Gun Violence Analysis: Background Checks and Mental Health History

This report delves into the pervasive issue of gun violence in the United States, highlighting its disproportionate impact on life expectancy and the substantial economic burden it imposes. The central argument proposes that reducing gun violence necessitates comprehensive background checks that incorporate psychiatric health history assessments and a mandatory waiting period for gun purchases. The report examines various perspectives on the issue, including arguments for stricter firearm access restrictions based on mental health, the importance of background checks, and counterarguments emphasizing alternative causes of violence. The analysis also addresses conflicts between individual rights and public safety, ultimately advocating for a combined approach of background checks and reforms in the entertainment industry's portrayal of violence. The recommendations emphasize the implementation of universal background checks and the potential for these measures to transform the criminal justice system by reducing gun-related mortality and crime rates.

Running head: HEALTH CARE
Health care
Name of the student:
Name of the University:
Author’s note

1HEALTH CARE
Overview of the issue:
Gun violence is a highly prevalent issue in the United States and the rate of gun related
violence is much higher than other developed nations. Gun related deaths particularly homicides
contribute to disparities in life expectancy between the whites and minority groups in US. The
issue has seriously affected the US economy as it cost at least $229 billion per year (Ludwig,
2017) . The main purpose of this paper is to develop a working thesis for the issue analysis on
gun violence. The key thesis statement for the task is that to reduce gun violence, there is a need
to conduct background check including psychiatric health history check for the person and
increase mandatory waiting period for gun purchase. The paper will look at evidence for various
positions on the issue and provide rationale for taking a specific position on the issue.
Discussion on all possible positions on the issue:
There are different positions on the issue of gun violence. One position is that gun
violence should be immediately controlled in America to prevent the burden of mental illness
and crime. Baumann and Teasdale (2018) argue that due to link between mental illness and mass
firearm shootings, there is a need for stronger restrictions on firearm access for individuals with
mental illness. Lu and Temple (2019) also reported that access to firearms is the main culprit that
leads to high hostility and such evidence can have many important implications for gun control
strategies. However, such restriction is dependent on implementation of strong legislation. This
evidence gives the perception that gun violence is rooted in psychiatric problems and firearm
access restrictions can be a possible solution to the problem.
Another supporting argument to reduce gun violence is that background checks for
firearms should be done during purchase. The evidence for the same has been given by

2HEALTH CARE
Wintemute (2014) and the study mainly advocates for the need of review of federal and state
policies to purchase fire arms and conduct background check requirements for firearm transfers.
The main advantage of background checks and denials is that it can substantially minimize the
risk of crime due to firearms. Background check is validated by the Brady’s Act which states the
need to perform background check for purchase from federal firearm licenses. However, the Act
failed to control the rate of fire homicides as the Act do not apply to firearm transfers by
unlicensed private parties. Hence, longstanding policies are required to address these gaps in
federal regulation. A state level study by Kalesan et al. (2016) also supported that universal
background check for purchase of firearms and ammunition is necessary to reduce mortality due
to firearms in USA.
There are many conflict positions on the issue. Many challenge the need for firearms
restriction to prevent gun violence because violent crimes occur because of other social issues
like family dysfunction and exposure to entertainment sources featuring gun violence. The study
by () that suggested that restricting firearm purchase may lead to adaption of other substation
methods for criminalities such as knives and bombs. Through this argument, the author mainly
highlights that disarming citizens cannot prevent gun violence. Instead, it encourages more crime
for criminal elements and less protection for good citizens. Hence, the paper suggested other
means to end gun violence. This included improving the educational system that equips young
minds with proper civics and reforming the way violent is project in the entertainment industry.
Values/beliefs conflict in relation to the issue:
In relation to the issue of preventing gun violence, some values or beliefs that come in
conflict based on restricting firearm possession is that individual right to safety. This is said

3HEALTH CARE
because people purchase firearms for their protection too instead of causing harm to others.
Hence, directly prohibiting individuals may lead to conflict of interest. However, the main
advantage of background check is that it can help to identify history of mental illness or domestic
violence. In such case, firearms laws can shape and regulate firearm ownership for at-risk
families. Based on this ground, laws to increase background checks and prevent firearm related
violence seems sensible. Background checking can protect people values and beliefs related to
firearm possession (Jashinsky et al., 2017).
Positions on the issues:
The main position taken for the issue is that background check is necessary and this
should be combined with reforms in the way violence is depicted in the entertainment industry.
The former will prevent access to firearms for people with mental problems and the latter
strategy will prevent youths from developing a fascination for possessing firearms. Laws related
to types of people who can possess firearms is more effective in reducing gun violence than laws
related to types of guns that are permitted. The main advantage of universal background checks
and permit requirement is that these laws ban people with violent intentions to possess fire arms.
Federal gun regulations related to universal background checks can increase the power to
regulate gun sales and ownerships (Siegel et al., 2019). Another rationale for the effectiveness of
the background check system is that it can significantly control unregulated gun market which is
the major reason for gun crime. Hence, this strategy has the potential to eliminate loopholes in
private gun sales and make gun purchasing harder for criminals.
Recommendations to analyze the issue:

4HEALTH CARE
As criminal groups may travel to states with looser laws to purchase a gun, it is
recommended that policy workers put efforts to implement universal background check law.
This would keep the system transparent irrespective of locations and it would eliminate other
pathways by which criminals seek to possess guns. Such strict standard is needed to achieve the
goal of preventing mortality and crimes related to gun violence. It will not only reduce homicide
rates, but also decrease the cost incurred due to gun violence (Swanson et al., 2017). This can
turn out to be the greatest reform in changing the criminal justice system of United States.

5HEALTH CARE
References:
Baumann, M. L., & Teasdale, B. (2018). Severe mental illness and firearm access: Is violence
really the danger?. International journal of law and psychiatry, 56, 44-49.4
Jashinsky, J. M., Magnusson, B., Hanson, C., & Barnes, M. (2017). Media agenda setting
regarding gun violence before and after a mass shooting. Frontiers in public health, 4,
291.
Kalesan, B., Mobily, M. E., Keiser, O., Fagan, J. A., & Galea, S. (2016). Firearm legislation and
firearm mortality in the USA: a cross-sectional, state-level study. The
Lancet, 387(10030), 1847-1855.
Lu, Y., & Temple, J. R. (2019). Dangerous weapons or dangerous people? The temporal
associations between gun violence and mental health. Preventive medicine, 121, 1-6.
Ludwig, J., (2017). Reducing gun violence in America. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences. 114 (46) 12097-12099; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1717306114
Siegel, M., Pahn, M., Xuan, Z., Fleegler, E., & Hemenway, D. (2019). The impact of state
firearm laws on homicide and suicide deaths in the USA, 1991–2016: a panel
study. Journal of general internal medicine, 34(10), 2021-2028.
Swanson, J. W., Norko, M. A., Lin, H. J., Alanis-Hirsch, K., Frisman, L. K., Baranoski, M. V., ...
& Bonnie, R. J. (2017). Implementation and effectiveness of connecticut's risk-based gun
removal law: Does it prevent suicides. Law & Contemp. Probs., 80, 179.

6HEALTH CARE
Wintemute, G. J. (2014). Support for a comprehensive background check requirement and
expanded denial criteria for firearm transfers: findings from the Firearms Licensee
Survey. Journal of urban health, 91(2), 303-319.