of international relations at George Washington University and director of the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies.

(CNN) -- The gun lobby is fiercely, and so far successfully, blocking what easily could be the greatest technological breakthrough to catching killers and deterring others.

The simple method allows bullet manufacturers to stamp a numeric code on shell casings that would make it very easy to identify the gun that fired the shot. But the National Rifle Association is lobbying against states enacting laws to require such "microstamping."

The gun lobby is likely to prevail, given that in 2008 -- for the first time in American legal history -- the Supreme Court interpreted that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual's right to own guns for personal use, rather than as the tools of a "well-regulated militia."

The 2008 case, championed by the NRA, was the District of Columbia v Heller. The Supreme Court then struck down a strict D.C. law banning handgun ownership. This, and a subsequent ruling in 2010, effectively tied the hands of state and federal governments in enacting any reasonable gun-related laws.

In 2008, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the typical 5 to 4 conservative majority, argued the first clause of the Second Amendment -- "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" -- merely offered one reason the founders sought to maintain the right to own firearms and that the main clause "codified a pre-existing right."

The decision was "a radical break from 70 years of Supreme Court precedent," according to an op-ed in The New York Times. Although Heller applied only to federal law, the 2010 decision in McDonald v. Chicago asserted that the individual right to bear arms is a fundamental right, and thus the court's ruling in Heller could apply to strike down state and local laws as well.

"Never in history has a federal court invalidated a law regulating the private ownership of firearms on Second Amendment grounds," said none other than Erin N. Griswold, solicitor general in the Nixon administration and former dean of Harvard Law School. "Indeed, that the Second Amendment poses no barrier to strong gun laws is perhaps the most well-settled proposition in American constitutional law."

Opinion: Don't be nosy about Fast and Furious

The key Supreme Court cases establishing the precedent are United States v. Cruikshank (1875), Presser v. Illinois (1886), Miller v. Texas (1894) and United States v. Miller (1939). Though the details of these cases vary, and like all such cases they are subject to different readings, the decisions reached in all of them fundamentally affirm that the Constitution does not limit the states' ability to restrict private gun ownership.

The court ruled that because Miller could not prove that his shotgun had "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument." In the 1875 case, United States v. Cruikshank, members of the Ku Klux Klan were charged with infringing on black citizens' right to bear arms. The court ruled that although the Constitution prevents the government from infringing on that right, it does not apply to citizens' interactions with one another and charged that "'bearing arms for a lawful purpose'... is not a right granted by the Constitution."

Presser v. Illinois (1886) reaffirmed the court's ruling in Cruikshank. In this case, participants in a paramilitary organization were arrested for conducting parades and weapons drills without permission. The court ruled that states have the right to prohibit citizens from forming private militias and that the Second Amendment "is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government," meaning that state governments are free to legislate as they choose regarding guns.

Similarly, in Miller v. Texas (1894), regarding a man who was convicted of murder with an unlicensed handgun, the court ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to state laws, calling it "well settled" that the Second Amendment "operate[s] only upon the federal power and [has] no reference whatsoever to proceedings in state courts."

The United States has more gun-related deaths than any other industrialized country. The rate of gun-related death in the United States is more than double that of the next-highest industrialized country and eight times more than the average of its economic peers, according to data from the University of Pennsylvania's Firearms and Injury Center.

The U.S. firearms mortality rate is more than 70 times higher than industrialized Asian countries, like Japan, Singapore and Taiwan. An average of 32,300 Americans died each year from gun-related injuries between 1980 and 2006. Among the many victims are children whose parents own guns to protect themselves against intruders.

As someone who has experience using guns, I suggest that most homemakers are more likely to be killed in a gunbattle with an intruder than to kill him. It is ridiculous to argue that criminals kill people, not guns. Nor could Seung-Hui Cho have killed 32 people and injured 18 others at Virginia Tech with a knife instead of handguns.

I realize that the majority of the Supreme Court is a conservative one and that the court very rarely reverses itself. However, this law enables the gun lobby to promote extreme positions.

Is it too much to even hope that justices might revisit the 2008 decision and do what is right -- establish that the government has not just a right but a duty to regulate guns and ammunition? Then we might even get the gun lobby to drop its opposition to stamping a tiny numeric code on shell casings.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Amitai Etzioni.

updated 9:00 AM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

Susan Antilla says prosecutors declined to charge Goldman Sachs but they have been quick to bring cases when the investment bank is a victimupdated 1:50 PM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

David Rothkopf says ignore the Twitter news cycle and consider: Paul Ryan as Romney's VP pick could mark the arrival of a true Republican national viewpoint updated 9:34 AM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

Donald Clarke says Gu Kailai's one-day trial was high profile, but few doubt that her sentence has been predetermined by the Communist Partyupdated 8:43 AM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

Lawrence Jacobs says using Paul Ryan to ignite the Republican base is probably Mitt Romney's most plausible path to prevailing

Get the latest opinion and analysis from CNN's columnists and contributors.updated 11:12 AM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

Targeted U.S. drone killings in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan may violate international law, says Mary Ellen O'Connellupdated 3:34 PM EDT, Wed August 15, 2012

In Florida this weekend, Paul Ryan needs to clarify his message to seniors and Hispanics before Democrats do it for him, says Ana Navarroupdated 7:42 AM EDT, Wed August 15, 2012

Ali Noorani says young immigrants brought here by their parents and willing to work hard or defend their country get a shot at the American Dream with the start of a "deferred action" policyupdated 7:46 AM EDT, Wed August 15, 2012

Negotiating with Syria's allies is the only way to end the bloodshed and avoid the mistakes made in Iraq, say Asli Bali and Aziz Rana.updated 1:58 PM EDT, Tue August 14, 2012

Gulf Arab countries are collaborating on a missile shield against Iran. Patrick M. Cronin asks: How well can they work together?updated 8:39 AM EDT, Wed August 15, 2012

Jesús Chairez says Leo Manzano has every right to wave two flags at the Olympics since he has dual citizenship for both countries.updated 6:49 PM EDT, Tue August 14, 2012

It has consequences, says Aaron Carroll: Medicare vouchers could cost seniors and affect quality of care; block grants to states for Medicaid could cut aid to poor, elderly.updated 1:17 PM EDT, Tue August 14, 2012

Paul Ryan's interest in the novelist Ayn Rand may put him at odds with the Christian right and the Roman Catholic Church, says Gary Weiss.updated 2:00 PM EDT, Thu August 16, 2012

Frida Ghitis says that in foreign policy, it's hard to find a truly sharp disagreement on fundamental issues between Romney and Obama.updated 3:12 PM EDT, Tue August 14, 2012

LZ Granderson says Americans aren't put off by Romney's wealth but by his tendency to ignore the fact that we live interdependent lives.

Entetainment 411

Thursday, August 16, 2012

NRA and bad law block a way to catch killers

No comments:

Post a Comment