< Back to Resource Center

2005 Firearms Fact Card

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.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms

The right to keep and bear arms is derived from and inseparably linked to the right of self-defense. Thus, by nature it is an individually possessed right, as are all rights protected in our Constitution.

The Founding Fathers, the Framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and those whom the Supreme Court (U.S. v. Miller, 1939) referred to as "approved commentators" could not have been more clear about the nature of the right and the purpose of the Second Amendment.

Thomas Jefferson said, "No free man shall be debarred the use of arms." Patrick Henry said, "The great object is, that every man be armed." Richard Henry Lee wrote, "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms." Thomas Paine noted, "[A]rms . . . discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property."

Prominent Federalist Tench Coxe asked, "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves?. . . Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American. . .. [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

In introducing the Bill of Rights in the House of Representatives, James Madison noted that the amendments "relate first to private rights." Sen. William Grayson observed that they "altogether respected personal liberty." Tench Coxe wrote, "[T]he people are confirmed by the next article [of amendment] in their right to keep and bear their private arms."

Constitutional scholars have noted that there is no historical basis for the claim that the Second Amendment protects a so-called "collective right" of the states. Stephen P. Halbrook writes, "If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 states such a thesis." (That Every Man Be Armed, Univ. of N.M. Press, 1984)

Historian Joyce Lee Malcolm, testifying before Congress in 1995, told Rep. John Conyers, "It is very hard, sir, to find a historian who now believes it is only a `collective right.` . . [T]here is a general consensus that in fact it is an individual right."

The Supreme Court recognized that the right to arms is an individual right in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), Presser v. Illinois (1886), Miller v. Texas (1894), U.S. v. Miller (1939) and U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990). In U.S. v. Cruikshank, the Court also recognized that the right preexisted the Constitution.

In U.S. v. Emerson, on Oct. 16, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that this right is subject only to "limited, narrowly tailored specific exceptions" that "are not inconsistent with the right of Americans generally to individually keep and bear their private arms as historically understood in this country. . . . All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans." Other federal court decisions have been divided on the nature of the right.

During the Bush Administration, the Attorney General and the Department of Justice have recognized that the right to keep and bear arms is an individually-held right. (See http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm).

The National Guard, established in 1903, is not the militia referred to in the Second Amendment. For more than 400 years, the term "well regulated militia" has meant the people, with privately owned weapons, led by officers chosen by themselves. Tench Coxe said that the militia "are in fact the effective part of the people at large." Richard Henry Lee said that the militia "are in fact the people themselves." George Mason said that the militia consist "of the whole people."

The Guard is subject to absolute federal control (Perpich v. Dept. of Defense, 1990) and thus is not the "well regulated militia" referred to in the Second Amendment. "The Militia of the United States" is defined under federal law to include all able-bodied males of age and some other males and females (10 U.S.C., Sec. 311; 32 U.S.C., sec. ;313), with the Guard established as only its "organized" element.

CURRENT ISSUES

• Reckless lawsuits attempting to hold gun manufacturers financially responsible for the acts of criminals run counter to long-standing principles of tort law, have been prohibited by 33 states and nearly universally dismissed by the courts, and may soon be prohibited nationally by Congress.
  

• The federal "assault weapon" law, imposed on Sept. 13, 1994, expired on Sept. 13, 2004. Essentially, it prohibited installing two or more attachments (e.g., a sharply angled grip, adjustable stock, or threaded muzzle) on certain kinds of semi-automatics, and limited new ammunition magazines to 10 rounds capacity. Foreign-made firearms later defined as "assault weapons" were prohibited from importation by regulation in 1989 (rifles) and 1993 (pistols) and revolving cylinder shotguns were restricted under the National Firearms Act in February 1994.
  
  The BATFE has rejected the Brady Campaign`s claim that the ban reduced crime. Studies for the National Academy of Sciences (2005), National Institute of Justice (2004), and the Congressional Research Service (2004) noted that reports from state and local law enforcement agencies show that guns defined as "assault weapons" are used in only about 1% of violent crimes. The CRS report also rejected the anti-gun Violence Policy Center`s claim about the use of the guns against police officers. The congressionally-mandated study of the ban (1997) found, "the banned weapons and magazines were never used in more than a fraction of all gun murders." A follow-up study (2003) found that criminals rarely fire more than 10 rounds, that wounds involving pistols are less likely to be fatal than those involving revolvers, and that the average number of wounds in pistol crimes is lower than with revolvers. Many more people are murdered with knives, or clubs, or bare hands, than with "assault weapons."
  
  The number of so-called "assault weapons" and magazines of over 10 rounds capacity is greater today than ever, and they are still rarely used in crime.
  
  Legislation has been introduced in Congress and some state legislatures to ban millions more guns as "assault weapons," including all semi-automatic shotguns, detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles, and even pump-action guns.
  

• "Gun show" legislation would not only impose background checks on private gun sales at shows. It would register anyone attending a show and affect many sales of guns that do not occur at shows. Dealer sales of guns, whether at stores or shows, are already subject to the federal background check. Federal studies find that less than 1% of criminals obtain guns at shows. The goal of such legislation is to move toward prohibiting private gun sales altogether, as has occurred in California.
  

• Registration and licensing led to confiscation in Germany, England, Australia, Mexico, California, New Jersey, and New York City. Library of Congress and Centers for Disease Control reports state that there is no evidence that registration and licensing reduce crime. To pave the way for registration in the U.S., anti-gun groups call for a ballistic "fingerprinting" law to require every new handgun to be test fired, and the markings left on bullets and/or cartridge cases entered into a database. Such a system was put in place in Maryland at the cost of millions of dollars, but, after its ineffectiveness was proven, the Maryland State Police Forensic Sciences Division called for scrapping it.
  

• "Smart" gun legislation is intended to reduce handgun purchases by increasing handgun prices, by requiring that handguns be made with "personalized" locking mechanisms that are not necessarily reliable or desired by gun owners.
  

• "Mandatory storage" laws, requiring gun owners to install gun locks on all guns, have prevented guns from being used for self-defense. Gun accidents are down, but because of training, not gadgetry or regulation.

Anti-gun groups openly oppose the use of firearms for protection and claim that self-defense is not a right under the Constitution. The federal and 44 state constitutions, and the laws of every state, recognize the right to arms for defensive purposes.

Survey research during the early 1990s by award-winning criminologist Gary Kleck found as many as 2.5 million protective uses of guns each year in the U.S. "(T)he best available evidence indicates that guns were used about three to five times as often for defensive purposes as for criminal purposes," Kleck concluded. Analyzing National Crime Victimization Survey data, he found, "robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of self-protection or those who did not resist at all."

In most defensive gun uses, the gun is not fired. In only 1% of instances are criminals wounded, and in only 0.1% are criminals killed.

A Dept. of Justice survey (1986) found that 40% of felons chose not to commit at least some crimes for fear their victims were armed, and 34% admitted having been scared off or shot at by armed victims. Thirty-eight states now have Right-to-Carry (RTC) laws providing for law-abiding citizens to carry guns for protection. Twenty-eight states have adopted RTC laws since 1987: Two-thirds of Americans live in RTC states.

Professor John R. Lott, Jr., and David B. Mustard, in the most comprehensive study to date of RTC laws, concluded, "When state concealed-handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell about 8 percent, rapes fell by 5 percent, and aggravated assaults fell by 7 percent." (1998)

RTC states have lower violent crime rates on average: 27% lower total violent crime, 32% lower murder, 45% lower robbery, and 20% lower aggravated assault. (FBI) People who carry legally are by far more law-abiding than the rest of the public.

GUNS DON`T CAUSE CRIME

There are more guns, gun owners, RTC states and carry permit holders than ever before. And the nation`s violent crime rate has decreased every year since 1991, to a 27-year low. Most criminologists, sociologists and law enforcement professionals, including the FBI, attribute the decrease to factors unrelated to "gun control," such as increased imprisonment rates, mandatory sentencing requirements, the hiring of additional police officers, improved policing methods and equipment, the aging of gang populations, the decline in the crack cocaine trade, and the improved economy during the 1990s. Notably, only about one-fourth of violent crimes are committed with guns. (FBI)

"GUN CONTROL" DOESN`T REDUCE CRIME

Studies for Congress, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have found no evidence that "gun control" reduces crime.

A 1983 study for the DOJ concluded, "there are about 20,000 firearms laws of one sort or another already on the books." However, the NAS study in 2005, conducted by a panel of academics organized during the anti-gun Clinton administration and including prominent anti-gunners, could not identify a single "gun control" scheme that reduced crime, suicides, or accidents.

For the CDC (2003), an independent Task Force studied a wide variety of gun control laws, but "found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence." A Library of Congress study (1998) concluded, "it is difficult to find a correlation between the existence of strict firearms regulations and a lower incidence of gun-related crimes."

The federal Gun Control Act was imposed in 1968, yet violent crime increased until 1991. Washington, D.C., banned handguns in 1976 and by 1991 its homicide rate tripled, while the U.S. rate rose only 12%. Despite having some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, Maryland`s robbery rate remains the highest among the states, and Baltimore`s murder rate is similar to D.C.`s.

States that delay gun sales with waiting periods, licensing and purchase permits have historically had higher crime rates. For many years after California imposed a 15-day waiting period in 1975 (reduced to 10 days in 1997), its violent crime rate was 50% higher each year, on average, compared to the rest of the country. States that prohibit or severely restrict carrying guns have higher crime rates, on average.

Now "gun control" advocates claim that the federal Brady Act and "assault weapon" law reduced crime. However, both laws were imposed in 1994, three years after violent crime began declining, and studies noted above have found no evidence that either affects crime levels. Also, a study by anti-gun researchers, published in the anti-gun Journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 found the Brady Act to be ineffective.

ENFORCE THE LAWS AGAINST CRIMINALS

Violent crime began decreasing in the 1990s, as states increased prison sentences for violent criminals.

Soon after taking office, President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft created the Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) program. PSN targeted criminals who use firearms, by allocating federal law-enforcement resources to enforce federal gun laws.

It resulted in a 68% increase in federal gun crime prosecutions, a 62% increase in the number of defendants charged with federal gun crimes, and increases in sentences for federal gun crimes. In 2003, 93% of defendants were sentenced to some prison time, and 72% were sentenced to more than three years.

Between 1999-2000 and 2001-2002, the violent crime rate dropped 21%, equating to 130,000 fewer Americans falling victim to crimes involving firearms than in the previous two years. (DOJ)

GUN SAFETY

Because focus group research showed that the public reacts unfavorably to the term "gun control," the anti-gun lobby now refers to gun bans, registration, waiting periods, and other restrictions as "gun safety."

True gun safety depends on education and personal responsibility, not government regulation. NRA`s 62,000 Certified Instructors and Law Enforcement Instructors reach 800,000 Americans each year. NRA`s award-winning Eddie Eagle GunSafe(r) Program has been used by more than 24,000 schools, law enforcement agencies and civic groups to reach more than 18 million children since 1988. Accidental deaths with guns have been decreasing for decades.

Since 1930, the annual number of such accidents has decreased 76%, while the U.S. population has more than doubled and the number of privately owned guns has quintupled. Among children, fatal gun accidents have decreased 89% since 1975. (National Center for Health Statistics and National Safety Council)

The per capita rate of accidental deaths with guns is at an all-time low, having decreased 91% since the all-time high in 1904. Gun accidents account for only 0.7% of accidental deaths. Most accidental deaths involve motor vehicles or are due to drowning, falls, fires, poisoning, medical mistakes, choking on ingested objects and environmental factors.

ASK THE PEOPLE

Eighty-five percent of Americans believe people have the right to use guns to defend themselves in their homes, 64% favor allowing law-abiding citizens to carry guns for protection outside their homes, and 72% prefer stiffer sentences for criminals who use guns in crime, rather than more gun laws. (Lawrence Research, National Survey of Registered Voters, 1998)