Covers firearms safety and laws in Washington State

Americans have an ambivalent relationship to guns. The debate over the role of guns and gun regulations in American society tends to be acrimonious and misinformed. DeGrazia and Hunt bring the advantages of philosophical analysis to this highly-charged issue in the service of illuminating the strongest possible cases for and against (relatively extensive) gun regulations.

The benefits of gun ownership -- The costs of firearms -- Philosophical roots of the right to arms and of opposition to the right -- The right to arms in the Second Amendment and state constitutions: cases and commentary -- Guns and identity: race, gender, class, and culture.

A former editor at the New York Times examines the war over gun control in America and the rigid and intolerant ideologies that have informed the debate on both sides for more than 50 years. 20,000 first printing.

The growing concern over the number of accidental firearm shootings, especially those involving children, prompted passage of the initial handgun safety law which went into effect in 1994. The stated intent of the California Legislature in enacting the current FSC law is for persons who obtain firearms to have a basic familiarity with those firearms, including, but not limited to, the safe handling and storage of those firearms. The statutory authority for this program is contained in Penal Code sections 26840 and 31610 through 31700. These statutes mandate DOJ to develop, implement and maintain the FSC Program. Pursuant to Penal Code section 26840, a firearms dealer cannot deliver a firearm unless the person receiving the firearm presents a valid FSC, which is obtained by passing a written test on firearm safety. Prior to taking delivery of a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer, the purchaser/recipient must also successfully perform a safe handling demonstration with that firearm..

Many have argued in recent years that the U.S. constitutional system exalts individual rights over responsibilities, virtues, and the common good. Answering the charges against liberal theories of rights, James Fleming and Linda McClain develop and defend a civic liberalism that takes responsibilities and virtues—as well as rights—seriously. They provide an account of ordered liberty that protects basic liberties stringently, but not absolutely, and permits government to encourage responsibility and inculcate civic virtues without sacrificing personal autonomy to collective determination. The battle over same-sex marriage is one of many current controversies the authors use to defend their understanding of the relationship among rights, responsibilities, and virtues. Against accusations that same-sex marriage severs the rights of marriage from responsible sexuality, procreation, and parenthood, they argue that same-sex couples seek the same rights, responsibilities, and goods of civil marriage that opposite-sex couples pursue. Securing their right to marry respects individual autonomy while also promoting moral goods and virtues. Other issues to which they apply their idea of civic liberalism include reproductive freedom, the proper roles and regulation of civil society and the family, the education of children, and clashes between First Amendment freedoms (of association and religion) and antidiscrimination law. Articulating common ground between liberalism and its critics, Fleming and McClain develop an account of responsibilities and virtues that appreciates the value of diversity in our morally pluralistic constitutional democracy.