tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/gun-industry-44607/articlesGun industry – The Conversation2022-05-26T22:27:34Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1839002022-05-26T22:27:34Z2022-05-26T22:27:34Z6 charts show key role firearms makers play in America’s gun culture<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/465589/original/file-20220526-26-uvb4ct.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=289%2C426%2C3335%2C2116&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sales of handguns have exploded in recent years. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/TexasHandguns/51de393bcbaf4e07a240de3b54da6981/photo?Query=Texas%20rifle&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=351&currentItemNo=11">AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Americans have blamed many culprits, from <a href="http://time.com/5160917/florida-school-shooting-donald-trump-mental-health/">mental illness</a> to inadequate security, for the tragic mass shootings that are occurring with <a href="https://theconversation.com/19-children-2-adults-killed-in-texas-elementary-school-shooting-3-essential-reads-on-americas-relentless-gun-violence-183811">increasing frequency in schools</a>, offices and theaters across the U.S. </p>
<p>The latest, which occurred on May 24, 2022, at a Texas elementary school and left at least 19 children and two teachers dead, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/05/24/1101050970/2022-school-shootings-so-far">was the 213th mass shooting this year</a> – and the 27th that took place in a school. </p>
<p>Yet during much of America’s ongoing conversation about the root causes of gun violence, the makers of guns have typically escaped scrutiny. As a public health researcher, <a href="https://medicine.tufts.edu/people/faculty/michael-siegel">I find</a> this odd, because <a href="http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/22/3/216.long">evidence shows</a> that the culture around guns contributes significantly to gun violence. And firearm manufacturers have played a major role in influencing American gun culture. </p>
<p>That’s beginning to change, particularly since the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/sandy-hook-school-shooting-remington-settlement-e53b95d398ee9b838afc06275a4df403">US$73 million settlement</a> between the families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the maker of the rifle used in the massacre. This may open the door for more lawsuits against firearm manufacturers. </p>
<p>To help support this much-needed discussion, I’d like to share some critical facts about the firearm industry that I’ve learned from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.05.002">my research on gun violence prevention</a>.</p>
<h2>Surging handgun sales</h2>
<p>The U.S. is saturated with guns, and has become a lot more so over the past decade. In 2020 alone, U.S. gun manufacturers produced <a href="https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/2020-annual-firearms-manufacturers-and-export-report-afmer">11.1 million firearms</a>, up from 5.4 million in 2010. Pistols and rifles made up about 75% of the total.</p>
<p><iframe id="gaGho" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/gaGho/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>In addition, only a small number of gun-makers dominate the market. The top five pistol manufacturers alone controlled <a href="https://www.atf.gov/about/docs/undefined/afmer2016webreport508pdf/download">over 70% of all production</a> in 2020: Smith & Wesson; Sig Sauer; Sturm, Ruger & Co.; Glock and Kimber Manufacturing. Similarly, the biggest rifle manufacturers – Sturm, Smith & Wesson, Springfield, Henry Rac Holding and Diamondback Firearms – controlled 61% of that market.</p>
<p>But all that only tells part of the story. A look at the caliber of pistols manufactured over the past decade reveals a significant change in demand that has reshaped the industry. </p>
<p><iframe id="rmSY1" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rmSY1/5/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The number of manufactured large-caliber pistols able to fire rounds greater than or equal to 9 mm has soared over the past 15 years, rising from just over half a million in 2005 to more than 3.9 million by 2020. The number of .38-caliber pistols – small handguns designed specifically for concealed carry – jumped to a record 1.1 million in 2016 and totaled 660,000 in 2020, compared with 107,000 in 2005.</p>
<p>This indicates a growing demand for more lethal weapons, especially those focused specifically on self-defense and concealed carry.</p>
<p>The production of rifles has also increased, doubling from 1.4 million in 2005 to 2.8 million in 2020, though down from a record 4.2 million in 2016. This is driven primarily by a higher demand for semi-automatic weapons, including assault rifles.</p>
<p><iframe id="RyY90" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/RyY90/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Explaining the stats</h2>
<p>So what can explain the jump in the sale of high-caliber handguns and semi-automatic rifles? </p>
<p>Gun-makers <a href="https://thenewpress.com/books/last-gun">have become very effective</a> at <a href="https://thenewpress.com/books/making-killing">marketing</a> their wares as <a href="http://www.vpc.org/studies/militarization.pdf">necessary tools for self-defense</a> – perhaps in large part to <a href="https://thenewpress.com/books/making-killing">offset a decline</a> in demand for recreational use.</p>
<p>For example, in 2005, Smith & Wesson announced a <a href="https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Smith+%26+Wesson+launches+aggressive+strategy.-a0135568802">major new marketing campaign</a> focused on “safety, security, protection and sport.” The <a href="http://ir.smith-wesson.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=90977&p=irol-sec&secCat01TF.1_rs=21&secCat01TF.1_rc=10&control_selectgroup=Annual%20Filings">number of guns</a> the company sold soared after the switch, <a href="http://ir.smith-wesson.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=90977&p=IROL-secToc&TOC=aHR0cDovL2FwaS50ZW5rd2l6YXJkLmNvbS9vdXRsaW5lLnhtbD9yZXBvPXRlbmsmaXBhZ2U9NDI3NTAzMSZzdWJzaWQ9NTc%3d&ListAll=1">climbing 30% in 2005</a> and <a href="http://ir.smith-wesson.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=90977&p=IROL-secToc&TOC=aHR0cDovL2FwaS50ZW5rd2l6YXJkLmNvbS9vdXRsaW5lLnhtbD9yZXBvPXRlbmsmaXBhZ2U9NTA1MTUzOCZzdWJzaWQ9NTc%3d&ListAll=1">50% in 2006</a>, led by strong growth in pistol sales. By comparison, the number of firearms sold in 2004 <a href="http://ir.smith-wesson.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=90977&p=irol-SECText&TEXT=aHR0cDovL2FwaS50ZW5rd2l6YXJkLmNvbS9maWxpbmcueG1sP2lwYWdlPTM2MzU2OTEmRFNFUT0xJlNFUT0zMSZTUURFU0M9U0VDVElPTl9QQUdFJmV4cD0mc3Vic2lkPTU3">rose 11%</a> over the previous year. </p>
<p><iframe id="ISVO5" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ISVO5/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>There’s strong survey evidence that gun owners have become less likely to cite hunting or sport as a reason for their ownership, instead pointing to personal security. The percentage of gun owners who <a href="http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx">told Gallup</a> that the reason they possessed a firearm was for hunting fell to 40% in 2019 from almost 60% in 2000. The share that cited “sport” as their reason fell even more.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Gallup found that 88% of gun owners in 2021 reported <a href="http://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx">self-defense</a> as a primary reason, up from 67% in 2005.</p>
<p><iframe id="rahI8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rahI8/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>‘Stand your ground’ laws flourish</h2>
<p>Another possible explanation for the uptick in handguns could be the widespread adoption of state “<a href="https://everytownresearch.org/reports/shoot-first/">stand your ground” laws</a> in recent years. These laws explicitly allow people to use guns as a first resort for self-defense in the face of a threat. </p>
<p>Utah enacted the first “stand your ground” measure in 1994. The second law wasn’t adopted until 2005 in Florida. A year later, “stand your ground” laws took off, with 11 states enacting one in 2006 alone. Another 15 have passed such laws since then, bringing the total number of states that have them on the books to 28. </p>
<p><iframe id="pGh56" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/pGh56/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>These laws were the result of a concerted <a href="https://everytownresearch.org/reports/shoot-first/">National Rifle Association lobbying campaign</a>. For example, Florida’s law, which <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts/index.html">George Zimmerman used</a> in 2013 to escape charges for killing Trayvon Martin, was drafted by former NRA <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/05/the-nra-lobbyist-behind-floridas-pro-gun-policies">President Marion Hammer</a>. </p>
<p>It’s not clear whether the campaign to promote stand-your-ground laws fueled the surge in handgun production. But it’s possible that it’s part of a larger effort to normalize the ownership of firearms for self-defense. </p>
<p>This overall picture suggests that a marketing change fueled an increased demand for more lethal weapons. This, in turn, appears to have fostered a change in gun culture, which has shifted away from an appreciation of the use of guns for hunting, sport and recreation and toward a view that guns are a necessity to protect oneself from criminals. </p>
<p>How and whether this change in gun culture is influencing rates of firearms violence is a question I’m currently researching. </p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-firearms-industry-influences-us-gun-culture-in-6-charts-92142">an article published</a> on Feb. 23, 2018.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183900/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Siegel receives funding from the 97 Percent Foundation.</span></em></p>A closer look at firearms sales reveals some interesting trends that should be part of America’s ongoing conversation about the root causes of gun violence.Michael Siegel, Visiting Professor of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1704892021-10-22T18:51:35Z2021-10-22T18:51:35ZHollywood’s love of guns increases the risk of shootings – both on and off the set<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428064/original/file-20211022-9823-1gc3wo9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=4%2C4%2C2991%2C1989&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Actor Alec Baldwin was involved in a tragic on-set accident.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/hamptons-international-film-festival-chairman-alec-baldwin-news-photo/1345530823?adppopup=true">Mark Sagliocco/Getty Images for National Geographic</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In what appears to be a tragic accident, actor Alec Baldwin shot dead a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/21/us/alec-baldwin-shooting-rust-movie.html">cinematographer</a> on Oct 21, 2021, while discharging a prop gun on set in New Mexico.</p>
<p>It is too early to speculate what went wrong during the filming of the Western movie “Rust.” But the incident, in which the film’s director was also injured, highlights a simple fact: Guns are <a href="https://features.hollywoodreporter.com/the-gun-industrys-lucrative-relationship-with-hollywood/">commonplace in Hollywood</a> films. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://u.osu.edu/bushman.20/">scholars of mass communication</a> and <a href="https://www.asc.upenn.edu/people/faculty/dan-romer-phd">risk behavior</a>, we have studied the growing prevalence of firearms on screen and believe that the more guns there are in movies, the more likely it is that a shooting will occur – both in the “reel” world and in the “real” world.</p>
<p>Gun violence in Hollywood movies has increased dramatically over time, especially in movies accessible to teens. Indeed, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-1600">our research</a> shows that acts of gun violence in PG-13 movies <a href="https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2891">nearly tripled</a> over the 30 years between 1985 (the year after the rating was introduced) and 2015. Similar <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247780">trends</a> have been observed in popular TV dramas, with the rate of gun violence depicted in prime time dramas doubling between 2000 and 2018.</p>
<p><iframe id="XOiau" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/XOiau/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Of course, depictions of violence in the entertainment industry are nothing new. The use of guns in Hollywood films has a long tradition going back to the <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/dillinger-era-gangster-films/">gangster movies of the 1930s</a>. Guns were also featured heavily in the <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wnet/pioneers-of-television/pioneering-programs/westerns/#:%7E:text=During%20the%20Golden%20Age%20of,were%20on%20the%20television%20schedule.">Western TV shows of the 1950s</a>.</p>
<p>The upsurge in the depiction of guns in movies and TV shows is likely related to the realization that <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130328091750.htm">violence draws audiences</a> and guns are an easy way to dramatize violence. And here filmmakers have a <a href="https://features.hollywoodreporter.com/the-gun-industrys-lucrative-relationship-with-hollywood/">willing accomplice in the gun industry</a>.</p>
<p>Media outlets are averse to allowing gun advertising on TV or mass-circulated magazines. But guns are amply displayed in top-grossing movies and popular TV dramas.</p>
<p>We know that the gun industry <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/how-hollywood-helps-gun-makers-sell-their-guns">pays production companies</a> to place its products in their movies. They are rewarded with frequent appearances on screen, so much so that in 2010 the firearm company Glock won a “<a href="https://www.iceworldwide.com/announcing-the-brandcameo-product-placement-award-winners-4/">lifetime achievement award for product placement</a>,” with a citation noting that Glocks appeared in 22 box office No. 1 films during that year.</p>
<p>The payoff for gun companies can be great – prominent placement in high-profile films can result in <a href="https://www.economist.com/prospero/2016/10/19/how-guns-get-into-films">a significant bump in sales</a> for gun models.</p>
<h2>Making guns ‘cool’</h2>
<p>But the potential harm caused by guns in Hollywood goes far beyond the occasional tragic accident on set. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317725419">Studies show</a> that simply seeing a gun can increase aggression in the viewer through what is called the “<a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1967-16673-001">weapons effect</a>.” </p>
<p>Violent movies and TV programs, which often contain guns, can likewise increase aggression and make viewers numb to the pain and suffering of others, <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/140/Supplement_2/S142">numerous studies show</a>.</p>
<p>And children might be especially vulnerable – which makes it all the more notable that the prevalence of guns in PG-13 movies has increased over the decades.</p>
<p>Younger viewers will often identify movie characters as being “cool” and want to imitate their behavior.</p>
<p>This was seen with smoking on screen: Children who see movie characters smoke cigarettes are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.585697">more likely to smoke themselves</a>. A similar effect was observed with children who <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014137">watched movie characters drink alcohol</a>.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2229">study conducted</a> by one of us, pairs of children ages 8 to 12 were first randomly assigned to watch a PG-rated movie clip containing guns or the same movie clip with the guns edited out.</p>
<p>They were then put in a room that contained several toys and games, while being observed by a hidden camera.</p>
<p>A cabinet in the room contained a real, but disabled, 9mm handgun that had been modified with a digital counter to record the number of times children pulled the trigger.</p>
<p>Most children (72%) opened the drawer and found the gun. But children who watched the movie clip with guns in it held the handgun longer – on average 53.1 seconds compared with 11.1 seconds for those who watched a clip without guns. They also pulled the trigger more times – 2.8 times on average compared with 0.01 times for those who watched the movie clip without guns. </p>
<p>Some children engaged in very dangerous behaviors with the real gun, such as pulling the trigger while pointing the gun at themselves or their partner. One boy pointed the real gun out the laboratory window at people in the street.</p>
<p>The kind of gun violence featured in Hollywood movies tends to highlight <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/141/6/e20173491">the justified</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00260">use of those weapons</a>. When characters use guns to defend themselves or family, their use is seen as acceptable.</p>
<p>This has the result of encouraging viewers to think that using guns for the protection of self or others is virtuous.</p>
<h2>Reflecting or glamorizing violence?</h2>
<p>The United States is the most <a href="https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/resources/SAS-BP-Civilian-Firearms-Numbers.pdf">heavily armed society</a> in the world. Although consisting of about 4% of the world’s population, U.S. citizens <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html">possess almost half</a> of the world’s guns. </p>
<p>In featuring guns so heavily, there is a danger that Hollywood is not merely reflecting society – it is encouraging firearm sales.</p>
<p>While incidents of actors and film production staff being injured or killed through accidental shootings are thankfully rare, the likelihood of fatal shootings – accidental or otherwise – in the real world goes up with every sale of the kinds of guns featured by Hollywood.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 110,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=100Ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170489/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dan Romer has received funding from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brad Bushman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A tragic accident resulted in the shooting death of a cinematographer on the set of actor Alec Baldwin’s latest movie. The dangers of more guns on set extend to society, two scholars argue.Brad Bushman, Professor of Communication and Rinehart Chair of Mass Communication, The Ohio State UniversityDan Romer, Research Director, Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of PennsylvaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1640512021-07-07T12:39:43Z2021-07-07T12:39:43ZNew York defines illegal firearms use as a ‘public nuisance’ in bid to pierce gun industry’s powerful liability shield<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/410024/original/file-20210706-25-1nsgm1j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=152%2C26%2C4271%2C2407&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Illegal gun use is now a public nuisance in New York.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/NY-GunBuyBack-Gallery/31df0c00ac994ff0bb273fb31449cec9/photo?Query=illegal%20AND%20gun&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=685&currentItemNo=7">AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Could calling the illegal use of firearms a “public nuisance” bring an end to the gun industry’s immunity from civil lawsuits? </p>
<p>New York will soon test that notion. State lawmakers <a href="https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2021/s7196">recently amended New York’s public nuisance statute</a> to specifically include marketing and sales practices that contribute to gun crimes. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-gun-control-new-laws-disaster-emergency-executive-order-2021-7">Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the bill</a> on July 6, 2021, after <a href="https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections-government/ny-cuomo-signs-gun-violence-bills-20210706-ds4k62rsezbm7blhuiya2k6jzi-story.html">declaring gun violence</a> a “disaster emergency.”</p>
<p><a href="https://news.gsu.edu/expert/timothy-d-lytton/">I’ve been researching</a> lawsuits against the gun industry for over 20 years. While I believe New York’s law is certain to unleash a new round of lawsuits against gun-makers, my research suggests that <a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/136758/suing_the_gun_industry">these claims will face considerable legal hurdles</a>. Even if this litigation succeeds – effectively ending the gun industry’s immunity from liability – the jury is still out on whether it will do much to curb gun violence.</p>
<h2>Defining illegal gun use as a public nuisance</h2>
<p>States routinely rely on <a href="https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/public+nuisance">public nuisance</a> laws to regulate conduct that unreasonably interferes with the health and safety of others. <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/public_nuisance">Common examples</a> include polluting the air or water, obstructing roadways or making excessive noise.</p>
<p>New York’s amended statute holds gun manufacturers and sellers responsible for the public nuisance of illegal gun use if they fail to implement “reasonable controls” to prevent the unlawful sale, possession or use of firearms within the state. The <a href="https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2021/s7196">law specifies</a> that “reasonable controls” include implementing programs to secure inventory from theft and prevent illegal retail sales. </p>
<p>Under the law, both public officials and private citizens can file lawsuits seeking money damages and a court injunction to compel offending parties to stop the nuisance. For example, a gun manufacturer who sold weapons that were subsequently used in crimes could be held liable if it failed to take reasonable measures to ensure that retail dealers did not engage in illegal sales practices.</p>
<h2>The gun industry’s immunity shield</h2>
<p>Suing the firearms industry for gun violence under the theory of public nuisance is nothing new.</p>
<p>Individual gun violence victims, civic organizations such as the NAACP and big-city mayors started filing <a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/gun_litigation-intro.htm">such lawsuits in the late 1990s</a>. Congress put an end to this litigation in 2005 when it passed the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-105">Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act</a>, which granted gun sellers – including manufacturers – immunity from liability arising out of criminal misuse of the weapons they sold.</p>
<p>Immunity under the act is not absolute. Notably, a seller is <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7903">not immune</a> from liability if it “knowingly violated a state or federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing” of firearms. Consequently, following the passage of the act, <a href="https://casetext.com/case/city-of-chicago-v-beretta-usa-corp-1">plaintiffs argued</a> that gun-makers’ marketing, distribution and sales practices constituted a public nuisance in violation of state statutes. </p>
<p>However, federal appellate courts in <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/05-6942/05-6942-cv_opn-2011-03-27.html">New York</a> and <a href="https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/05/11/06-56872.pdf">California</a> rejected this argument. Those courts held that public nuisance laws did not qualify for the exception to immunity because they were not specifically aimed at regulating firearms.</p>
<h2>Challenges ahead for New York’s new law</h2>
<p>New York responded by updating its statute.</p>
<p>The state is hoping to prompt civil litigation that will bring pressure on the industry to prevent the diversion of guns into the black market and the hands of illegal gun traffickers. Before the federal immunity bill, the industry faced a <a href="https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/faculty_pub/2089/">rising tide</a> of litigation. </p>
<p>New lawsuits, however, will face multiple challenges, which I believe will likely reach all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. I will consider two prominent ones.</p>
<p>First, gun industry defendants will argue that New York’s amended public nuisance statute is an attempt to subvert the purpose of 2005 law, which was passed specifically <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7901">to halt these types of claims</a> against gun sellers in the 1990s and early 2000s. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7901">opening section</a> of the immunity law denounces this litigation as “an abuse of the legal system.” New York’s claim to utilize a narrow exception to gun industry immunity looks an awful lot like an attempt to eliminate immunity altogether.</p>
<p>At the same time, the letter of the law allows claims arising out of the violation of any statute that specifically applies to the sale of firearms, which is exactly what New York’s amended public nuisance law does.</p>
<p>For the Supreme Court, these contending views would pit the conservative majority’s strong allegiance to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/are-us-supreme-court-conservatives-aiming-expand-gun-rights-2021-04-27/">gun rights</a> against its insistence on sticking to the <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/12/kavanaugh-barrett-supreme-court-scalia-spam.html">letter of the law</a> when reading statutes.</p>
<p>Second, gun industry defendants <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7901">will argue</a> that the <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-2/">Second Amendment</a> limits any type of litigation likely to restrict access to the lawful purchase of firearms. </p>
<p>In a series of <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-ii/interps/99">landmark cases</a>, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to own firearms “in common use” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” If public nuisance lawsuits were to drive some gun-makers into bankruptcy, courts might view them as a threat to Second Amendment rights. </p>
<p>However, the Second Amendment is silent on how to balance the constitutional right to keep and bear arms against the right Americans have to sue in civil court. How the Supreme Court might rule on this particular challenge is unclear. </p>
<h2>Impact on reducing gun violence</h2>
<p>But let’s assume for a moment that nuisance lawsuits survive a Supreme Court challenge, effectively ending the gun industry’s liability shield. Would this litigation then be able to reduce gun violence?</p>
<p>The main impact of these lawsuits is to put pressure on gun manufactures to do more to prevent inventory theft and illegal sales by retailers. Since 2000, the <a href="http://www.dontlie.org/history.cfm">gun industry has operated a program</a> to prevent illegal straw purchases, suggesting manufactures think they may be able to affect how retailers operate. Even still, little is known about whether this program has had any impact on gun violence rates. That’s why no one really knows if forcing gun manufacturers to more closely supervise retailers will work.</p>
<p>Part of the problem is a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5846612/">lack of government funding</a> since the mid-1990s for public health research on alleged links between industry sales practices and gun crimes. <a href="https://www.apa.org/monitor/2021/04/news-funding-gun-research">Recent funding</a> for this kind of research may clarify the value of regulating illegal gun sales as a public nuisance.</p>
<p>Until then, passing laws to prompt litigation against the gun industry is just a shot in the dark.</p>
<p>[<em>3 media outlets, 1 religion newsletter.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/this-week-in-religion-76/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=religion-3-in-1">Get stories from The Conversation, AP and RNS.</a>]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164051/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy D. Lytton has provided expert consulting services to law firms representing gun violence victims.</span></em></p>The state’s revised statute will likely lead to a flurry of lawsuits against firearms manufacturers and gun stores. What’s less clear is whether that will curb gun violence.Timothy D. Lytton, Distinguished University Professor & Professor of Law, Georgia State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/923282018-03-05T11:42:37Z2018-03-05T11:42:37ZWhen can you buy a gun, vote or be sentenced to death? Science suggests US should revise legal age limits<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207698/original/file-20180223-108110-1ocl6op.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Vietnam War protests led to a lower voting age. The Parkland shooting could push similar reevaluations.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/APTOPIX-School-Shooting-Florida/7bc83c9e428e469b97d4efd6acea6ac1/1/0">AP Photo/Gerald Herbert</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Societies have long grappled with where to draw the chronological age boundary between adolescence and adulthood. The United States stands apart from most of the world in that it uses different ages for different rights and responsibilities. We permit people to <a href="https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl11028/chapter4.cfm">drive when they are 16</a> (even younger in a few states), but prohibit them from <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/minimum-legal-drinking-age.htm">purchasing alcohol until they are 21</a>. The ages at which adolescents can <a href="https://filmratings.com/Tips">see a risqué movie</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/child-marriage-is-still-legal-in-the-us-88846">choose to marry</a>, enter into contracts, or buy cigarettes generally fall between these two extremes.</p>
<p>Nearly all <a href="http://chartsbin.com/view/545">other countries use one age</a> — <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority">almost always, 18</a> — to distinguish between minors and adults for most legal purposes. This one-age-fits-all regime has the advantages of consistency, clarity and fairness. Once you’re an adult, you’re an adult.</p>
<p>Taking an issue-specific approach permits society to align legal responsibilities and privileges with people’s abilities and needs. It also allows citizens to change our collective mind about particular boundaries when events dictate rethinking them, as was the case when demonstrations over the Vietnam War draft prompted Congress to <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-xxvi">lower the voting age from 21 to 18</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/us/stoneman-douglas-shooting.html">Parkland school shooting</a>, in which 17 high school students and staff were killed by a 19-year-old with a semiautomatic assault rifle, may be another one of these transformative events. The massacre has understandably prompted a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/politics/congress-obstacles-gun-law-control/index.html">national discussion about gun control</a>, but this is not the only policy debate that this tragedy should stimulate.</p>
<p>Three age-related revisions to the law, in particular, deserve careful consideration in the wake of the shooting: increasing the minimum age for purchasing firearms, lowering the voting age and raising the age of eligibility for capital punishment.</p>
<p>As I outline in my book “<a href="http://www.laurencesteinberg.com/books/age-of-opportunity">Age of Opportunity: Lessons From the New Science of Adolescence</a>,” research on <a href="https://www.nature.com/collections/vbmfnrsssw">adolescent psychological and brain development</a> provides a compelling basis for changing our laws.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207696/original/file-20180223-108139-s1xmi7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Researchers know adolescent brains are still developing, as can be seen during cognitive tasks.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nihgov/40268599281">Dr. Richard Watts and ABCD/Univ. of VT P.I. Dr. Hugh Garavan</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Predictable developmental timetables</h2>
<p>In order to understand how the new science of adolescence can inform this discussion, we need to differentiate between “cold” and “hot” cognition. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_967-1">Cold cognition</a> is invoked in quiet situations, when you’re alone and unhurried. Here the most important skills are those measured by standardized tests of basic intellectual abilities, including attention, memory and logical reasoning.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awu177">Hot cognition</a> is what kicks in when you are excited, agitated, in groups, or rushed. Under these circumstances, the most important skill is <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/anger-in-the-age-entitlement/201110/self-regulation">self-control</a>, which enables us to regulate our emotions, resist coercion and think before we act. </p>
<p>For the past 20 years, my colleagues and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=fpFXX8EAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">I have been studying</a> the developmental timetables of cold and hot cognition. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014763">Our initial research</a> was conducted in the United States, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12532">our most recent study</a> included more than 5,000 people between ages 10 and 30 in 11 countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and North and South America. The age trajectories we discovered were the same in our international sample as they were in the United States study.</p>
<p>Our studies show that the abilities necessary to make reasoned decisions are mature by age 16. By this age, adolescents can gather and process information, think logically and draw evidence-based inferences.</p>
<p>Self-regulation does not mature until around age 22, however. Not until this age are people capable of restraining themselves when their emotions are intense, when they are pressured by their peers, or when they feel hurried.</p>
<p>These findings on the development of cold and hot cognition parallel patterns of adolescent brain development. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3509">Neuroimaging studies show</a> that brain systems necessary for cold cognition are mature by mid-adolescence, whereas those that govern self-control are not fully developed until the early 20s.</p>
<h2>Growing into privileges</h2>
<p>Most people would agree that individuals who have trouble controlling their emotions or thinking through the consequences of their acts should not possess deadly weapons. This, after all, is the rationale behind prohibiting those with serious mental illness from purchasing assault rifles and other firearms. (Even the staunchest defenders of Second Amendment rights, <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-bipartisan-members-congress-meeting-school-community-safety/">including President Trump</a>, favor placing restrictions on the sale of guns to the mentally ill.)</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"966662241977360384"}"></div></p>
<p>Adolescence is not a mental illness, but it is a time during which many mentally healthy people have difficulty controlling their impulses and regulating their behavior. Based on the science, I <a href="https://www.flgov.com/2018/02/23/gov-scott-announces-major-action-plan-to-keep-florida-students-safe-following-tragic-parkland-shooting/">agree with Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott</a> that people should not be permitted to purchase firearms until they are at least 21, if not older.</p>
<p>Voting, in contrast, is an act for which cold cognitive abilities are sufficient for competence. An election unfolds over months, which diminishes time pressure and permits people to gather facts and weigh them. Although you might discuss your preferences with others, the act of voting is done alone, and you have as much time as you want to deliberate inside a voting booth.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZxD3o-9H1lY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Marjory Stoneman Douglas student Emma Gonzalez calls out President Trump and the NRA at an anti-gun rally.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is quite clear from post-Parkland events, during which we have witnessed many examples of <a href="https://qz.com/1212712/florida-shooting-stoneman-douglas-student-quotes-after-the-high-school-attack/">wise, articulate and informed young people</a> discussing gun control, that high school students are able to understand and speak knowledgeably about political issues that affect them. There is no reason why people who have the intellectual skills necessary to vote should be prohibited from doing so.</p>
<p>Teenagers may make bad choices, but they won’t make them any more often than adults do. As I noted in a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/opinion/sunday/voting-age-school-shootings.html">recent op-ed in The New York Times</a>, I believe the U.S. ought to lower the voting age to 16, as several countries <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8963-2_4">in Europe</a> and <a href="http://chartsbin.com/view/re6">South America</a> have done.</p>
<h2>A question of juvenile responsibility</h2>
<p>Deciding how to sentence the 19-year-old Parkland attacker, Nikolas Cruz, is certain to be controversial. In its 2005 decision in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-633.ZS.html">Roper v. Simmons</a>, the U.S. Supreme Court abolished the juvenile death penalty on the grounds that adolescents are inherently less mature than adults and therefore not deserving of punishments reserved for those who are fully responsible for their crimes.</p>
<p>In 2010 and 2012, in <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/08-7412">several cases</a> on the constitutionality of <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2011/10-9646">life without parole for juveniles</a> that followed Roper, amicus briefs submitted by scientific organizations <a href="http://www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/graham-v-florida-sullivan.pdf">including the American Psychological Association</a> helped persuade the court that its decision in Roper was consistent with research on adolescent brain development.</p>
<p>In the last five years, <a href="http://www.lawneuro.org/files/adol_dev_brief.pdf">neuroscientific evidence has accumulated</a> showing that many of the deficiencies characteristic of the juvenile brain continue to be evident after age 18. It makes sense for courts to consider people to be less than fully responsible for their criminal acts up to the age of 21.</p>
<p>In 2017, I presented this science in <a href="https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/files/pdf/KentuckyAge21DecisionEfrainDiaz.pdf">Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Diaz</a>, a case involving a 20-year-old accused of murder. That court agreed that the logic of Roper should apply to people up to age 21, and that the death penalty could not be considered as a possible sentence for Mr. Diaz. The case is now under appeal.</p>
<p>Nikolas Cruz’s public defenders have <a href="https://www.local10.com/news/parkland-school-shooting/prosecutors-push-back-on-talk-of-plea-deal-for-parkland-gunman">offered prosecutors a guilty plea</a> and their willingness to <a href="http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-school-shooting-nikolas-cruz-grand-jury-20180228-story.html">accept a life sentence</a> in return for the state’s agreement to not pursue the death penalty. To date, the prosecutors have not announced their intentions. Although given the enormity of Cruz’s crime, there will surely be a public outcry pushing for the death penalty, the science is on the defense’s side.</p>
<p>Research on adolescent brain and psychological development can inform debates about where to draw legal lines between minors and adults. Science is not the only consideration when society contemplates changes in the law. But to the extent that people care to align social policies with current understanding of human development, the science of adolescence can help guide the discussion.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92328/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Laurence Steinberg receives funding from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Klaus J. Jacobs Foundation.</span></em></p>Teens’ brains develop different skills along a predictable timeline. These milestones should influence the legal age boundaries for voting, buying guns and being put to death.Laurence Steinberg, Professor of Psychology, Temple UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/920052018-02-16T22:02:23Z2018-02-16T22:02:23ZThe American public has power over the gun business – why doesn’t it use it?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206814/original/file-20180216-75994-1yh9slx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Attendees attend a candlelight vigil for the victims of a shooting at a Florida school.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As teenagers in Parkland, Florida, dressed for the funerals of their friends – the latest victims of a mass shooting in the U.S. – weary outrage poured forth on <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23ParklandStrong&src=tyah">social media</a> and in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/15/opinion/congress-gun-progress.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=7&pgtype=sectionfront">op-eds</a> across the country. Once again, survivors, victims’ families and critics of U.S. gun laws demanded action to address the never-ending cycle of <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdf">mass shootings</a> and <a href="http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/">routine violence</a> ravaging American neighborhoods. </p>
<p>The 14 children and three adults shot dead on Feb. 14 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School were casualties of the nation’s <a href="http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting">30th mass shooting</a> this year – defined by the Gun Violence Archive as involving at least four victims including the injured – and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/14/health/parkland-among-deadliest-mass-shootings-trnd/index.html">one of the deadliest</a> in U.S. history. A question on many minds is whether this massacre will finally compel Washington to act. Few commentators seem to believe so. </p>
<p>If advocates for reform <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/opinion/gun-control-vegas-shooting.html">despair</a>, I can understand. The politics seem intractable. It’s easy to feel powerless. </p>
<p>But what I’ve learned from a decade of studying the history of the arms trade has convinced me that the American public has more power over the gun business than most people realize. Taxpayers have always been the arms industry’s indispensable patrons.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gun maker Simeon North made this flintlock pistol around 1813.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Balefire/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Washington’s patronage</h2>
<p>The U.S. arms industry’s close alliance with the government is as old as the country itself, beginning with the American Revolution. </p>
<p>Forced to rely on <a href="http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_438624">foreign weapons</a> during the war, President George Washington wanted to ensure that the new republic had its own arms industry. Inspired by European practice, he and his successors built public arsenals for the production of firearms in Springfield and Harper’s Ferry. They also began doling out lucrative arms contracts to private manufacturers such as Simeon North, the <a href="http://www.courant.com/courant-250/moments-in-history/hc-250-simeon-north-middletown-berlin-20141223-story.html">first official U.S. pistol maker</a>, and <a href="https://www.eliwhitney.org/7/museum/eli-whitney/arms-production">Eli Whitney</a>, inventor of the cotton gin.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/638798">government provided</a> crucial startup funds, steady contracts, tariffs against foreign manufactures, robust patent laws, and patterns, tools and know-how from federal arsenals. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.academia.edu/8058237/American_Arms_Manufacturing_and_the_Onset_of_the_War_of_1812">War of 1812</a>, perpetual conflicts with Native Americans and the U.S.-Mexican War all fed the industry’s growth. By the early 1850s, the United States was emerging as a world-class arms producer. Now-iconic American companies like those started by <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eliphalet-Remington">Eliphalet Remington</a> and <a href="https://connecticuthistory.org/the-colt-patent-fire-arms-manufacturing-company/">Samuel Colt</a> began to acquire international reputations. Even the mighty gun-making center of Great Britain started emulating the <a href="http://doi.org/10.1080/00076798900000002">American system</a> of interchangeable parts and mechanized production. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This is an advertisement for a Remington rifle in the Army and Navy Journal in 1871.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Army and Navy Journal</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Profit in war and peace</h2>
<p>The Civil War supercharged America’s burgeoning gun industry.</p>
<p>The Union poured huge sums of money into arms procurement, which manufacturers then invested in new capacity and infrastructure. By 1865, for example, Remington had made nearly <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=E86oBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=remington+Union+contracts+during+the+civil+war&source=bl&ots=TNb6SfMJxE&sig=hhrPb76HA0rOyDzbvj3PbE8VzVU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZuZfYj-LWAhUE2LwKHWSyC7cQ6AEIPTAE#v=onepage&q=earned%20nearly%20three%20million&f=false">US$3 million</a> producing firearms for the Union. The Confederacy, with its weak industrial base, had to <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/historians-reveal-secrets-of-uk-gun-running-which-lengthened-the-american-civil-war-by-two-years-9557937.html">import</a> the vast majority of its weapons.</p>
<p>The war’s end meant a collapse in demand and bankruptcy for several gun makers. Those that prospered afterward, such as Colt, Remington and Winchester, did so by securing <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=VeeiAgToOq4C&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=remington%27s+contracts+with+the+Ottoman+Empire&source=bl&ots=KqHBeJro9w&sig=nZmi4Xp-ubj98K5FbldhZiVlav0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKkeaYud_WAhUEHZQKHYknCecQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=remington's%20contracts%20with%20the%20Ottoman%20Empire&f=false">contracts</a> from foreign governments and hitching their <a href="http://pamelahaag.com/writing-archive/connecticut-explored/">domestic marketing</a> to the brutal romance of the American West. </p>
<p>While peace deprived gun makers of government money for a time, it delivered a windfall to well-capitalized dealers. That’s because within five years of Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, the War Department had decommissioned most of its guns and <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b2979306;view=1up;seq=52">auctioned</a> off some 1,340,000 to private arms dealers, such as <a href="https://centerofthewest.org/2016/12/09/schuyler-hartley-graham-original-gun-dealer/">Schuyler, Hartley and Graham</a>. The Western Hemisphere’s largest private arms dealer at the time, the company scooped up warehouses full of cut-rate army muskets and rifles and <a href="http://library.centerofthewest.org/cdm/search/collection/SHG/order/identi/ad/asc">made fortunes reselling them at home</a> and <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=85nfz5URJZkC&pg=RA1-PA91&lpg=RA1-PA91&dq=%22schuyler,+hartley,+and+graham%22&source=bl&ots=PA3HCpk5Qm&sig=uEJuvgsen6rxocKadN7XFKeg5Zc&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22schuyler%2C%20hartley%2C%20and%20graham%22&f=false">abroad</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A soldier fires the Sig Sauer P320, which the Army has chosen as its new standard pistol.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">U.S. Army</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>More wars, more guns</h2>
<p>By the late 19th century, America’s increasingly aggressive role in the world insured steady business for the country’s gun makers. </p>
<p>The Spanish American War brought a new wave of contracts, as did both <a href="https://www.remingtonsociety.org/remingtons-allied-rifle-contracts-during-wwi/">World Wars</a>, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and the dozens of smaller conflicts that the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations">U.S. waged around the globe</a> in the 20th and early 21st century. As the U.S. built up the world’s most powerful military and <a href="http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/daniel-immerwahr/GUS.pdf">established bases across the globe</a>, the <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/100833931">size of the contracts soared</a>. </p>
<p>Consider <a href="https://www.sigsauer.com/usage/pro/military/">Sig Sauer</a>, the New Hampshire arms producer that made the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/06/14/the-gun-the-orlando-shooter-used-was-not-an-ar-15-that-doesnt-change-much/?utm_term=.fd14defaee8e">MCX rifle</a> used in the Orlando Pulse nightclub massacre. In addition to arming <a href="http://www.monch.com/mpg/news/14-land/708-sig-sauer-takes-the-extra-mile.html">nearly a third</a> of the country’s law enforcement, it recently won the coveted <a href="https://www.wired.com/2017/01/us-army-sig-sauer-p320/">contract</a> for the Army’s new standard pistol, ultimately worth $350 million to $580 million.</p>
<p>Colt might best illustrate the importance of public money for prominent civilian arms manufacturers. Maker of scores of iconic guns for the civilian market, including the AR-15 carbine used in the 1996 massacre that prompted <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2704353/">Australia</a> to enact its famously sweeping gun restrictions, Colt has also relied heavily on government contracts since the 19th century. The Vietnam War initiated a long era of making M16s for the military, and the company continued to <a href="http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/071315/why-colt-went-out-business.asp">land contracts</a> as American war-making shifted from Southeast Asia to the Middle East. But Colt’s reliance on government was so great that it filed for bankruptcy in 2015, in part because it had <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/15/why-cops-and-soldiers-fell-out-of-love-with-colt-guns/">lost the military contract</a> for the M4 rifle two years earlier.</p>
<p>Overall, gun makers relied on government contracts <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/19/seven-facts-about-the-u-s-gun-industry/?utm_term=.2ca2524d1816">for about 40 percent</a> of their revenues in 2012. </p>
<p>Competition for contracts spurred manufacturers to make lethal innovations, such as handguns with magazines that hold 12 or 15 rounds rather than seven. Absent regulation, these innovations show up in <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/susannahbreslin/2013/08/16/gun-magazines/#6dd3a4d2215c">gun enthusiast periodicals</a>, sporting goods stores and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/how-military-guns-make-the-civilian-market/375123/">emergency rooms</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An activist is led away by security after protesting during a statement by NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre, left, during a news conference in response to the Connecticut school shooting in 2012.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Evan Vucci</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>NRA helped industry avoid regulation</h2>
<p>So how has the industry managed to avoid more significant regulation, especially given the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/politics/gun-control-polling-las-vegas-shooting/index.html">public anger and calls for legislation</a> that follow horrific massacres like the one in Las Vegas? </p>
<p>Given their historic dependence on U.S. taxpayers, one might think that small arms makers would have been compelled to make meaningful concessions in such moments. But that seldom happens, thanks in large part to the National Rifle Association, a complicated yet invaluable industry partner. </p>
<p>Prior to the 1930s, meaningful firearms regulations came from <a href="http://time.com/3921663/gun-regulation-history/">state and local governments</a>. There was little significant federal regulation until 1934, when Congress – spurred by the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/history-of-gun-control-legislation/2012/12/22/80c8d624-4ad3-11e2-9a42-d1ce6d0ed278_story.html?utm_term=.69769313c6be">bloody “Tommy gun era”</a> – debated the <a href="https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act">National Firearms Act</a>. </p>
<p>The NRA, founded in 1871 as an organization focused on hunting and marksmanship, rallied its members <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=0xQsDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq=NRA+and+the+1934+National+Firearms+Act&source=bl&ots=K50kyM78W0&sig=Iv19dxaW0r3LwG9L9J0AddIG6N4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjW0eCWpODWAhUJzLwKHY-bBcQ4FBDoAQguMAI#v=onepage&q=NRA%20and%20the%201934%20National%20Firearms%20Act&f=false">to defeat</a> the most important component of that bill: a tax meant to make it far more difficult to purchase handguns. Again in 1968, the NRA ensured <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29197">Lyndon Johnson’s Gun Control Act</a> wouldn’t include <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/10/05/even-in-the-1960s-the-nra-dominated-gun-control-debates/?utm_term=.e172d93ae81a">licensing and registration</a> requirements. </p>
<p>In 1989, it <a href="https://www.thetrace.org/2016/01/nra-background-check-system-brady-bill-wayne-lapierre/">helped delay and water down</a> the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1025/text/rh">Brady Act</a>, which mandated background checks for arms purchased from federally licensed dealers. In 1996 the NRA engineered a virtual ban on <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-still-cant-study-causes-gun-violence-180955884/?no-ist">federal funding</a> for research into gun violence. In 2000, the group led a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/smith-and-wesson-almost-went-out-of-business-trying-to-do-the-right-thing-2013-1?r=US&IR=T">successful boycott</a> of a gun maker that cooperated with the Clinton administration on gun safety measures. And it scored another big victory in 2005, by <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7901">limiting the industry’s liability</a> to gun-related lawsuits. </p>
<p>Most recently, the gun lobby has succeeded by promoting an ingenious <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/jun/15/nra-right-obama-coming-our-guns/">illusion</a>. It has framed government as the <a href="https://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/how-gun-industry-made-fortune-stoking-fears-obama-would-take-peoples-guns-ammo">enemy</a> of the gun business rather than its indispensable historic patron, convincing millions of American consumers that the state may <a href="http://thehill.com/regulation/248950-gun-production-has-doubled-under-obama">at any moment</a> stop them from buying guns or even try to confiscate them. </p>
<p>This helps explain why the share price of gun makers so often <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/business/gun-stocks-vegas-shooting-trump.html">jumps</a> after mass shootings. Investors know they have little to fear from new regulation and expect sales to rise anyway.</p>
<h2>A question worth asking</h2>
<p>So with the help of the NRA’s magic, major arms manufacturers <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-14/the-nra-racks-up-victories-the-atf-wants-to-give-them-more">have for decades thwarted regulations</a> that <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-guns-and-gun-ownership/psdt_2017-06-22-guns-00-03/">majorities of Americans support</a>. </p>
<p>Yet almost never does this <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/gun-companies-arm-trade-association-cash-influence-2016-elections/">political activity</a> seem to jeopardize access to lucrative government contracts. </p>
<p>Americans interested in reform might reflect on that fact. They might start asking their representatives where they get their guns. It isn’t just the military and scores of federal agencies. States, counties and local governments buy plenty of guns, too. </p>
<p>Take Smith & Wesson, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/15/florida-shooting-suspect-bought-gun-legally-authorities-say/340606002/">maker of the AR-15</a> Nikolas Cruz just used to kill his teachers and classmates at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Smith & Wesson is well into a <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-officers-gun-purchase-discounts-smith-wesson-20150925-story.html">five-year contract</a> to supply handguns to the Los Angeles Police Department, the second-largest in the country. In 2016 the company <a href="https://www.nssf.org/smith-wesson-tops-nssf-gunvote-chairmans-club-with-500000-contribution/">contributed $500,000</a> (more than <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/gun-companies-arm-trade-association-cash-influence-2016-elections/">any other firm</a>) to a get-out-the-vote operation designed to defeat candidates who favor tougher gun laws. </p>
<p>Do voters in LA – or in the rest of the country – know that they are indirectly subsidizing the gun lobby’s campaign against regulation? Concerned citizens should begin acting like the consumers they are and holding gun makers to account for political activities that imperil public safety.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an article originally published on Oct. 9, 2017.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92005/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian DeLay receives funding from the American Council of Learned Societies and the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.
</span></em></p>Advocates of gun control may despair in the wake of mass shootings like the one in Parkland, Florida, but the history of government support for the gun industry shows Americans have more sway than they think.Brian DeLay, Associate Professor of History, University of California, BerkeleyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/853642017-10-16T00:36:40Z2017-10-16T00:36:40ZFive types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190012/original/file-20171012-31440-13apnyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Were muskets in 1777 better regulated than assault rifles in 2017?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/philadelphia-pa-usa-october-7-2017-730137331?src=gSM3tSQ0u09lFwCOE1zdAQ-1-22">Jana Shea/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment">The Second Amendment</a> is one of the most frequently cited provisions in the American Constitution, but also one of the most poorly understood. </p>
<p>The 27 words that constitute the Second Amendment seem to baffle modern Americans on both the left and right. </p>
<p>Ironically, those on both ends of our contemporary political spectrum cast the Second Amendment as a <a href="https://gun-control.procon.org/">barrier to robust gun regulation</a>. Gun rights supporters – mostly, but not exclusively, on the <a href="http://gcadvocate.com/2015/12/23/1982/">right</a> – seem to believe that the Second Amendment prohibits many forms of gun regulation. On the left, frustration with the lack of progress on modern gun control leads to periodic calls for the amendment’s <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/4/michael-moore-demands-repeal-of-ancient-and-outdat/">repeal.</a></p>
<p>Both of these beliefs ignore an irrefutable historical truth. The framers and adopters of the Second Amendment were generally ardent supporters of the idea of well-regulated liberty. Without strong governments and effective laws, they believed, liberty inevitably degenerated into licentiousness and eventually anarchy. <a href="http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch11s10.html">Diligent students of history</a>, particularly Roman history, the Federalists who wrote the Constitution realized that tyranny more often resulted from anarchy, not strong government. </p>
<p>I have been researching and writing about <a href="http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7584&context=jclc">the history of gun regulation and the Second Amendment</a> for the past two decades. When I began this research, most people assumed that regulation was a relatively recent phenomenon, something associated with the rise of big government in the modern era. Actually, while the founding generation certainly <a href="http://fordhamlawreview.org/issues/a-well-regulated-right-the-early-american-origins-of-gun-control/">esteemed the idea of an armed population, they were also ardent supporters of gun regulations</a>. </p>
<p>Consider these five categories of gun laws that the Founders endorsed.</p>
<h2>#1: Registration</h2>
<p>Today American gun rights advocates typically oppose any form of <a href="http://reason.com/archives/2013/12/11/how-government-officials-sealed-the-doom">registration</a> – even though such schemes are common in every other <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/worldwide-gun-control-policy/423711/">industrial democracy</a> – and typically argue that registration violates the Second Amendment. This claim is also hard to square with the history of the nation’s founding. All of the colonies – apart from Quaker-dominated Pennsylvania, the one colony in which religious pacifists blocked the creation of a militia – enrolled local citizens, white men between the ages of 16-60 in <a href="http://www.chronicle.com/article/All-Guns-Are-Not-Created-Equal/136805">state-regulated militias.</a> The colonies and then the newly independent states <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=qoY2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA424&dq=militia+musket&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjw59L6-vLWAhUIQiYKHSesBLEQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=accoutrements&f=false">kept track of these privately owned weapons </a> required for militia service. Men could be fined if they reported to a muster without a well-maintained weapon in working condition. </p>
<h2>#2: Public carry</h2>
<p>The modern gun rights movement has aggressively pursued the goal of <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/open-carry-laws/436665/">expanding the right to carry firearms in public</a>. </p>
<p>The American colonies inherited a variety of restrictions that evolved under <a href="http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs1.html">English Common Law</a>. In 18th-century England, armed travel was limited to a few well-defined occasions such as assisting justices of the peace and constables. Members of the upper classes also had a limited exception to travel with arms. Concealable weapons such as handguns were subject to even more stringent restrictions. The city of London <a href="http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3912&context=clevstlrev">banned public carry of these weapons entirely.</a></p>
<p>The American Revolution did not sweep away English common law. In fact, most colonies adopted common law as it had been interpreted in the colonies prior to independence, including the ban on traveling armed in populated areas. Thus, there was no general <a href="https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/firearm-regionalism-and-public-carry">right of armed travel when the</a> Second Amendment was adopted, and certainly no right to travel with concealed weapons. Such a right first emerged in the United States in the slave South decades after the Second Amendment was adopted. The market revolution of the early 19th century made cheap and reliable hand guns readily available. Southern murder rates soared as a result. </p>
<p>In other parts of the nation, the traditional English restrictions on traveling armed persisted with one important change. American law recognized an exception to this prohibition for individuals who had a good cause to fear an imminent threat. Nonetheless, by the end of the century, <a href="https://lcp.law.duke.edu/article/the-right-to-keep-and-carry-arms-in-anglo-american-law-cornell-vol80-iss2/">prohibiting public carry</a> was the legal norm, not the exception. </p>
<h2>#3: Stand-your-ground laws</h2>
<p>Under traditional English common law, one had a duty to <a href="http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2841&context=facpubs">retreat, not stand your ground.</a> Deadly force was justified only if no other alternative was possible. One had to retreat, until retreat was no longer possible, before killing an aggressor. </p>
<p>The use of deadly force was justified only in the home, where retreat was not required under the so-called castle doctrine, or the idea that “a man’s home is his castle.” The emergence of a more aggressive view of the right of self-defense in public, <a href="http://prospect.org/article/history-floridas-stand-your-ground-law">standing your ground,</a> emerged slowly in the decades after the Civil War.</p>
<h2>#4: Safe storage laws</h2>
<p>Although some gun rights advocates attempt to <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/08/176350364/fears-of-government-tyranny-push-some-to-reject-gun-control">demonize government power</a>, it is important to recognize that one of the most important rights citizens enjoy is the freedom to elect representatives who can enact laws to promote health and public safety. This is the foundation for the idea of <a href="http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/term/liberty">ordered liberty</a>. The regulation of gun powder and firearms arises from an exercise of <a href="http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch14s47.html">this basic liberty</a>. </p>
<p>In 1786, Boston acted on this legal principle, <a href="http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol73/iss2/3/">prohibiting the storage of a loaded firearm</a> in any domestic dwelling in the city. Guns had to be kept unloaded, a practice that made sense since the black powder used in firearms in this period was corrosive. Loaded guns also posed a particular hazard in cases of fire because they might discharge and injure innocent bystanders and those fighting fires.</p>
<h2>#5: Loyalty oaths</h2>
<p>One of the most common claims one hears in the modern Second Amendment debate is the assertion that the Founders included this provision in the Constitution to make possible a <a href="http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/20/the-second-amendment-isnt-about-hunting-or-self-defense-but-revolution/">right of revolution.</a> But this claim, too, rests on a serious <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/constitutional-myth-6-the-second-amendment-allows-citizens-to-threaten-government/241298/">misunderstanding of the role the right to bear</a> arms played in American constitutional theory. </p>
<p>In fact, <a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/01-03-02-0016-0075">the Founders engaged in large-scale disarmament of the civilian population</a> during the American Revolution. The right to bear arms was conditional on swearing a loyalty oath to the government. Individuals who refused to swear such an oath were disarmed. </p>
<p>The notion that the Second Amendment was understood to protect a right to take up arms against the government is absurd. Indeed, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii">the Constitution itself defines such an act as treason</a>. </p>
<p>Gun regulation and gun ownership have always existed side by side in American history. The Second Amendment poses no obstacle to enacting sensible gun laws. The failure to do so is not the Constitution’s fault; it is ours.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85364/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>As a researcher at the John Glenn School of Public Policy at Ohio State, Cornell was the lead investigator on a project that was funded by a grant from the Joyce Foundation to research the history of gun regulation. Part of the research cited in this essay was done under that grant.</span></em></p>A leading historian of constitutional thought says the contemporary Second Amendment debate is founded on serious misunderstandings.Saul Cornell, Paul and Diane Guenther Chair in American History, Fordham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/851672017-10-09T23:23:18Z2017-10-09T23:23:18ZHow the US government created and coddled the gun industry<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189471/original/file-20171009-25649-1ts0kj5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A U.S. soldier fires a Colt M16 in Vietnam in 1967.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Operation_“Cook”,_8_September_1967,_Quang_Ngai_Province,_Republic_of_Vietnam-R.C._Lafoon.PNG">U.S. Army</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>After Stephen Paddock opened fire on Las Vegas concertgoers on Oct. 1, <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/354448-talk-of-gun-control-dominates-sunday-shows-after-las-vegas">many people responded</a> with calls for more gun control to help prevent <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdf">mass shootings</a> and the <a href="http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/">routine violence</a> ravaging U.S. neighborhoods. </p>
<p>But besides a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/top-house-republicans-open-to-legislation-regulating-bump-stocks/2017/10/05/4580cb54-a9dc-11e7-b3aa-c0e2e1d41e38_story.html?utm_term=.640105e36861">rare consensus</a> on restricting the availability of <a href="https://www.thetrace.org/rounds/nra-bump-stocks-fox-news-wayne-lapierre-chris-cox/">so-called bump stocks</a>, which Paddock used to enable his dozen semi-automatic rifles to fire like machine guns, it’s unclear if <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/opinion/banning-bump-stocks-wont-solve-anything.html?_r=0">anything meaningful</a> will come of it. </p>
<p>If advocates for reform <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/opinion/gun-control-vegas-shooting.html">despair</a> after such a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/02/why-congress-still-wont-do-something-about-gun-laws-after-las-vegas/">tragedy</a>, I can understand. The politics seem intractable right now. It’s easy to feel powerless. </p>
<p>But what I’ve learned from a decade of studying the history of the arms trade has convinced me that the American public has more power over the gun business than most people realize. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189449/original/file-20171009-6999-una1zf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gun maker Simeon North made this flintlock pistol around 1813.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Balefire/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Washington’s patronage</h2>
<p>The U.S. arms industry’s close alliance with the government is as old as the country itself, beginning with the American Revolution. </p>
<p>Forced to rely on <a href="http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_438624">foreign weapons</a> during the war, President George Washington wanted to ensure that the new republic had its own arms industry. Inspired by European practice, he and his successors built public arsenals for the production of firearms in Springfield and Harper’s Ferry. They also began doling out lucrative arms contracts to private manufacturers such as Simeon North, the <a href="http://www.courant.com/courant-250/moments-in-history/hc-250-simeon-north-middletown-berlin-20141223-story.html">first official U.S. pistol maker</a>, and <a href="https://www.eliwhitney.org/7/museum/eli-whitney/arms-production">Eli Whitney</a>, inventor of the cotton gin.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/638798">government provided</a> crucial startup funds, steady contracts, tariffs against foreign manufactures, robust patent laws, and patterns, tools and know-how from federal arsenals. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.academia.edu/8058237/American_Arms_Manufacturing_and_the_Onset_of_the_War_of_1812">War of 1812</a>, perpetual conflicts with Native Americans and the U.S.-Mexican War all fed the industry’s growth. By the early 1850s, the United States was emerging as a world-class arms producer. Now-iconic American companies like those started by <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eliphalet-Remington">Eliphalet Remington</a> and <a href="https://connecticuthistory.org/the-colt-patent-fire-arms-manufacturing-company/">Samuel Colt</a> began to acquire international reputations. Even the mighty gun-making center of Great Britain started emulating the <a href="http://doi.org/10.1080/00076798900000002">American system</a> of interchangeable parts and mechanized production. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189448/original/file-20171009-9731-kwg9r5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This is an advertisement for a Remington rifle in the Army and Navy Journal in 1871.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Army and Navy Journal</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Profit in war and peace</h2>
<p>The Civil War supercharged America’s burgeoning gun industry.</p>
<p>The Union poured huge sums of money into arms procurement, which manufacturers then invested in new capacity and infrastructure. By 1865, for example, Remington had made nearly <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=E86oBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=remington+Union+contracts+during+the+civil+war&source=bl&ots=TNb6SfMJxE&sig=hhrPb76HA0rOyDzbvj3PbE8VzVU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZuZfYj-LWAhUE2LwKHWSyC7cQ6AEIPTAE#v=onepage&q=earned%20nearly%20three%20million&f=false">US$3 million</a> producing firearms for the Union. The Confederacy, with its weak industrial base, had to <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/historians-reveal-secrets-of-uk-gun-running-which-lengthened-the-american-civil-war-by-two-years-9557937.html">import</a> the vast majority of its weapons.</p>
<p>The war’s end meant a collapse in demand and bankruptcy for several gun makers. Those that prospered afterward, such as Colt, Remington and Winchester, did so by securing <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=VeeiAgToOq4C&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=remington%27s+contracts+with+the+Ottoman+Empire&source=bl&ots=KqHBeJro9w&sig=nZmi4Xp-ubj98K5FbldhZiVlav0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKkeaYud_WAhUEHZQKHYknCecQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=remington's%20contracts%20with%20the%20Ottoman%20Empire&f=false">contracts</a> from foreign governments and hitching their <a href="http://pamelahaag.com/writing-archive/connecticut-explored/">domestic marketing</a> to the brutal romance of the American West. </p>
<p>While peace deprived gun makers of government money for a time, it delivered a windfall to well capitalized dealers. That’s because within five years of Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, the War Department had decommissioned most of its guns and <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b2979306;view=1up;seq=52">auctioned</a> off some 1,340,000 to private arms dealers, such as <a href="https://centerofthewest.org/2016/12/09/schuyler-hartley-graham-original-gun-dealer/">Schuyler, Hartley and Graham</a>. The Western Hemisphere’s largest private arms dealer at the time, the company scooped up warehouses full of cut-rate army muskets and rifles and <a href="http://library.centerofthewest.org/cdm/search/collection/SHG/order/identi/ad/asc">made fortunes reselling them at home</a> and <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=85nfz5URJZkC&pg=RA1-PA91&lpg=RA1-PA91&dq=%22schuyler,+hartley,+and+graham%22&source=bl&ots=PA3HCpk5Qm&sig=uEJuvgsen6rxocKadN7XFKeg5Zc&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22schuyler%2C%20hartley%2C%20and%20graham%22&f=false">abroad</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189447/original/file-20171009-6990-p3yvkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A soldier fires the Sig Sauer P320, which the Army has chosen as its new standard pistol.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">U.S. Army</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>More wars, more guns</h2>
<p>By the late 19th century, America’s increasingly aggressive role in the world insured steady business for the country’s gun makers. </p>
<p>The Spanish American War brought a new wave of contracts, as did both <a href="https://www.remingtonsociety.org/remingtons-allied-rifle-contracts-during-wwi/">World Wars</a>, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and the dozens of smaller conflicts that the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations">U.S. waged around the globe</a> in the 20th and early 21st century. As the U.S. built up the world’s most powerful military and <a href="http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/daniel-immerwahr/GUS.pdf">established bases across the globe</a>, the <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/100833931">size of the contracts soared</a>. </p>
<p>Consider <a href="https://www.sigsauer.com/usage/pro/military/">Sig Sauer</a>, the New Hampshire arms producer that made the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/06/14/the-gun-the-orlando-shooter-used-was-not-an-ar-15-that-doesnt-change-much/?utm_term=.fd14defaee8e">MCX rifle</a> used in the Orlando Pulse nightclub massacre. In addition to arming <a href="http://www.monch.com/mpg/news/14-land/708-sig-sauer-takes-the-extra-mile.html">nearly a third</a> of the country’s law enforcement, it recently won the coveted <a href="https://www.wired.com/2017/01/us-army-sig-sauer-p320/">contract</a> for the Army’s new standard pistol, ultimately worth $350 million to $580 million.</p>
<p>Colt might best illustrate the importance of public money for prominent civilian arms manufacturers. Maker of scores of iconic guns for the civilian market, including the AR-15 carbine used in the 1996 massacre that prompted <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2704353/">Australia</a> to enact its famously sweeping gun restrictions, Colt has also relied heavily on government contracts since the 19th century. The Vietnam War initiated a long era of making M16s for the military, and the company continued to <a href="http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/071315/why-colt-went-out-business.asp">land contracts</a> as American war-making shifted from southeast Asia to the Middle East. But Colt’s reliance on government was so great that it filed for bankruptcy in 2015, in part because it had <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/15/why-cops-and-soldiers-fell-out-of-love-with-colt-guns/">lost the military contract</a> for the M4 rifle two years earlier.</p>
<p>Overall, gun makers relied on government contracts <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/19/seven-facts-about-the-u-s-gun-industry/?utm_term=.2ca2524d1816">for about 40 percent</a> of their revenues in 2012. </p>
<p>Competition for contracts spurred manufacturers to make lethal innovations, such as handguns with magazines that hold 12 or 15 rounds rather than seven. Absent regulation, these innovations show up in <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/susannahbreslin/2013/08/16/gun-magazines/#6dd3a4d2215c">gun enthusiast periodicals</a>, sporting goods stores and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/how-military-guns-make-the-civilian-market/375123/">emergency rooms</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189451/original/file-20171009-6971-kzyn3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An activist is led away by security after protesting during a statement by NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre, left, during a news conference in response to the Connecticut school shooting in 2012.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Evan Vucci</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>NRA helped industry avoid regulation</h2>
<p>So how has the industry managed to avoid more significant regulation, especially given the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/politics/gun-control-polling-las-vegas-shooting/index.html">public anger and calls for legislation</a> that follow horrific massacres like the one in Las Vegas? </p>
<p>Given their historic dependence on U.S. taxpayers, one might think that small arms makers would have been compelled to make meaningful concessions in such moments. But that seldom happens, thanks in large part to the National Rifle Association, a complicated yet invaluable industry partner. </p>
<p>Prior to the 1930s, meaningful firearms regulations came from <a href="http://time.com/3921663/gun-regulation-history/">state and local governments</a>. There was little significant federal regulation until 1934, when Congress – spurred by the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/history-of-gun-control-legislation/2012/12/22/80c8d624-4ad3-11e2-9a42-d1ce6d0ed278_story.html?utm_term=.69769313c6be">bloody “Tommy gun era”</a> – debated the <a href="https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act">National Firearms Act</a>. </p>
<p>The NRA, founded in 1871 as an organization focused on hunting and marksmanship, rallied its members <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=0xQsDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq=NRA+and+the+1934+National+Firearms+Act&source=bl&ots=K50kyM78W0&sig=Iv19dxaW0r3LwG9L9J0AddIG6N4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjW0eCWpODWAhUJzLwKHY-bBcQ4FBDoAQguMAI#v=onepage&q=NRA%20and%20the%201934%20National%20Firearms%20Act&f=false">to defeat</a> the most important component of that bill: a tax meant to make it far more difficult to purchase handguns. Again in 1968, the NRA ensured <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29197">Lyndon Johnson’s Gun Control Act</a> wouldn’t include <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/10/05/even-in-the-1960s-the-nra-dominated-gun-control-debates/?utm_term=.e172d93ae81a">licensing and registration</a> requirements. </p>
<p>In 1989, it <a href="https://www.thetrace.org/2016/01/nra-background-check-system-brady-bill-wayne-lapierre/">helped delay and water down</a> the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1025/text/rh">Brady Act</a>, which mandated background checks for arms purchased from federally licensed dealers. In 1996 the NRA engineered a virtual ban on <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-still-cant-study-causes-gun-violence-180955884/?no-ist">federal funding</a> for research into gun violence. In 2000, the group led a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/smith-and-wesson-almost-went-out-of-business-trying-to-do-the-right-thing-2013-1?r=US&IR=T">successful boycott</a> of a gun maker that cooperated with the Clinton administration on gun safety measures. And it scored another big victory in 2005, by <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/7901">limiting the industry’s liability</a> to gun-related lawsuits. </p>
<p>Most recently, the gun lobby has succeeded by promoting an ingenious <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/jun/15/nra-right-obama-coming-our-guns/">illusion</a>. It has framed government as the <a href="https://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/how-gun-industry-made-fortune-stoking-fears-obama-would-take-peoples-guns-ammo">enemy</a> of the gun business rather than its indispensable historic patron, convincing millions of American consumers that the state may <a href="http://thehill.com/regulation/248950-gun-production-has-doubled-under-obama">at any moment</a> stop them from buying guns or even try to confiscate them. </p>
<p>Hence the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/business/gun-stocks-vegas-shooting-trump.html">jump</a> in the shares of gun makers following last week’s slaughter in Las Vegas. Investors know they have little to fear from new regulation and expect sales to rise anyway.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189452/original/file-20171009-6984-13poxmw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People have been leaving memorials and tributes in honor of the victims of the Las Vegas mass shooting.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">gotpap/STAR MAX/IPx via AP Photo</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A question worth asking</h2>
<p>So with the help of the NRA’s magic, major arms manufacturers <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-14/the-nra-racks-up-victories-the-atf-wants-to-give-them-more">have for decades thwarted regulations</a> that <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-guns-and-gun-ownership/psdt_2017-06-22-guns-00-03/">majorities of Americans support</a>. </p>
<p>Yet almost never does this <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/gun-companies-arm-trade-association-cash-influence-2016-elections/">political activity</a> seem to jeopardize access to lucrative government contracts. </p>
<p>Americans interested in reform might reflect on that fact. They might start asking their representatives where they get their guns. It isn’t just the military and scores of federal agencies. States, counties and local governments buy plenty of guns, too. </p>
<p>For example, Smith & Wesson is well into a <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-lapd-officers-gun-purchase-discounts-smith-wesson-20150925-story.html">five-year contract</a> to supply handguns to the Los Angeles Police Department, the second-largest in the country. In 2016 the company <a href="https://www.nssf.org/smith-wesson-tops-nssf-gunvote-chairmans-club-with-500000-contribution/">contributed $500,000</a> (more than <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/gun-companies-arm-trade-association-cash-influence-2016-elections/">any other company</a>) to a get-out-the-vote operation designed to defeat candidates who favor tougher gun laws. </p>
<p>Do taxpayers in L.A. – or the rest of the country – realize they are indirectly subsidizing the gun lobby’s campaign against regulation?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85167/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian DeLay receives funding from the American Council of Learned Societies and the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.</span></em></p>While advocates of gun control may feel powerless in the wake of mass shootings like the one in Las Vegas, the history of government support for the industry shows Americans have more sway than they think.Brian DeLay, Associate Professor of History, University of California, BerkeleyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.