1. Choose a policy issue area such as crime control, national security, environmental protection, or economic development. Use the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Procedural Guide 3 to generate a list of stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area you have chosen for analysis. After generating the list, create a cumulative frequency distribution. Place stakeholders on the horizontal axis, numbering them from 1 . . . n. On the vertical axis, place the number of new (nonduplicate) ideas generated by each stakeholder (the ideas can be objectives, alter- natives, outcomes, causes, etc.). Connect the total new ideas of each stakeholder with
a line graph.
Does the line graph flatten out?
If so, after how many stakeholders? What conclusions can you draw about the policy problem(s) in the issue area?
Introduction
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution upholds the right of the citizens to bear arms. The right to bear arms extends to all individuals provided the person can prove their responsibility and care. However, arms have continually found their way into the hands of criminals and other non-licensed holders. Drug cartel members, gang members, and other individuals who participate in illegal activities are among the persons likely to hold unlicensed arms. For this reason, the government has had to create gun control reforms. Gun control can be described as the regulation of all activities that involve weapons. The activities include manufacture, transport, possession, and use.
Discussion
Gun control mostly focuses on small arms and other weapons not commonly used by the Federal or State law enforcement agencies (Price, 2015). According to a 2007 report, it was estimated that there were close to nine-hundred million small arms globally. A considerable number of the arms were held by civilians and worse still, some of the individuals were not licensed to bear arms. Consequently, incidences such as shootouts have been experienced in schools and other institutions in the recent past. It is anticipated that mentally ill persons, religious fanatics, and anti-government extremists are among the unlicensed individual who bears arms. As a result, the arms have been used to perpetrate serious crimes that could be prevented had there been stringent arms control policies (Zakaria, 2015).
To curb the unlicensed holding and using of firearms, legislators in the U.S have been trying to create gun control policies. The policies seek to establish a means of identifying all arms holders by regulating the manufacture, transportation, and use of arms. Tighter gun control policies have aided in the cutting down the number of deaths in all the states that have managed to create gun control policies. However, it has also been argued that during shootouts and other criminal activities, a good person with a weapon may help to stop the evil person from killing innocent people. Nonetheless, it is considered a risky affair to depend on some good persona to help prevent deaths as they may not always be present at the scene of a crime.
With the rising concerns in the number of arms-related crimes, legislators alone may not be able to combat arms-related crimes through statutes and sanctions. Research indicates that the number of guns held by civilians went down significantly from 1973 to 2014 (W. Smith & Son, 2015). Nonetheless, the same cannot be reported for arms-related crimes. Educators, parents, religious leaders, and law enforcement officers are among other stakeholders who need to be included in the formulation and enforcement of gun control policies (Dvorak, 2013).
According to Timothy Egan of the New York Times, America is currently in a split situation over gun control laws (Egan, 2015). On one side, the alarming number of shootings happening in schools, churches, and other establishments requires urgent attention. On the other hand, opponents of gun control claim that having more guns in the hands of civilians could help combat criminal activities. Egan also notes that Americans are twenty times more likely to die due to gun violence as compared to residents of other developed countries. Egan's fears are opposed by Radley Balko of the Washington Post who claims that there lacks evidence to support the claim of increasing crime in America (Balko, 2015).
According to Balko, the underlying factors responsible for the rising crime levels are directly related to the treatment of the citizens by the law enforcement agents. For instance, he notes that poor people are arrested and prosecuted without having committed any crime as a means of social control. This contradicts Egan's perceptions of violence arising from extremism. In this case, it could be agreeable that mistreatment of individuals sets back their overall well-being. From Balko's assumptions, it is clear that creating reforms within the law enforcement system could save the country the rising crime had there been justice. However, as Egan observes, there is a higher crime rate occurrence in the southern states as compared to the northern states. Hence, Balko's assumptions must justify that the law is strict-bent towards the southern states as opposed to the northern states (Balko, 2015).
Egan also observes that premises with a prohibition on arms are less likely to experience armed violence. For instance, he cites The Mall of America among establishments that do not allow armed visitors. Such establishments have their security teams thus disallowing off-duty police officers from carrying their guns inside (Price, 2015). According to Egan, such measures ensure that individuals do not threaten the lives of others (Egan, 2015).
Besides the issue of gun safety, it is equally important to consider the motivations behind the crime. As Balko observes, the harassment of citizens has the power to ignite rage within an individual. In agreement with Egan, he adds that mentally ill persons or those with histories of mental illness should not be licensed to handle guns. For this reason, it is necessary to consider all the stakeholders who could help understand the factors contributing to crime in America (Egan, 2015).
Foremost, it is easy to track violent individuals back to their neighborhoods. This implies that caregivers such as parents and teachers have the capacity to identify violent traits in these individuals from an early age. Parents and teachers spend a considerable amount of time with children and young adults, the same persons who either fall victim to gun violence or perpetrate the violence (Price, 2015). Religious leaders can also help identify criminal elements within the society considering that some religions are widely believed to support violent attacks.
To this effect, a consensus must be reached by all parties that could help to curb gun violence. Parents need to recognize threats to their children's well-being and address such issues in time. Teachers must go beyond teaching and counsel their students to ensure that they do not engage in criminal activities. Religious leaders, also, need to focus on messages that can unite people as opposed to advocating for violence. Legislators and the law enforcement agencies can also aid the fight against gun violence by creating laws that effectively combat gun violence (Balko, 2015).
The arguments forwarded by Egan and Balko both carry the concept of scrutinizing individuals before allowing them to hold firearms. Policy makers need to diversify their scope and consider the various options that could help control the mishandling of firearms. However, it may be argued that while several options exist, the enforcement of the policies could also be difficult (Price, 2015). In essence, the manufacture, sale, and use of firearms take a long procedure that may not always involve the end, users. Influential persons own companies that manufacture or transport the arms. However, culprits and suspects of gun violence are arrested prosecuted while no action is taken against the gun marketers (W. Smith & Son, 2015). Although The Second Amendment allows any individual to bear arms, stricter policies need to be established to define the conditions under which one may be permitted or denied the right to carry an arm (Egan, 2015). For example, mentally incapacitated persons or those with histories of mental illness should be deprived of the right to bear arms. Similarly, it is assumed that arming many citizens will provide security. It may be noted that not all individuals are adequately trained on how to use firearms in case of an emergency such as an attack at a mall. Consequently, there could be more fatalities or damages if the situation were to be handled by police officers as opposed to any arm-bearing individual at the scene (Dvorak, 2013).
As the gun control debate continues to rage in America, it has been turned into a battle of might between the various factions with each struggling to gain support (Zakaria, 2015). For instance, some states such as Virginia are yet to attempt creating any gun control policies. A restaurant owner in Virginia rewards any customer who comes in carrying a weapon as a means of ensuring that his establishment is safe. This highlights the need for policymakers to have a joint stand against gun control as opposed to having each state create its policies. For example, there would be a crisis in the event that a licensed gun holder in Virginia for instance, carried and used his gun in Ohio or another state that disallows arms bearing for unlicensed persons (Zakaria, 2015).
Conclusion
Gun control policies in America need to make several considerations including the provisions of The Second Amendment. However, when the use of arms becomes an issue of national concern due to frequent and fatal attacks on unarmed civilians, there is need for stakeholders and policy makers to create laws that consider the safety of all citizens. These could focus on assessing the suitability individuals to bear arms among other means that could help regulate the number of guns in use.