Gun Violence in the United States
What Is Happening
The United States is a global outlier in firearm-related deaths, experiencing the highest rates of gun violence among high-income nations. In 2017, for example, the most recent year for which global data is available, 4.43 deaths per 100,000 people occurred in the U.S. due to gun violence – around 7 times higher than the United Kingdom, 9 times higher than Canada, and 29 times higher than Denmark.1 Gun sales in the U.S. have increased at an unprecedented rate in recent years as well. In 2020 alone, Americans purchased more than 23 million guns, a 65% increase from the previous year.2 Furthermore, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), more Americans died of gun-related deaths, including homicides, suicides, and accidental deaths, in 2020 than any other year on record.3 In fact, rates of homicide by firearm in 2020 increased by 34% from the previous year and 75% from the previous decade.4
In the United States, gun violence has taken a characteristic form in recent years: mass shootings. Defined by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) as “multiple firearm homicide incidents, involving four or more victims at one or more locations close to one another,”5 such incidents often take place in public spaces, including schools, places of worship, and entertainment venues. In the last decade especially, mass shootings have been occurring at an unprecedented rate and frequency. In 2019, one mass shooting was recorded every 36 days, while in 2017 and 2018, one mass shooting took place every 45 days on average, leading some to label such incidents as a “uniquely American crime.”6
One of the most tragic mass shootings in history took place on December 14, 2012, when a 20-year-old gunman shot and killed 26 people at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Of the victims, 20 were first-grade children. Six teachers were killed while attempting to protect the students. The shooting led policymakers to make promises of stricter gun control, and many Washington officials vowed to not let a similar incident take place. Nonetheless, between 2012 and 2020, 2,654 more mass shootings occurred in the United States,7 two of which have been deadlier than Sandy Hook. On June 12, 2016, a 29-year-old man killed 49 people and wounded 53 at a nightclub in Orlando, which was deemed a terrorist attack by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) due to the shooter’s self-proclaimed allegiance to an extremist terrorist group. Then, on October 1, 2017, a 64-year-old man opened fire from his hotel room on the crowd attending a music festival in Las Vegas, firing more than 1,000 bullets, killing 60 people and injuring 411 without a determined cause. The Las Vegas shooting remains the deadliest mass shooting committed by an individual in modern U.S. history.
According to most recent data figures, the number of mass shootings increased further during the coronavirus pandemic, even doubling in July 2021 compared to a year earlier.8 Although some point to the surge in gun sales as the cause of increased gun-related violence,9 the sociological trauma and economic distress experienced during the pandemic have also been cited to have triggered the increase.10 With around 121 guns circulating in the United States for every 100 people,11 and the prominence of mass shootings in the public sphere, gun violence remains a prevalent threat. Furthermore, the risk of gun violence affects communities disproportionately, interacting with existing systematic inequalities and identity politics to produce diverging levels of risk between different demographics. As such, certain portions of the American population are more vulnerable to gun violence than others, especially people of color, low-income individuals, and women.
Notably, black Americans, although they make up only 14% of the population, represent more than 55% of homicide by firearm victims.12 They are also ten times more likely than white Americans to die from gun homicide, and black children are fourteen times more likely than white children.13 Racial dynamics are further compounded by socioeconomic patterns. The rate of firearm-related deaths is four times higher among young people living in towns with the highest concentration of poverty than those living in the lowest concentration of poverty.14 As communities of color are significantly more likely to live in high-poverty neighborhoods compared to white Americans,15 the nexus of gun violence and household income also disadvantages people of color, especially black Americans.
Lastly, unregulated access to firearms by violence-prone individuals exacerbates domestic abuse, leaving women especially vulnerable to gun-related deaths. Women in the U.S. are 21 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than in other developed countries, usually as a result of domestic violence.16 Nearly 1 million women alive in the U.S. today have reported being shot or shot at by their partners, while 4.5 million women have reported being threatened with a gun. Although the intersection of gun violence and domestic abuse can affect all women, women of color experience this disproportionately, specifically, Black, American Indian, and Hispanic women.17 As such, gun violence interacts with deep seated systematic inequalities, causing communities of color, individuals with low incomes, and women to be more vulnerable.
Why Is It Happening?
In the United States, the question of gun control is intertwined with matters of individual freedoms and constitutional rights. Because of this, gun control remains incredibly polarized, and relevant bills are often unable to obtain the bipartisan support needed in the U.S. Senate to become laws. In this way, despite promises of increased public safety made by policymakers after mass shootings, gun control proposals are often blocked in Congress with reference to the Second Amendment.
Adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reads, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”18 The vague language of the amendment has led to considerable debate regarding its intended scope, with different interpretations prevailing in different times in history. Until the 2000s, it was largely understood to be addressing the right of states to have a militia,19 which is a military organization of citizens with limited military training, usually for local defense. In 1886, the Supreme Court confirmed the militia interpretation in Presser v. Illinois, and reaffirmed it in 1939 in United States v. Miller. Further, in 1980, the Supreme Court wrote that the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.”20 However, this interpretation was challenged in 2008. In its decision for District of Columbia v. Heller, which was the Supreme Court’s first official consideration of the gun rights issue since 1939, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia, and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense in one’s home. As such, in 2008, the right to bear arms officially became a constitutionally-recognized privilege of American citizens.
Due to the Supreme Court’s recognition of gun ownership as a constitutionally-granted individual right, gun control has been a highly contested issue at both the federal and the state levels, leading to a lack of regulation around firearms. Accordingly, issues around gun sales and ownership are primarily governed by two acts. The first is the National Firearms Act of 1934, which imposes an excise tax on the manufacture and transfer of certain firearms, and mandates their registration. The other is the Gun Control Act of 1968, passed after the assassinations of former President John Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., which forbids the sale of firearms and ammunition to felons and other “prohibited persons.”21 One notable gun legislation in more recent history is the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, referred to as the Brady Act, which implemented the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). As mandated in the Brady Act, federally licensed dealers are required to complete a background check through the NICS for any individual purchasing a firearm.
However, there has not been a major piece of gun control legislation at the federal level since 1993. Legislative loopholes within the aforementioned acts remain open to exploitation by both gun sellers and purchasers. For instance, the Gun Control Act deems it unlawful for anyone other than licensed dealers to engage in the sale of firearms, however, it considers any “person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms” outside of the licensing requirement. In other words, gun sales that occur through private transactions, which is an estimated 40% of all gun sales in the U.S., are unregulated, such as gun shows, internet sales, and classified advertisements.22 Similarly, although the Brady Act mandates background checks, the requirement only applies to gun purchases from a licensed dealer, meaning that “prohibited persons” can obtain firearms through private transactions without any federal record of their transactions. And even in the case of purchase from a licensed dealer, the Brady Act states that if there is something in your record that requires further investigation before your purchase request is approved, the FBI has three business days to complete the investigation. In other words, if the FBI does not approve or deny you in that timespan, then you are allowed to purchase a firearm, despite an existing criminal record or a history of suspicious activity.
In addition to not implementing more comprehensive provisions in order to eliminate such loopholes, the U.S. legislative has also not renewed existing legislation due to the two leading political parties’ inability to achieve bipartisan agreement. In subsequent years, AR-15 style assault fires, similar to those previously banned, were used in multiple mass shootings, including the Sandy Hook massacre, the Pulse Nightclub shooting, and the Las Vegas music festival shooting.23
The political polarization around gun control has even stood in the way of passing simple security-related legislation to help address the issue. Specifically, there is no federal law that mandates the secure storage of firearms or safety locking features. This means that even those that cannot purchase guns themselves can easily have access to them through their relatives. For example, the shooter of the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre, who was a minor and thus not allowed to buy a gun himself, committed the murders with his mother’s guns, one semi-automatic assault rifle and two pistols, which he took from his home. Considering that the median age of school shooters is 16 years old, meaning they would not be able to buy a gun in any state, even simple legislation like secure storage would create significant change.
In sum, the Supreme Court’s recognition of the Second Amendment’s scope as extending to the individual ownership of firearms has meant that gun control has become a partisan issue, contested among those supporting gun rights as a matter of personal freedom and a constitutionally mandated right, and those considering gun control as the only viable avenue to tackle gun violence, a concern for public health and safety.
What Is Being Done About It?
Increasing rates of gun violence and mass shootings in recent years have triggered a wave of public protests, advocating for increased gun control legislation. In 2018, in response to a mass shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, which left 17 people dead, thousands of students in the D.C. region organized a national walk-out to protest gun violence. One year later, in 2019, hundreds of thousands of people gathered around Capitol Hill in Washington to attend the “March for Our Lives” protest, which was organized by the survivors of the Parkland shooting. The protest’s focus was federal legislation mandating universal background checks for firearm sales, including by private deals, which had passed through the House of Representatives and was waiting for Senate’s approval.24 The bill has not yet been voted for in the Senate as it does not have enough bipartisan support.
The Biden administration has also been more willing to issue gun control regulations at the federal level, bypassing deadlocks at the Senate. In response to the increasing number of firearm-related incidents since 2020, President Joe Biden called gun violence in the country an “epidemic,” condemning it as an “international embarrassment” in April 2021.25 He proposed that instead of depending on the legislative branch to pass proposed bills, he would announce concrete actions that he can take without congressional approval. Accordingly, in last April the Biden administration announced a new policy that regulates “ghost guns,” untraceable firearms that are built privately and do not have serial numbers, meaning they cannot be traced in the case of a crime. Under the rule, the kits now have to be produced by licensed manufacturers and contain serial numbers on the gun kit’s frame. Purchasers of ghost gun kits will also be required to go through thorough background checks.26
Some state governments have also enacted gun control mechanisms. New York City mayor Eric Adams, for instance, announced a “Blueprint to End Gun Violence” last January, which includes a more robust police presence with a focus on preventing the influx of guns into the city, as well as community-based efforts such as the expansion of violence interruption programmes, and mental health services. The roadmap focuses both on intervention and prevention efforts, and calls on the federal government and New York state to partner with the city administration to better prevent gun violence.
Beyond regulatory action through official channels, many grassroots organizations have risen to prominence in the stand against this issue. Even activism by a small number of individuals have made real difference on the ground. In 2014, families of nine Sandy Hook victims and a survivor filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the rifle that was used by the shooter, which had advertised the firearm through an incitive slogan. Although a 2005 law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) provided legislative breaks to gun manufacturers to market their products however they wished, the Sandy Hook families were able to win the lawsuit in February 2022.27 This means that gun manufacturers can no longer consider themselves immune to judiciary action, and although the full effects of the lawsuit are not yet evident, there is no question that the decision will be incredibly impactful.
What’s Next?
The Biden administration is expected to phase out further gun control regulations in the coming months. The aforementioned rules concerning the sale of “ghost guns” compose the first step of a 6-step plan by the administration.28 In a briefing, the White House reiterated its determination “not [to] wait for the Congress to act to take its own steps to save lives.” Additionally, in the coming weeks, the administration will propose a rule to make subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act any device “marketed as a stabilizing brace, [which] effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle.” The rule has been prompted by the mass shooting that took place in Boulder, Colorado in March 2022, during which a gunman who used a pistol with an arm brace killed 11 people.
Moreover, the White House will publish a model “red flag” legislation for states to enact, which would allow family members or law enforcement to petition for a court order to temporarily bar people in crisis from accessing firearms if they present a danger to themselves or to others. Over the coming years, the Biden administration is also proposing to invest in evidence-based community violence interventions, and will mandate the Justice Department to issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. Lastly, the White House will nominate a Director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the key agency responsible from enforcing gun laws, which has not had a director since 2015.
The effects of the 2020 surge in gun sales have not yet been fully assessed. With 23 million more guns circulating in the United States in the last two years, it is uncertain whether rates of gun violence will decrease in the near future. As the legislative branch is deadlocked by procedural obstacles and partisanship, it is up to the White House and to state-level legislatives to enact necessary regulations to avoid the continued rise of gun violence in the short and medium term.
To access the endnotes, download the full report.
