Changes

The "right to keep and bear arms" is a right guaranteed to the American citizen by the Bill of Rights through the virtue of a selective reading of said Bill. The phrase "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" precedes the statement, and most federal Courts of Appeals have held that this phrase requires that the "right to bear arms" relates to the collective rights of state militias, as opposed to the individual's rights to have any weapon desired.  Just recently, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit went against nine other circuits in holding that the Second Amendment constitutes an individual right.<ref>The New York Times - [https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/washington/10gun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Court Rejects Strict Gun Law as Unconstitutional]</ref><ref>FOX News - [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban]</ref> However, according to the judge writing for the majority in this case, its decision does still allow for "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership and use, such as carrying of guns by intoxicated individuals, or in churches.

The "right to keep and bear arms" is a right guaranteed to the American citizen by the Bill of Rights through the virtue of a selective reading of said Bill. The phrase "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" precedes the statement, and most federal Courts of Appeals have held that this phrase requires that the "right to bear arms" relates to the collective rights of state militias, as opposed to the individual's rights to have any weapon desired.  Just recently, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit went against nine other circuits in holding that the Second Amendment constitutes an individual right.<ref>The New York Times - [https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/washington/10gun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Court Rejects Strict Gun Law as Unconstitutional]</ref><ref>FOX News - [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban]</ref> However, according to the judge writing for the majority in this case, its decision does still allow for "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership and use, such as carrying of guns by intoxicated individuals, or in churches.

Only six cities in the United States ban handguns:  [[Washington, D.C.]], [[Chicago]], and four of its suburbs.<ref>David Kopel, "The Democrats and Gun Control," Wall St.J., Page A19, April 17, 2008 [http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120839466717921537-lMyQjAxMDI4MDE4NzMxOTc0Wj.html]</ref>  Some specific locations have also been labeled "[[gun-free zone]]s," including schools, shopping malls, movie theaters, corporate offices, and more.  In most cases, mass shootings take place in these gun-free zones, since those who obey the rules do not carry, while those already planning to break the law disregard this rule.  When attempted in areas where firearms are permitted, [[Mass shootings prevented by armed citizens| mass shootings have often been quickly stopped by armed citizens]].

Only six cities in the United States ban handguns:  [[Washington, D.C.]], [[Chicago]], and four of its suburbs.<ref>David Kopel, "The Democrats and Gun Control," Wall St.J., Page A19, April 17, 2008 [http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120839466717921537-lMyQjAxMDI4MDE4NzMxOTc0Wj.html]</ref>  Some specific locations have also been labeled "[[gun-free zone]]s," including schools, shopping malls, movie theaters, corporate offices, and more.  In most cases, mass shootings take place in these gun-free zones, since those who obey the rules do not carry, while those already planning to break the law disregard this rule.  When attempted in areas where firearms are permitted, [[Mass shootings prevented by armed citizens|mass shootings have often been quickly stopped by armed citizens]].

Support for stricter gun control laws fell deeply between 1992 and 2012, and while it rose in the succeeding six years, support levels remained far lower than in 1992.<ref>Hawkins, Awr (October 20, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/20/poll-gun-control-support-down-17-percent-over-past-28-years/ Poll: Gun Control Support Down 17 Percent Over Past 28 Years]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 21, 2018.</ref>

Support for stricter gun control laws fell deeply between 1992 and 2012, and while it rose in the succeeding six years, support levels remained far lower than in 1992.<ref>Hawkins, Awr (October 20, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/20/poll-gun-control-support-down-17-percent-over-past-28-years/ Poll: Gun Control Support Down 17 Percent Over Past 28 Years]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved October 21, 2018.</ref>

Gun control began in Australia in response to fears that guns would be used by home-grown Communist Revolutionaries.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083528 This study discusses the parallel policies of early-mid 20th century Britain and Australia.</ref> The most restrictive reforms were made in 1996 and 2002, following highly publicized shootings.<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref>

Gun control began in Australia in response to fears that guns would be used by home-grown Communist Revolutionaries.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083528 This study discusses the parallel policies of early-mid 20th century Britain and Australia.</ref> The most restrictive reforms were made in 1996 and 2002, following highly publicized shootings.<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref>

Both sets of reforms (1996 and 2002) were led by Prime Minister [[John Howard]] of the Coalition (Australia's conservative government). Howard was well-known as an anti-gun advocate.<ref name="ReferenceB">http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> The move offended gun supporters, many of whom had traditionally supported the Coalition.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Despite the loss of this voting group, Howard won elections following both reforms (in 1998 and 2004).

Both sets of reforms (1996 and 2002) were led by Prime Minister [[John Howard]] of the Coalition (Australia's conservative government). Howard was well known as an anti-gun advocate.<ref name="ReferenceB">http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> The move offended gun supporters, many of whom had traditionally supported the Coalition.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Despite the loss of this voting group, Howard won elections following both reforms (in 1998 and 2004).

There is controversy over the success of Australia's gun restrictions. Studies suggest overall gun violence has decreased since the 1996 and 2002 bans.<ref name="ReferenceA"/> However, Australia's bike and drug gangs, the main perpetrators of gun violence, still easily access illegal firearms.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/a-disarming-cause/2006/04/27/1145861489519.html</ref> Further, the overall homicide rate remains constant.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04

There is controversy over the success of Australia's gun restrictions. Studies suggest overall gun violence has decreased since the 1996 and 2002 bans.<ref name="ReferenceA"/> However, Australia's bike and drug gangs, the main perpetrators of gun violence, still easily access illegal firearms.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/a-disarming-cause/2006/04/27/1145861489519.html</ref> Further, the overall homicide rate remains constant.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04