Ethics Research Paper - Seton Hall, Professor Johnson PDF

Preview

Summary

Seton Hall, Professor Johnson...

Description

Professor Johnson Contemporary Moral Issues 2 November 2019 The Second Amendment and Gun Control Can Co-Exist Today, the United States has the highest per capita and total number of guns in the world. On average, there is at least one school shooting a week in the United States and there have been at least 288 school shootings in the U.S. since January 1st, 2009. According to CNN, that is fiftyseven times as many shootings as Canada, Japan, Germany, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom combined. The United States has a pervading gun culture that stems from the Second Amendment to the Constitution which states that “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.” Over time, this amendment has gained much controversy due to the increased gun violence that has occurred across the country. One of the main issues at hand is the meaning of the Second Amendment, to which opponents of gun control say that it guarantees an individual’s right to have firearms, whereas gun control advocates say that it only states a collective right of the states to maintain militias. I believe that gun control should be implemented to make it much more difficult to get a gun, however, I do not think that guns should be banned altogether. Therefore, my own view on the matter is that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms shall not be changed, but the laws should be more regulated by the government in order to maintain the safest environment overall. As stated previously, the Second Amendment provides U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. The amendment was proposed by James Madison shortly after the Constitution was

Basedow 2

ratified as a way to provide more power to the state. Because Anti-Federalists were those who supported the states having more power, they wanted the amendment to be created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a possible tyrannical federal government. There has been little talk on the issue of the Second Amendment within the Supreme Court until recent years, but past cases have cemented the court’s opinion that the amendment does not prohibit states from setting their own rules on gun ownership, meaning that the federal government has nothing to do with the matter. There are evidently many pros and cons to gun control. Some pros include that more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths, legally owned guns are frequently stolen and used by criminals, and that gun control laws would reduce the societal costs associated with gun violence. However, some cons of gun control are said to be that even with more laws, that they do not deter crime but gun ownership is what deters crime. As well, another con is that gun control laws give too much power to the government, a viewpoint that the early Anti-Federalists who originated the Second Amendment had. And lastly, people who are against gun control believe that gun control laws such as background checks and microstamping are an invasion of privacy. Although opponents of gun control believe these are cons to the added regulation of guns, I feel that restrictions on firearms are necessary to decide who can have them, under what conditions, and where they can be taken. Under the ethics of utilitarianism, the theory suggests that “we ought to consider the totality of consequences of a policy or action” (MacKinnon). The basic procedure for this theory is to add up the interests of everyone who would be affected by an action without privileging the interests above anyone else in particular. This being said, under the morals of a utilitarianist, the idea of added gun control and regulation of guns in America would result in the greatest amount

Basedow 3

of good for the greatest amount of people, a principle they call the principle of utility or the greatest happiness principle. Since a strict increase in regulation would thus lead to fewer mass shootings, there would, therefore, be fewer people to mourn, fewer family members to be mourning the death of a relative, and less negative social consequences after a mass shooting has occurred. Stricter gun control will more than likely reduce mass shootings, for example by closing background check loopholes to make it harder for dangerous people to obtain guns. Because utilitarianism focuses solely on the consequences of an action and not the action itself, even if the action of gun control may not be seen as a good act by many, the consequences of this act would lead to a greater good in which fewer people will be affected by mass murder by guns. The theory of utilitarianism has two different forms that exist; act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism is the idea that we should consider the consequences of each act separately, whereas rule utilitarianism states that we should consider the consequences of the act performed as a general practice. For example, if someone were to use a gun to create a mass murder, someone who was an opponent of gun control would say that they have the right to own a gun due to the Second Amendment of the Constitution. However, looking at this situation through the eyes of a rule utilitarianist, we would have to calculate the morality of this act if everyone were to be allowed to create mass murder just because they had the right to do so. Of course, this would be completely unethical, because if everyone were to be allowed to create mass murder and get away with it, everyone would be more than likely already dead. A point of utilitarianism is to consider the importance of happiness of others, which would mean to evaluate how much happiness would become overall if gun control laws were implemented to save how many ever live in the future. Deontological ethics focuses on duties, obligations, and rights. This means that

Basedow 4

deontological theories focus on the “right actions and right intentions while downplaying the importance of the goods or benefits that are produced by these actions” (MacKinnon). The deontological theory, also known as Kantian ethics, eludes then that gun control would be a morally good act because the intentions behind one’s idea to increase gun control in America would only be to increase the safety of the whole population. According to Kant, we are responsible for our intention to do good or bad, and it is this that we are held morally accountable. Therefore, an opponent of gun control would be seen as not acting morally since his intention would be to loosen restriction laws on guns for his own benefit, not for the benefit and safety of others. One issue with the debate on gun control laws today is that “the United States has less than 5 percent of the world’s population but 35 to 50 percent of its guns” (Nakaya). The main reason for this percentage of guns in the country is due to the loopholes found in the law, in which private individuals selling and purchasing do not have to undergo a federal background check in order to obtain a gun. The act of loopholes within the implemented laws could also be seen as immoral, because the intention to do so would be malicious, knowing that said person should not be allowed to obtain the gun but they are anyways. A feature of Kant’s deontological theory is the emphasis on the moral equality of all people, and that we should not make exceptions for ourselves. If one person believes that everyone should have the right to own a gun, that includes criminals, ex-convicts, as well as some who are mentally unstable. Although possibly seen as unfair, those groups of people in society are the ones who should not be able to own a gun because of the instability and backgrounds that they come from. Background checks should be a common occurrence when someone is purchasing a gun, regardless of how inconvenient it may seem to those who have owned guns before. Even though it is near impossible to have background checks between

Basedow 5

private purchases, gun purchases should be monitored so that none are bought in bulk, or in high quantity and there should be a limit on how many guns a person is allowed to own to eliminate the possibility of private sellers. Those who wish to have guns should have rational reasons as to why they want to own a said gun, otherwise, they should not be able to obtain one. Many people believe that gun control infringes on the rights of U.S. citizens based upon the right given to them by the Second Amendment. In some ways, these people are right to feel afraid of having their rights being taken away from them. Under a utilitarian viewpoint, there is no true consensus on whether or not restricting gun laws will result in a social positive or negative or whether the net result will be positive or negative. Although guns do create social problems in terms of school shootings and murders by guns, there is no way to tell if creating such stricter gun laws will lead to a greater amount of happiness overall. As well, under a deontological viewpoint, it is argued that aggressive gun control will inevitably interfere with the right of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment that is related to some deontological rights. Because gun possession is so deeply rooted in American society, there is no way to tell that increasing gun control laws will lead to a solution that will do more harm than good or vice versa. There is a strong understanding of why many do not think gun control is necessary or fair. The right to bear arms is granted to us in the Constitution, so to think that any of those rights were to be possibly taken away in the future, for example, freedom of speech would seem absolutely unheard of in our society. However, because there is no controversy of the freedom of speech that exists, everyone would come together to fight against the infringement of that right that was given to us. Unfortunately, gun control controversy does exist, because there are varying degrees of gun culture all over the United States. Those who live in the midwest or south are more than likely using guns for hunting purposes. But, those who live in urban cities are only

Basedow 6

purchasing guns for selfish related reasons, and not for practical use such as the ones who need them to survive. Gun control has been a debate in recent years due to the increase in gun violence in the United States. Although there is an obvious divide between those who believe that guns should be outlawed and those who think things should stay the same, I believe that gun laws should only increase in restrictions to obtain one. By doing so, it would not ban guns altogether, but increase the difficulty of someone who is a criminal or mentally unstable to get their hands on a gun. There is evidence that mental illness is a factor in many mass shootings, so background checks will eliminate those who are mentally unstable creating such chaos with a gun. Moral theories such as utilitarianism and deontological ethics sort out in different ways why gun control laws would be an ethical act. Gun control would presumably lessen crime rates with guns, therefore creating a greater amount of good for society. As well, gun control would only be implemented to create a safer society for everyone, therefore according to Kant, the intentions were good so the act is good too. Although gun control controversy will continue to prevail throughout the country, I believe that gun control will be for the greater benefit of society.

Works Cited Baltzell, George W. “Constitution of the United States - We the People.” Constitution for the United States - We the People, https://constitutionus.com/. “Constitution of the United States of America.” Bill of Rights Institute, https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/constitution/? utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=SEARCH&utm_campaign=EVERGREEN&utm _term=CONSTITUTION&utm_content=TEXT1&gclid=CjwKCAjwxt_tBRAXEiwAEN

Basedow 7

Y8hcyuPHOkIESUUmGz_tLSoJXuopommY0NdofhAPZeZd4EgzCFLQhoDxoCrFkQA vD_BwE. Grabow, Chip, and Lisa Rose. “The US Has Had 57 Times as Many School Shootings as the Other Major Industrialized Nations Combined.” CNN, Cable News Network, 21 May 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-worldtrnd/index.html. Henigan, Dennis A. Lethal Logic : Exploding the Myths That Paralyze American Gun Policy. Vol. 1st ed, Potomac Books, 2009. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=e900xww&AN=388754&site=eds-live. MacKinnon, Barbara, and Andrew Fiala. Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues. Cenegage, 2018. Nakaya, Andrea C. Mass Shootings. ReferencePoint Press, 2016. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=e700xna&AN=1718729&site=eds-live. “Pros & Cons - ProCon.org.” Gun Control, https://gun-control.procon.org/. “The Second Amendment & the Right to Bear Arms.” LiveScience, Purch, https://www.livescience.com/26485-second-amendment.html. Wasike, Ben. “Persuasion in 140 Characters: Testing Issue Framing, Persuasion and Credibility via Twitter and Online News Articles in the Gun Control Debate.” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 66, Jan. 2017, pp. 179–190. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.037.

Basedow 8...