|
Abstract: In general, persons in the U.S. without a very specific disqualifying criminal or mental health history, or some other prohibited status, may purchase or possess firearms. This policy choice generally allows most people who wish to own a handgun to do so. The U.S. approach to the sale and possession of firearms, particularly handguns, is unusual among high-income, developed countries. Canada, for example, requires prospective buyers to first obtain a permit to purchase a handgun. In order to get the permit, the buyer must undergo an extensive background check often requiring weeks to complete and demonstrate a valid reason for needing the handgun. The U.S. approach emphasizes the ability of individuals to own guns and even carry concealed weapons in public, whereas the Canadian approach generally places a premium on the health and safety of communities.
In this article, we explore the ethical dimensions of the U.S. versus Canadian approaches to the regulation of handguns through the three major themes of autonomy, prevention of harms, and social justice. We argue that the Canadian approach is ethically justified. Our aim is to inform future public policy, as the U.S. and other countries wrestle with the appropriate policy responses to tragedies like the Virginia Tech University shootings in 2007, as well as the daily toll of gun violence within the population.
|