If gun safety activists want their agenda to survive, they will have to stop trying to ban guns — and focus instead on reducing the violence those guns bring.

The gun safety movement finds itself on the precipice of disaster.

With new grass-roots and advocacy organisations, better financing, and stronger support from the Democratic Party, it has, arguably, never been stronger. But on Wednesday, the Supreme Court will&nbsp;hear a case&nbsp;that is likely to call into question many of the reforms at the top of the movement’s agenda.

The justices are considering the constitutionality of a New York law that makes it hard for residents to obtain a permit to carry concealed firearms in public. The court, with three conservative pro-gun justices appointed by former President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>, will almost certainly say New York’s law is too restrictive under the Second Amendment — which will lead, predictably, to more guns on city streets and more violent crime.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-wants-us-congress-to-reform-american-gun-laws-363630">Biden wants US Congress to reform American gun laws</a>

The New York case could also signal the beginning of a new era of judicial hostility to gun laws, especially to the bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines that the reinvigorated gun safety movement has fought so hard to get enacted. With a single decision, the Supreme Court majority could transform life in many American cities — and stymie the growing political movement for gun reform.

Advocates and activists need an agenda that can survive the Supreme Court’s new interpretation of the Second Amendment. Fighting to restrict the quantity and kinds of guns owned by citizens will be a losing battle. Instead, it is time to focus on policies that will reduce the violence all those guns in America bring.

A good place to start would be community-based intervention programs like Operation Ceasefire, an initiative launched in Boston in 1996.&nbsp;Studies&nbsp;show&nbsp;that a small percentage of the population, such as gang members and hardened criminals, commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. By bringing together community leaders, former gang members and the police for outreach to those most likely to use firearms, gun violence intervention programs have a proven track record of reducing gun crime.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/supporters-of-gun-control-assail-biden-over-delay-on-action-373719">Supporters of gun control assail Biden over delay on action</a>

Such programs, however, require resources and personnel at a time when social services and law enforcement are already stretched thin, and the political will to fund them adequately has never really materialized. That’s where the new strength of the gun safety movement can be a boon. Instead of spending political capital on a national ban on assault rifles that the justices are likely to overturn, the movement could use its muscle to push for federal and state legislation to fund vibrant and effective gun violence intervention programs in every major and midsize city across America.

The gun safety reform movement should also prioritize strengthening federal efforts to crack down on gun trafficking. While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or A.T.F., has federal gun law enforcement authority, the National Rifle Association and its allies&nbsp;have shackled it&nbsp;with outdated technology, insufficient funds, and absurd restrictions. With an ever-increasing number of guns in the United States, A.T.F.’s intentional impotence comes at a deadly cost.

By law, A.T.F. is prohibited from using electronic databases to trace guns found at crime scenes and barred from electronically searching the records it does have. So when a gun is found at a crime scene, agents have to travel to individual gun stores and sort through boxes of documents to find out who bought it. A.T.F. is also prohibited by law from making more than one unannounced, warrantless inspection per year of any licensed gun dealer. And A.T.F. is still operating with roughly the same number of employees it had in 2001, and about 20 percent fewer inspectors, even though the number of guns in the United States has skyrocketed, and we now average at least 30 million gun sales a year. In a country where there are now&nbsp;more licensed&nbsp;gun dealers&nbsp;than branches of Starbucks and McDonald’s combined, these artificial restraints on A.T.F. should be lifted.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bidens-order-to-target-ghost-guns-in-reforms-against-increasing-gun-violence-375987">Biden's order to target 'ghost guns' in reforms against increasing gun violence</a>

The gun safety movement should also launch a renewed push for universal — and better — background checks to make it harder for criminals and abusers to obtain firearms. There is broad public support for universal background checks, even among gun owners, and the court is unlikely to declare them unconstitutional.

Background checks, however, are only as good as the underlying databases. In 2015, a background check error allowed Dylann Roof to buy a handgun, weeks before he shot and killed 9 people in the Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C. In 2017, more than two dozen churchgoers were killed by another shooter whose domestic violence conviction&nbsp;wasn’t&nbsp;reported to the F.B.I. The current system has significant gaps, especially when it comes to disqualifying mental health records. The federal database is missing hundreds of thousands of mental health records, and state reporting is shockingly uneven.

Gun safety advocates have long recognized these problems — and have been among the lone voices pushing for exactly these reforms. Yet proposals with more obvious popular appeal, like banning assault rifles, have taken center stage over the past decade. An expansive new interpretation of the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court warrants a reordering of priorities.

An agenda that focuses on intervention, beefing up gun law enforcement, and better background checks would not only be more likely to survive in the court, it might also do more to reduce gun violence. While assault rifles look menacing, they are responsible for only a fraction of gun deaths in America each year. While these weapons have been used in some of the most notorious massacres, most mass shootings are actually committed with handguns.

The same principle applies to large-capacity magazine bans. Though good in theory, they’re consistently ignored in practice. Advocates convinced lawmakers in New Jersey to&nbsp;ban&nbsp;them in 2018, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that gun owners have turned in or thrown away their now illegal magazines.

For decades now, the N.R.A. has&nbsp;said&nbsp;we don’t need more gun laws, just better enforcement of existing gun laws. It’s time for the gun safety movement to take the N.R.A. up on its challenge. By dropping the excessive focus on banning certain types of weapons, and instead prioritizing reforms that do more to crack down on gun violence, gun safety advocates may be able avoid the harsh scrutiny of the new Supreme Court — and, in the end, save more lives.

If gun safety activists want their agenda to survive, they will have to stop trying to ban guns — and focus instead on reducing the violence those guns bring. The gun safety movement finds itself on the precipice of disaster.

If gun safety activists want their agenda to survive, they will have to stop trying to ban guns — and focus instead on reducing the violence those guns bring. The gun safety movement finds itself on the precipice of disaster. With new grass-roots and advocacy organisations, better financing, and stronger support from the Democratic Party, it has, arguably, never been stronger. But on Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear a case that is likely to call into question many of the reforms at the top of the movement’s agenda. The justices are considering the constitutionality of a New York law that makes it hard for residents to obtain a permit to carry concealed firearms in public. The court, with three conservative pro-gun justices appointed by former President Donald Trump, will almost certainly say New York’s law is too restrictive under the Second Amendment — which will lead, predictably, to more guns on city streets and more violent crime. Also read | Biden wants US Congress to reform American gun laws The New York case could also signal the beginning of a new era of judicial hostility to gun laws, especially to the bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines that the reinvigorated gun safety movement has fought so hard to get enacted. With a single decision, the Supreme Court majority could transform life in many American cities — and stymie the growing political movement for gun reform. Advocates and activists need an agenda that can survive the Supreme Court’s new interpretation of the Second Amendment. Fighting to restrict the quantity and kinds of guns owned by citizens will be a losing battle. Instead, it is time to focus on policies that will reduce the violence all those guns in America bring. A good place to start would be community-based intervention programs like Operation Ceasefire, an initiative launched in Boston in 1996. Studies show that a small percentage of the population, such as gang members and hardened criminals, commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. By bringing together community leaders, former gang members and the police for outreach to those most likely to use firearms, gun violence intervention programs have a proven track record of reducing gun crime. Also read | Supporters of gun control assail Biden over delay on action Such programs, however, require resources and personnel at a time when social services and law enforcement are already stretched thin, and the political will to fund them adequately has never really materialized. That’s where the new strength of the gun safety movement can be a boon. Instead of spending political capital on a national ban on assault rifles that the justices are likely to overturn, the movement could use its muscle to push for federal and state legislation to fund vibrant and effective gun violence intervention programs in every major and midsize city across America. The gun safety reform movement should also prioritize strengthening federal efforts to crack down on gun trafficking. While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or A.T.F., has federal gun law enforcement authority, the National Rifle Association and its allies have shackled it with outdated technology, insufficient funds, and absurd restrictions. With an ever-increasing number of guns in the United States, A.T.F.’s intentional impotence comes at a deadly cost. By law, A.T.F. is prohibited from using electronic databases to trace guns found at crime scenes and barred from electronically searching the records it does have. So when a gun is found at a crime scene, agents have to travel to individual gun stores and sort through boxes of documents to find out who bought it. A.T.F. is also prohibited by law from making more than one unannounced, warrantless inspection per year of any licensed gun dealer. And A.T.F. is still operating with roughly the same number of employees it had in 2001, and about 20 percent fewer inspectors, even though the number of guns in the United States has skyrocketed, and we now average at least 30 million gun sales a year. In a country where there are now more licensed gun dealers than branches of Starbucks and McDonald’s combined, these artificial restraints on A.T.F. should be lifted. Also read | Biden's order to target 'ghost guns' in reforms against increasing gun violence The gun safety movement should also launch a renewed push for universal — and better — background checks to make it harder for criminals and abusers to obtain firearms. There is broad public support for universal background checks, even among gun owners, and the court is unlikely to declare them unconstitutional. Background checks, however, are only as good as the underlying databases. In 2015, a background check error allowed Dylann Roof to buy a handgun, weeks before he shot and killed 9 people in the Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C. In 2017, more than two dozen churchgoers were killed by another shooter whose domestic violence conviction wasn’t reported to the F.B.I. The current system has significant gaps, especially when it comes to disqualifying mental health records. The federal database is missing hundreds of thousands of mental health records, and state reporting is shockingly uneven. Gun safety advocates have long recognized these problems — and have been among the lone voices pushing for exactly these reforms. Yet proposals with more obvious popular appeal, like banning assault rifles, have taken center stage over the past decade. An expansive new interpretation of the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court warrants a reordering of priorities. An agenda that focuses on intervention, beefing up gun law enforcement, and better background checks would not only be more likely to survive in the court, it might also do more to reduce gun violence. While assault rifles look menacing, they are responsible for only a fraction of gun deaths in America each year. While these weapons have been used in some of the most notorious massacres, most mass shootings are actually committed with handguns. The same principle applies to large-capacity magazine bans. Though good in theory, they’re consistently ignored in practice. Advocates convinced lawmakers in New Jersey to ban them in 2018, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that gun owners have turned in or thrown away their now illegal magazines. For decades now, the N.R.A. has said we don’t need more gun laws, just better enforcement of existing gun laws. It’s time for the gun safety movement to take the N.R.A. up on its challenge. By dropping the excessive focus on banning certain types of weapons, and instead prioritizing reforms that do more to crack down on gun violence, gun safety advocates may be able avoid the harsh scrutiny of the new Supreme Court — and, in the end, save more lives.

If the new Supreme Court stymies gun safety laws, what comes next?

Gun culture, an ingrained part of American society

US President Donald Trump plans to discuss gun legislation with lawmakers this week, the White House said Monday, and he told governors not to worry about the National Rifle Association as they mull responses to the massacre of 17 people at a Florida high school.

&quot;Don`t worry about the NRA. They`re on our side,&quot; Trump told more than 35 governors, including Rick Scott of Florida, during a White House meeting. &quot;If they`re not with you, we have to fight them every once in a while. That`s OK. They`re doing what they think is right.&quot;

The February 14 massacre of students and educators at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, by a gunman with a legally purchased semiautomatic rifle reignited the nation`s long-running debate over gun rights.&nbsp;

Trump, a Republican who backed gun rights during and since his 2016 presidential campaign, has been under pressure to show he is responding without alienating Republicans who oppose restrictions on gun rights. He plans to meet with lawmakers from both parties on Wednesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said at a news briefing.

Trump, who had lunch with senior NRA officials on Sunday, on Monday repeated his suggestion that arming teachers could help stop more rampages. He did not mention raising the legal age to buy assault rifles to 21, an idea he emphasised last week and one that Florida`s Scott, also a Republican, backed after the rampage.

The NRA could not be reached for immediate comment.

Investigators said this month`s assault was carried out by Nikolas Cruz, a 19-year-old former student at the high school, with a legally purchased AR-15 assault weapon.

The shooting has rattled long-drawn political lines on gun rights in the United States, where Republican officials have often opposed any efforts to tighten gun ownership rules, partly out of concern about retribution by the powerful NRA.

Washington Governor Jay Inslee, a Democrat, told Trump that teachers in his state do not want to carry weapons.

&quot;I have listened to the first-grade teachers who don`t want to be pistol-packing first-grade teachers,&quot; Inslee said. &quot;Let`s just take that off the table and move forward.&quot;

But Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, said more than 100 school districts in his state have trained teachers and other staff to carry a weapon and respond to attacks.

&quot;Some school districts, they promote it,&quot; Abbott said. &quot;They will have signs out front, a warning sign, `Be aware there are armed personnel on campus.`&quot;

Florida plans to invest $500 million to have a significant law enforcement presence in every public school in the state, Scott told the White House meeting.

Trump says would have run in

Trump criticised the law enforcement officers who responded to the shooting.

An armed school resource officer stationed at the school stayed outside during the attack, and has since resigned. Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel has been criticised for his department`s response to the shooting.

&quot;The way they performed was, frankly, disgusting,&quot; Trump said, adding that he believed that if he were in the same situation, he would have run into the school &quot;even if I didn`t have a weapon.&quot;

The businessman-turned-politician avoided military service during the Vietnam War through student and medical deferments.

He has called the school resource officer, Scot Peterson, a &quot;coward.&quot;

An attorney for Peterson defended his actions in a statement, saying he had remained outside because he believed the gunfire was occurring outside the school.

&quot;Allegations that Mr. Peterson was a coward and that his performance, under the circumstances, failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue,&quot; attorney Joseph DiRuzzo said in a statement.

Trump has said he plans to limit sales of &quot;bump stocks,&quot; which can modify a legally purchased semiautomatic rifle to fire at high rates of speed akin to a machine gun. Fully automatic machine guns are largely banned under US law.

The NRA has pushed back against that idea, saying it would impinge on the rights of law-abiding gun owners while having no effect on public safety.

A gunman in Las Vegas last year used assault rifles equipped with bump stocks to kill 58 people in the deadliest attack by a single shooter in US history. Bump stocks have not played a prominent role in other recent US mass shootings.

'Don`t worry about the NRA. They`re on our side,' Trump told more than 35 governors during a White House meeting. 'If they`re not with you, we have to fight them every once in a while. That`s OK. They`re doing what they think is right'

US President Donald Trump plans to discuss gun legislation with lawmakers this week, the White House said Monday, and he told governors not to worry about the National Rifle Association as they mull responses to the massacre of 17 people at a Florida high school. "Don`t worry about the NRA. They`re on our side," Trump told more than 35 governors, including Rick Scott of Florida, during a White House meeting. "If they`re not with you, we have to fight them every once in a while. That`s OK. They`re doing what they think is right." The February 14 massacre of students and educators at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, by a gunman with a legally purchased semiautomatic rifle reignited the nation`s long-running debate over gun rights. Trump, a Republican who backed gun rights during and since his 2016 presidential campaign, has been under pressure to show he is responding without alienating Republicans who oppose restrictions on gun rights. He plans to meet with lawmakers from both parties on Wednesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said at a news briefing. Trump, who had lunch with senior NRA officials on Sunday, on Monday repeated his suggestion that arming teachers could help stop more rampages. He did not mention raising the legal age to buy assault rifles to 21, an idea he emphasised last week and one that Florida`s Scott, also a Republican, backed after the rampage. The NRA could not be reached for immediate comment. Investigators said this month`s assault was carried out by Nikolas Cruz, a 19-year-old former student at the high school, with a legally purchased AR-15 assault weapon. The shooting has rattled long-drawn political lines on gun rights in the United States, where Republican officials have often opposed any efforts to tighten gun ownership rules, partly out of concern about retribution by the powerful NRA. Washington Governor Jay Inslee, a Democrat, told Trump that teachers in his state do not want to carry weapons. "I have listened to the first-grade teachers who don`t want to be pistol-packing first-grade teachers," Inslee said. "Let`s just take that off the table and move forward." But Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, said more than 100 school districts in his state have trained teachers and other staff to carry a weapon and respond to attacks. "Some school districts, they promote it," Abbott said. "They will have signs out front, a warning sign, `Be aware there are armed personnel on campus.`" Florida plans to invest $500 million to have a significant law enforcement presence in every public school in the state, Scott told the White House meeting. Trump says would have run in Trump criticised the law enforcement officers who responded to the shooting. An armed school resource officer stationed at the school stayed outside during the attack, and has since resigned. Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel has been criticised for his department`s response to the shooting. "The way they performed was, frankly, disgusting," Trump said, adding that he believed that if he were in the same situation, he would have run into the school "even if I didn`t have a weapon." The businessman-turned-politician avoided military service during the Vietnam War through student and medical deferments. He has called the school resource officer, Scot Peterson, a "coward." An attorney for Peterson defended his actions in a statement, saying he had remained outside because he believed the gunfire was occurring outside the school. "Allegations that Mr. Peterson was a coward and that his performance, under the circumstances, failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue," attorney Joseph DiRuzzo said in a statement. Trump has said he plans to limit sales of "bump stocks," which can modify a legally purchased semiautomatic rifle to fire at high rates of speed akin to a machine gun. Fully automatic machine guns are largely banned under US law. The NRA has pushed back against that idea, saying it would impinge on the rights of law-abiding gun owners while having no effect on public safety. A gunman in Las Vegas last year used assault rifles equipped with bump stocks to kill 58 people in the deadliest attack by a single shooter in US history. Bump stocks have not played a prominent role in other recent US mass shootings.

Trump plans to discuss gun legislation with lawmakers, says NRA 'on our side'

gun-law-in-us

Gun Law In Us, News on Gun Law In Us, stories on Gun Law In Us, articles on Gun Law In Us, Gun Law In Us stories at Wion, Gun Law In Us news, Gun Law In Us latest news

gun law-in-us

If the new Supreme Court stymies gun safety laws, what comes next?

Gun culture, an ingrained part of American society

Trump plans to discuss gun legislation with lawmakers, says NRA 'on our side'