A Report On The York City Council Passed Council Bill 118437

The National firearm act of 1934 regulating only fully automatic firearms like sub-machine guns is approved by Congress. Then Roosevelt wins approval of the National Firearms Act of 1938, which requires the licensing of interstate gun dealers, who must record their sales. It prohibits sales to individuals under accusation or convicted of crimes of violence. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed for the purpose of keeping firearms out of the hands of those not legally permitted to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence. In 1972 the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms is created listing as part of its mission the control of illegal use and sale of firearms and the enforcement of Federal firearms laws. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act enforces a five-day waiting period on the purchase of a handgun and requires that local law enforcement agencies conduct background checks on purchasers of handguns. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 band all sale, manufacture, importation, or possession of a number of specific types of assault weapons. Given this information you

Many laws, regulations, and government programs directly impact the issue of gun control as well. The Federal Government is in charge of the gun control laws and pass the majority of them. However, sometimes the laws they create do not succeed as they expect them to. For example, gun buy-back programs were created to reduce the number of firearms owned by civilians and to provide a process where people can sell firearms without the risk of prosecution. Phillips et al. stated, “Cities in the USA continue to use the programme in response to high-profile incidents, such as the shooting in Newtown, CT, despite a lack of evidence that the programme will succeed in reducing violent crime”(249). As gun buy-backs were an important step to reducing the amount of firearms, many illegal weapons still

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms” (Adams). Samuel Adams said this while forming the Constitution, in order to protect United States citizens. The United States of America is one of the few nations that allow citizens to own a weapon. The recent mass murders in public centers have increased the fear of guns amongst the citizens. Guns are now stigmatized after the several mass murder incidents from the movie theater in Colorado, to schools and universities in Texas and Virginia. Due to the gun-related homicides, the government implemented strict regulations for owning a gun. This has made the government enforce more stringent regulations in guns, especially automatic rifles. New gun laws have banned the ownership of automatic rifles and magazines with high capacity. Also, the government has taken away the freedom to carry handguns from citizens without a proper license in most states. Now, in order to carry a gun, either by open carry or concealed carry, the citizens need to apply for a gun-carrying permit. California is one of the very few states with extraneous gun laws, and the Los Angeles County has some of the strictest concealed carry gun regulations. Because of personal safety, and the Second Amendment, Los Angeles should allow every resident the opportunity to apply for a concealed weapon

The Supreme Court was asked to decide if the Congress had the authority to make such a law under the Commerce Clause as they applied it to public school zones. Under the Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate three areas; Instrumentalities of commerce, the use or channels of commerce, and activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Since the gun was bought nor sold at the school or on school grounds, this clause did not apply for making the Act. The gun on school grounds had no impact, positive or negative, on interstate

HB 1169 was introduced on January, 3rd by representatives Rick C. Becker, B. Koppelman, Magrum, Olson, Paur, Porter, Simons; Senators O. Larsen, Luick, Myrdal, Vedaa. Under its provisions, people carrying concealed without a concealed weapons license will need to carry a form of state-issued photo ID, must be a North Dakota resident for at least 1 year, must inform police about their handgun upon contact, and must not otherwise be prohibited from possessing a firearm by law. Open carry of a loaded handgun will still require a permit. Non-residents will continue to be required to have a permit recognized by North Dakota to carry openly or concealed. The law will go into effect August 1, 2017 Gov. Doug Burgum signed the bill into law

The Supreme Court ruled on June 28th that the 2nd Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms applies on state and city levels. The 5-4 decision along ideological lines echoed 2008's decision to strike down DC's handgun ban, citing the 14th Amendment as a major factor in the decision to extend the federal right to own a hand gun for personal protection down to local levels. Though it officially returned McDonald v. City of Chicago to the lower courts for a decision, it is expected that Chicago's 28 year old handgun ban will be overturned, and that legislation against handgun restrictions in other states will be legally challenged for years to come.

It wasn 't until the 1930’s when opponents of the second amendment started to take action at the federal level. One law that was established at this time was the National Firearms Act of 1934. The National firearms Act stated that any weapon considered a machine gun or short barreled rifle, including sawed off shotguns, would have a tax of $200 imposed on the transfer of that weapon.

This case relates directly to my question because it calls into question the State police power. Performing background checks of gun purchasers falls under the state 's powers but the State cannot be forced to perform background checks by the Federal government. The Federal government can’t coerce the states into following policy, they can only encourage the states to follow policy. So with the violation of the constitution obvious, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Printz. So in the question “Do State and Local government have the power to claim a city to be a ‘Sanctuary City” and pass policy to do so?” we can conclude that State and Local governments can introduce this policy because the police power belongs solely to the State governments. So if we can assume that if Federalism is followed then the State powers would be prevail.

In my opinion, I disagree with the bill. Simplifying the process for allowing guns on the street can do more harm than good. Reducing the regulations required to carry-and-conceal can do more harm than good. While I do agree that the fee is a little ridiculous, I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that some people do not have the time to take the eight-hour class. This class is required simply because guns are a dangerous weapon. Without the proper skills, if a firearm were to be acquired by the wrong person, the amount of damage they can do with it is permanent. The class is required to prevent catastrophes from occurring. When firearms fall into the wrong hands, it also makes the job of law enforcement much harder. If a situation arose with an offender, they would have to possibly engage the situation in a much more violent manner, because the suspect might have a firearm in their possession. Forcing police to patrol the streets with a heightened sense of security because of the number of firearms on the streets seems unfair, and dangerous. I also do agree that people have a right to defend themselves as well as their loved ones, but only if they have the necessary skills required to successfully defend them in the safest way

To help apply restrictions, the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was the first gun law, was passed in the wake of the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Senator Robert F. Kennedy earlier that year (“Restricting” par. 4). The 1968 Gun Control Act established categories of prohibited gun purchasers and possessors, including convicted felons, fugitives from justice, minors, individuals with a history of

What brought this law about are the tragedies of 2012 that caused ripples in all ideas for assault weapons. The shootings that lead to this are tragic and not to be overlooked.

A big controversy in congress is passing a law to Tax ammunition/bullets to a gun. This will not just help the country from crime, it will help the economy. “Today almost 65% of people own a gun and 50% have live ammunition to that gun” (Domenech). Taxing every bullet to every gun in the entire country will generate millions of dollars. Another idea is to have gun collection days and ammunition collection days. Obviously the more guns you bring in, the more money the government will give to you. If none of these ideas work, congress can at least limit the ammunition to a gun in a house. The thought of having a gun

The concept of total gun-control is viewed by many as the ban of all firearms for civilian possession, as well as severe restrictions on the certain types of firearms allowed for civilian possession. In very recent years we can examine the effects of instituting sever gun restriction in cities and the negative effects that it had. Washington DC and Chicago provide

Gun control infringes on the Second Amendment right of the American people.  The Second Amendment reads, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (Adams).  In researching gun control, the government is not sure which way to enforce the law because they can not determine the fair interpretation of the amendment.  Even though gun control is suppose to reduce fire arm related crimes, it only makes it harder for law abiding citizens, or officers of the law to attain guns.  According to Hogberg there was a specific case of Heller vs. Washington D.C. that made a huge impact.  Dick Heller was asked to defend the people of D.C. against the government to gain the rights to own a hand gun.  The right of owning a hand gun in Washington D.C. was revoked in the early 1970's, but in 1976 an incident of a shooting changed

“I argue that location-specific gun bans (commonly known as “gun-free zones”) are typically unjust” (Pg.1, Hsiao)