Balancing Bruen and Public Safety
Presentation Type
Poster
Faculty Advisor
Thomas Loikith
Access Type
Event
Start Date
26-4-2024 12:45 PM
End Date
26-4-2024 1:44 PM
Description
In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled on New York State Pistol and Rifle Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which ended the “may issue” scheme for concealed carry state firearm permits. With handguns being the choice of firearm in the vast majority of gun crime in the United States, and the choice of firearm in the majority of mass shootings, this loosening of restrictions is an unproven national test of the Second Amendment. This new constitutional interpretation presents a challenge for the states: balancing this unprecedented change in firearm jurisprudence and public safety. This is a unique and complex problem requiring interdisciplinary research to have a more conclusive understanding of this dilemma, and for possible solutions to be presented. I have utilized the disciplines of law and public policy for my research. I have used qualitative research methodology to analyze and find common ground integrations in both. The legal discipline seeks to track the historical development of firearm jurisprudence prior to the touchstone case. The public policy discipline seeks to analyze public policy regarding handguns and their effectiveness. Following this, I sought to integrate common insights between both disciplines to reach a greater understanding of the problem, and to present possible solutions and new avenues of research. The research and analysis of both disciplines suggest that the implementation of additional firearm acquisition restrictions, and restricting carry in specific locations may result in a reduction in firearm homicide rates, and result in greater public safety while maintaining the standard set in Bruen.
Balancing Bruen and Public Safety
In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled on New York State Pistol and Rifle Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which ended the “may issue” scheme for concealed carry state firearm permits. With handguns being the choice of firearm in the vast majority of gun crime in the United States, and the choice of firearm in the majority of mass shootings, this loosening of restrictions is an unproven national test of the Second Amendment. This new constitutional interpretation presents a challenge for the states: balancing this unprecedented change in firearm jurisprudence and public safety. This is a unique and complex problem requiring interdisciplinary research to have a more conclusive understanding of this dilemma, and for possible solutions to be presented. I have utilized the disciplines of law and public policy for my research. I have used qualitative research methodology to analyze and find common ground integrations in both. The legal discipline seeks to track the historical development of firearm jurisprudence prior to the touchstone case. The public policy discipline seeks to analyze public policy regarding handguns and their effectiveness. Following this, I sought to integrate common insights between both disciplines to reach a greater understanding of the problem, and to present possible solutions and new avenues of research. The research and analysis of both disciplines suggest that the implementation of additional firearm acquisition restrictions, and restricting carry in specific locations may result in a reduction in firearm homicide rates, and result in greater public safety while maintaining the standard set in Bruen.