The twenty-first century, however, has brought a steady rise in crime within society, which has escalated the debate over gun legislation. As stated before, the Second Amendment granted the right of a qualified citizen to own a gun. This modern debate has not been over the legitimacy of that amendment, but whether existing gun laws are sufficient, or if stricter gun laws need to be imposed. Over the years, there have been three major federal statutes that have regulated the possession of firearms. One was the National Firearms Act of 1934, which made it difficult to obtain lethal assault weapons, such as machine guns. It also placed heavy taxes on all aspects of the weapons' production and distribution process.
The second vital statute was the Gun Control Act of 1968, which mostly required all persons manufacturing, importing, or selling firearms as a business to be federally licensed. It also required gun dealers to maintain records of all commercial gun sales.3 The third, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, required background checks for firearm transfers between federally licensed firearm dealers and non-licensed persons. Though such an act placed restrictions on licensed, regulated sales of guns, there still remains a problem: the government has yet to enact a law that places restrictions on private, unregulated sales. For example, gun shows around the country serve as the largest marketplace for private sellers who can easily connect with customers looking to avoid detection. Without a government law that monitors these private, unlicensed sales, guns are constantly falling into the hands of potential ex-convicts who are looking for an easy source of guns. This "gun show loophole"" has resulted in liberals protesting the neglect of a national law to further restrict these private dealers.
A solution to my problem has nothing to do with modifying the second amendment.
