What the Navy Yard Shooting Will Mean for Gun Control Reform

By Rosalba Gleijeses

Often a source of much contention in national policy debate, gun control legislation has been once again thrust into the limelight in the tragic aftermath of this week’s Navy Yard shooting. In the wake of the Newton massacre this past winter, a Senate bill was introduced that sought to establish more rigorous background checks in the purchase of firearms, ban the purchase of military-style rifles, and limit the size of ammunition magazines. Despite attempts to overrule a filibuster, the bill failed to pass in April. Ardently dismayed by Congress’s squandering of the bill, President Obama has since pledge to make control a priority. However, the issue has yet to resurface on the floor on Congress, which begs the question: will this issue quickly fade into legislative oblivion after the immediate shock and grief subside?

The answer seems dismal, if patterns perpetuate. After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, gun control received a surge in media coverage.  Interest quickly dissolved when the issue no longer remained a legislative issue being addressed on the floor. The President’s statements prove influential in spiking media coverage, but only briefly, where this issue will likely remain untouched until violent tragedy strikes again. An unfortunate side effect of the waning media coverage is that many citizens are unaware or the current gun control legislation.

As of 2010, 40-45% of households in the US had at least one firearm. Roughly 67% of documented murders in the United States are committed with firearms. What are the current rules to regulate this? In 1976, Washington, DC passed a law that prohibited individuals from possessing handguns, while also requiring that all firearms in private home be kept unloaded and rendered temporarily inoperable, by means of disassembly or installation of a trigger law. In 2008, however, the US Supreme Court struck down the law as unconstitutional in a 5-4 ruling. Current federal law deems it illegal to import, manufacture, deal, or transport a firearm without a license to do so (64 USC 18). However, federal law does not require that an individual undergo a background check when transferring or selling a firearm within the same state. Are these means alone the extent of sufficient, constitutional gun control?

In the immediate aftermath of situations like those of Navy Yard, and all other mass shootings, the public ardently preaches the need for stricter gun control. But as with the trend of media coverage, this fervor softens as tragedies slip farther into the past. Alternatively, there are a considerable amount of Americans that would vehemently defend their Second Amendment rights. Unless another bill soon reaches the floor, this issue will remain addressed only when immediately apparent, an occasional captivating story with undulating media popularity.