论文部分内容阅读
Guns put everyone at risk， regardless of one position in the society. Yet， it is not such easy to implement stricter gun control plan.
面对枪击惨案频频发生，在美国，无论总统、议员，还是平民百姓，人人都有可能面临威胁，而美国执行更严厉的枪支管制却并不那么容易。
Constitution Protects the Right of Gun Ownership
宪法保护民众持枪
The United States is the world's first and so far the only country to allow its citizens to have guns. The voice of opposing gun rights isn’t something new. The right of gun ownership originated from the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution： A well-regulated militia， being necessary to the security of a free State， the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
When the first group of Europeans came to North America in the 16th century， they had to face a vast wilderness and to fight against the Indians who tried to protect their homelands， and ever since then they have realized the importance of having guns. At that time， the society was so dispersed that the government could hardly provide effective protection to their citizens， so citizens could only rely on its own strengthens， and the guns played an important role in providing protection.
Subsequently during the American War of Independence， the decisive role played by the militia made bearing guns more meaningful. All states acknowledged the right of citizens to bear guns， recognizing bearing gun as the basic measure of defending civil rights， state rights， freedom and peace. It was the first shot fired by the militia in Lexington that marked the outbreak of the War of Independence. To many Americans， the initial reason why the United States could achieve independence is that every American had guns. During the American Civil War， in order to ensure the victory of the Union， the Lincoln’s administration strongly encouraged weapons producing and equipped people of the North with weapons. It reinforced the importance of gun in American minds.
Because of such history， the US has the unique gun laws. According to the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution， the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Although the society has gone through earth-shaking changes， Americans have not amended this provision.
美国是世界上第一个，也是至今唯一公民普遍有持枪权利的国家，反对公民普遍有持枪权利的呼声并非现在才有。公民普遍有持枪权利，法律上它源于美国宪法修正案第二条：管理良好的民兵是保障自由州的安全所必需，因此人民持有和携带武器的权利不得侵犯。
16世纪第一批欧洲人来到北美大陆时，面对广袤的荒野，不时要和保卫家园的印第安人作战，从那时起人们已知道持枪的重要。当时的社会松散，政府难以提供有效保护，可以信赖的就是自身的力量，而枪支在保障人身安全方面的作用举足轻重。 随后的美国独立战争期间，民兵发挥的决定性作用又为持枪增加了神圣的意味。使各州人民普遍认识到公民普遍有持枪权利是公民权和州权的基本内容之一，是捍卫公民权和州权的最后手段，是保卫自由与和平的一道钢铁防线。正是民兵在莱克星顿打响了第一枪，为独立战争拉开序幕。在许多美国人看来，最初美国之所以能够获得独立，很大程度上是因为人手一支枪。美国内战期间，林肯政府为了确保北方的胜利，大力鼓励武器生产和武装北方的民众，从而进一步确立了枪支在美国人心目中的地位。
正是因为这样的历史，所以美国有独特的涉枪法律。根据美国宪法第二修正案，公民拥有和携带武器的权利不受侵犯。虽然说如今的社会已经发生翻天覆地的变化，但视宪法为“圣经”的美国人，对宪法这项规定却没有随便“与时俱进”，而是很珍惜。
Interest Groups Intervene Forcefully
利益集团强行介入
Apart from the history and culture and the shared belief that it’s the human rather than the guns that kill people； the relentless obstruction from the interest groups also makes imposing gun control so difficult. The National Rifle Association is the most typical example.
In the late 19th century， after the American Civil War， the prevalence of marksmanship culture in American society led to the establishment of National Rifle Association as an organization of promoting the shooting sports. This organization popularized the gun knowledge nationwide， provided training， and issued certificates to some local shooting clubs and members.
After the Gun Control Act was passed in the United States in 1968， the National Rifle Association gradually evolved into a lobby group that advocate armed self-defense and oppose gun control. Fueled by the association， gun control becomes a national political issue.
The Association currently has about 4 million members， and former U.S. President Ronald Reagan， George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush are all life members of the association. The association is also well-funded as it received $ 253 million donation from gun manufacturers and distributors in 2010 alone， and there is no less than $ 100 million donation in other years.
Paul Waldman， an American scholar who has well studied the conservative movement in the US politics， said that the National Rifle Association has an “extraordinary political influence” as it has a lot of money and wide range connections to grass-roots organizations， and can affect the results of elections. Politicians are proud of winning its support.
In addition， there are some more radical groups， such as the Second Amendment Sisters， the Second Amendment Foundation， the Jewish Association for the Maintenance of Gun Ownership， the Pink Pistol and the Gun Owners of America， to support private gun ownership.
The view of the National Rifle Association on gun plan is： Do not re-introduce new gun control laws while implement the existing gun control laws. The slogan of these radical groups is： “We boycott any gun control laws which violate the spirit of the Constitution， and we hope that all be repealed！” 之所以控枪如此之难，除了历史文化以及“杀人的是人，而不是枪”的观念之外，在枪支交易中获得好处的利益集团不断阻挠，也是一个重要因素。其中以“全国步枪协会”最为典型。
19世纪后期美国南北战争之后，当时美国社会盛行练枪法的风气，全国步枪协会作为推广射击体育项目的组织应运而生。该组织在全国范围内普及用枪知识，提供培训，并给地方一些射击俱乐部及成员颁发证书。
在1968年美国通过《枪支管制法》后，该协会逐步演变成一个主张持枪自卫、反对枪支管制的游说团体。在其推波助澜下，枪支管制逐渐成为了一个全国性的政治议题。
目前该协会拥有约400万名会员，美国前总统里根、老布什和小布什都是该协会的终身会员。该协会资金雄厚，仅2010年从枪支制造商和经销商中得到的赞助就多达2.53亿美元，其他年份也都不下1亿美元。
对保守派政治运动颇有研究的美国学者保罗·瓦尔德曼说，“全国步枪协会”拥有“超乎寻常的政治能量”，它手握大量资金并拥有广泛的基层组织，可以影响选举结果，政治人物更以获得它的支持为荣。
此外，还有一些更为激进的支持私人持枪的团体，比如“第二修正案姐妹”、“第二修正案基金会”、“犹太人维护枪支所有权协会”、“粉红手枪”、“美国枪支拥有者协会”等。
美国步枪协会的观点是：不要再出台新的枪支管制法了，只要执行已有法律就行了。而这些激进组织的口号则是——我们抵制违反宪法精神的枪支管制法，我们希望统统予以废除！
Partisan Tendencies and Regional Divisions
党派倾向与地域色彩
In addition， the division of opinions among political parties and regions has also limited the gun control agenda. Although debates over gun control do not have a clear partisan demarcation， the majority of Republicans， in general， are pro- armed self defense while Democrats are mostly anti-armed self defense. When a Democrat Bill Clinton came into power， he highlighted gun control and several gun control laws were passed in succession， including background checks for all gun buyers and creating a mandatory period after purchase etc. However， when a Republican G.W. Bush took office， some measures were taken to loosen the gun control.
Also， there are regional differences in gun control. In the mountainous areas like the South and the Midwest， people love hunting， and are traditionally dependent on guns for self-defense. In addition， those regions are relatively conservative. Therefore， the public opinion tends to pro-armed self-defense. However， the urban-concentrated areas in New England and California are densely populated and the voice of advocating the gun control is relatively high out of concerns about the crime increase. And this is why the states expanding citizens' rights in self-defense majorly locate in the West and the South.
This differentiation has a direct impact on passing the bill in the congress. More often than not， senators from the most rural constituency in the South and the Midwest are against the gun control， while those from the northern areas and urban areas majorly support gun control.
Even though many Americans support gun control， they aren’t as firm as those who support the gun-ownership right， because the view of US citizens and the role of governments and individual rights have far-reaching impact on public attitudes. Thus， although the majority of people support the proper gun control， they don’t want to strictly forbid the private possession of guns. Many people hold an ambiguous and wavering stance over guns with significant emotional inclination. Normally， a shocking shooting case is a catalyst for the promotion of gun control legislation； once those events are overtaken， the attention of the gun control will drop. If the Republican Party is in power， it will have the organizations against gun control stage a comeback， or promote an overthrow of the previous laws， or enact laws to safeguard the rights of gun owners.
The Democratic Party has paid a heavy price for strengthening gun control. The Democratic-controlled Congress passed the bill of the implementation of background checks on pistols purchasers in 1993 and the bill of prohibiting private possession of offensive guns in 1994. As a result， in the 1994 mid-term Congressional elections， the Democratic Party lost its majority in the House and Senate. President Bill Clinton said that the two bills could be one of the reasons for the election defeat of the Democratic Party.
Because of these factors， although the shooting incidents happen one after another， gun control is still extremely difficult for the U.S. government and society.
除却上述原因之外，各党派、不同地域之间对于持枪问题的争论，也导致控枪问迟迟未能提上日程。关于枪支问题的争论虽并不严格以党派划界，但总的说来，支持持枪自卫的共和党人居多，而反对者以民主党人居多。民主党的克林顿执政以后，着重提出进行枪支管制，陆续通过了几项枪支管制法，主要也是在对购枪者进行背景检查、购买等待期的长短等方面做文章。但等到共和党的布什上台后，则又采取了一些有利于放松管制枪支的措施。
相比之下，枪支争论的地域色彩则更为浓厚。在美国南部和中西部山区，人们钟爱打猎，传统上依赖枪支防身，加之当地人思想保守，所以民意倾向于支持持枪自卫；在城市比较集中的地区，比如美国东北部新英格兰地区及西海岸的加州，人口密集，出于对犯罪率上升的担忧，主张枪支管制的呼声较高。这也是近来扩大公民自卫权的州多在西部和南部的原因。
这种分化直接影响了国会议员的投票行为，往往来自美国南部、中西部各州广大乡村选区的议员反对枪支管制，而来自北方地区、城市地带的国会议员大多支持枪支管制。
尽管不少美国民众支持枪支管制，但他们并不像维护枪支权利人士那样立场坚定，因为在枪支问题上，更为深远地影响到公众态度的一个重要因素，说到底是美国民众对于政府角色和个人权利的看法。
因此，尽管大多数民众支持对枪支进行适当管制，但也不愿严格到禁止个人拥有枪支。许多人处在一种模棱两可、犹豫不定的状态，并带有明显的情绪化色彩。通常，一起令人震惊的枪击案会成为推动管制枪支立法的一个催化剂；可一旦事过境迁，对于枪支问题的关注度就会下降。如果恰逢共和党执政时期，反对枪支管制的组织就会卷土重来，或者推翻早先的法律，或者制定法律来维护持枪者的权利。
向来支持加强枪支管控的民主党为此付出过沉重代价。由民主党控制的国会1993年通过对手枪购买者实施背景调查的法案，1994年又通过禁止私人持有攻击性枪支的法案。结果在1994年的国会中期选举中，民主党失去了参、众两院的多数席位。时任总统克林顿曾表示，这两个法案极有可能是民主党选举失利的原因之一。
正是因为这些因素，尽管枪击事件层出不穷，但对于美国政府和美国社会来说，控枪仍然是难于上青天的一件事。
面对枪击惨案频频发生，在美国，无论总统、议员，还是平民百姓，人人都有可能面临威胁，而美国执行更严厉的枪支管制却并不那么容易。
Constitution Protects the Right of Gun Ownership
宪法保护民众持枪
The United States is the world's first and so far the only country to allow its citizens to have guns. The voice of opposing gun rights isn’t something new. The right of gun ownership originated from the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution： A well-regulated militia， being necessary to the security of a free State， the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
When the first group of Europeans came to North America in the 16th century， they had to face a vast wilderness and to fight against the Indians who tried to protect their homelands， and ever since then they have realized the importance of having guns. At that time， the society was so dispersed that the government could hardly provide effective protection to their citizens， so citizens could only rely on its own strengthens， and the guns played an important role in providing protection.
Subsequently during the American War of Independence， the decisive role played by the militia made bearing guns more meaningful. All states acknowledged the right of citizens to bear guns， recognizing bearing gun as the basic measure of defending civil rights， state rights， freedom and peace. It was the first shot fired by the militia in Lexington that marked the outbreak of the War of Independence. To many Americans， the initial reason why the United States could achieve independence is that every American had guns. During the American Civil War， in order to ensure the victory of the Union， the Lincoln’s administration strongly encouraged weapons producing and equipped people of the North with weapons. It reinforced the importance of gun in American minds.
Because of such history， the US has the unique gun laws. According to the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution， the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Although the society has gone through earth-shaking changes， Americans have not amended this provision.
美国是世界上第一个，也是至今唯一公民普遍有持枪权利的国家，反对公民普遍有持枪权利的呼声并非现在才有。公民普遍有持枪权利，法律上它源于美国宪法修正案第二条：管理良好的民兵是保障自由州的安全所必需，因此人民持有和携带武器的权利不得侵犯。
16世纪第一批欧洲人来到北美大陆时，面对广袤的荒野，不时要和保卫家园的印第安人作战，从那时起人们已知道持枪的重要。当时的社会松散，政府难以提供有效保护，可以信赖的就是自身的力量，而枪支在保障人身安全方面的作用举足轻重。 随后的美国独立战争期间，民兵发挥的决定性作用又为持枪增加了神圣的意味。使各州人民普遍认识到公民普遍有持枪权利是公民权和州权的基本内容之一，是捍卫公民权和州权的最后手段，是保卫自由与和平的一道钢铁防线。正是民兵在莱克星顿打响了第一枪，为独立战争拉开序幕。在许多美国人看来，最初美国之所以能够获得独立，很大程度上是因为人手一支枪。美国内战期间，林肯政府为了确保北方的胜利，大力鼓励武器生产和武装北方的民众，从而进一步确立了枪支在美国人心目中的地位。
正是因为这样的历史，所以美国有独特的涉枪法律。根据美国宪法第二修正案，公民拥有和携带武器的权利不受侵犯。虽然说如今的社会已经发生翻天覆地的变化，但视宪法为“圣经”的美国人，对宪法这项规定却没有随便“与时俱进”，而是很珍惜。
Interest Groups Intervene Forcefully
利益集团强行介入
Apart from the history and culture and the shared belief that it’s the human rather than the guns that kill people； the relentless obstruction from the interest groups also makes imposing gun control so difficult. The National Rifle Association is the most typical example.
In the late 19th century， after the American Civil War， the prevalence of marksmanship culture in American society led to the establishment of National Rifle Association as an organization of promoting the shooting sports. This organization popularized the gun knowledge nationwide， provided training， and issued certificates to some local shooting clubs and members.
After the Gun Control Act was passed in the United States in 1968， the National Rifle Association gradually evolved into a lobby group that advocate armed self-defense and oppose gun control. Fueled by the association， gun control becomes a national political issue.
The Association currently has about 4 million members， and former U.S. President Ronald Reagan， George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush are all life members of the association. The association is also well-funded as it received $ 253 million donation from gun manufacturers and distributors in 2010 alone， and there is no less than $ 100 million donation in other years.
Paul Waldman， an American scholar who has well studied the conservative movement in the US politics， said that the National Rifle Association has an “extraordinary political influence” as it has a lot of money and wide range connections to grass-roots organizations， and can affect the results of elections. Politicians are proud of winning its support.
In addition， there are some more radical groups， such as the Second Amendment Sisters， the Second Amendment Foundation， the Jewish Association for the Maintenance of Gun Ownership， the Pink Pistol and the Gun Owners of America， to support private gun ownership.
The view of the National Rifle Association on gun plan is： Do not re-introduce new gun control laws while implement the existing gun control laws. The slogan of these radical groups is： “We boycott any gun control laws which violate the spirit of the Constitution， and we hope that all be repealed！” 之所以控枪如此之难，除了历史文化以及“杀人的是人，而不是枪”的观念之外，在枪支交易中获得好处的利益集团不断阻挠，也是一个重要因素。其中以“全国步枪协会”最为典型。
19世纪后期美国南北战争之后，当时美国社会盛行练枪法的风气，全国步枪协会作为推广射击体育项目的组织应运而生。该组织在全国范围内普及用枪知识，提供培训，并给地方一些射击俱乐部及成员颁发证书。
在1968年美国通过《枪支管制法》后，该协会逐步演变成一个主张持枪自卫、反对枪支管制的游说团体。在其推波助澜下，枪支管制逐渐成为了一个全国性的政治议题。
目前该协会拥有约400万名会员，美国前总统里根、老布什和小布什都是该协会的终身会员。该协会资金雄厚，仅2010年从枪支制造商和经销商中得到的赞助就多达2.53亿美元，其他年份也都不下1亿美元。
对保守派政治运动颇有研究的美国学者保罗·瓦尔德曼说，“全国步枪协会”拥有“超乎寻常的政治能量”，它手握大量资金并拥有广泛的基层组织，可以影响选举结果，政治人物更以获得它的支持为荣。
此外，还有一些更为激进的支持私人持枪的团体，比如“第二修正案姐妹”、“第二修正案基金会”、“犹太人维护枪支所有权协会”、“粉红手枪”、“美国枪支拥有者协会”等。
美国步枪协会的观点是：不要再出台新的枪支管制法了，只要执行已有法律就行了。而这些激进组织的口号则是——我们抵制违反宪法精神的枪支管制法，我们希望统统予以废除！
Partisan Tendencies and Regional Divisions
党派倾向与地域色彩
In addition， the division of opinions among political parties and regions has also limited the gun control agenda. Although debates over gun control do not have a clear partisan demarcation， the majority of Republicans， in general， are pro- armed self defense while Democrats are mostly anti-armed self defense. When a Democrat Bill Clinton came into power， he highlighted gun control and several gun control laws were passed in succession， including background checks for all gun buyers and creating a mandatory period after purchase etc. However， when a Republican G.W. Bush took office， some measures were taken to loosen the gun control.
Also， there are regional differences in gun control. In the mountainous areas like the South and the Midwest， people love hunting， and are traditionally dependent on guns for self-defense. In addition， those regions are relatively conservative. Therefore， the public opinion tends to pro-armed self-defense. However， the urban-concentrated areas in New England and California are densely populated and the voice of advocating the gun control is relatively high out of concerns about the crime increase. And this is why the states expanding citizens' rights in self-defense majorly locate in the West and the South.
This differentiation has a direct impact on passing the bill in the congress. More often than not， senators from the most rural constituency in the South and the Midwest are against the gun control， while those from the northern areas and urban areas majorly support gun control.
Even though many Americans support gun control， they aren’t as firm as those who support the gun-ownership right， because the view of US citizens and the role of governments and individual rights have far-reaching impact on public attitudes. Thus， although the majority of people support the proper gun control， they don’t want to strictly forbid the private possession of guns. Many people hold an ambiguous and wavering stance over guns with significant emotional inclination. Normally， a shocking shooting case is a catalyst for the promotion of gun control legislation； once those events are overtaken， the attention of the gun control will drop. If the Republican Party is in power， it will have the organizations against gun control stage a comeback， or promote an overthrow of the previous laws， or enact laws to safeguard the rights of gun owners.
The Democratic Party has paid a heavy price for strengthening gun control. The Democratic-controlled Congress passed the bill of the implementation of background checks on pistols purchasers in 1993 and the bill of prohibiting private possession of offensive guns in 1994. As a result， in the 1994 mid-term Congressional elections， the Democratic Party lost its majority in the House and Senate. President Bill Clinton said that the two bills could be one of the reasons for the election defeat of the Democratic Party.
Because of these factors， although the shooting incidents happen one after another， gun control is still extremely difficult for the U.S. government and society.
除却上述原因之外，各党派、不同地域之间对于持枪问题的争论，也导致控枪问迟迟未能提上日程。关于枪支问题的争论虽并不严格以党派划界，但总的说来，支持持枪自卫的共和党人居多，而反对者以民主党人居多。民主党的克林顿执政以后，着重提出进行枪支管制，陆续通过了几项枪支管制法，主要也是在对购枪者进行背景检查、购买等待期的长短等方面做文章。但等到共和党的布什上台后，则又采取了一些有利于放松管制枪支的措施。
相比之下，枪支争论的地域色彩则更为浓厚。在美国南部和中西部山区，人们钟爱打猎，传统上依赖枪支防身，加之当地人思想保守，所以民意倾向于支持持枪自卫；在城市比较集中的地区，比如美国东北部新英格兰地区及西海岸的加州，人口密集，出于对犯罪率上升的担忧，主张枪支管制的呼声较高。这也是近来扩大公民自卫权的州多在西部和南部的原因。
这种分化直接影响了国会议员的投票行为，往往来自美国南部、中西部各州广大乡村选区的议员反对枪支管制，而来自北方地区、城市地带的国会议员大多支持枪支管制。
尽管不少美国民众支持枪支管制，但他们并不像维护枪支权利人士那样立场坚定，因为在枪支问题上，更为深远地影响到公众态度的一个重要因素，说到底是美国民众对于政府角色和个人权利的看法。
因此，尽管大多数民众支持对枪支进行适当管制，但也不愿严格到禁止个人拥有枪支。许多人处在一种模棱两可、犹豫不定的状态，并带有明显的情绪化色彩。通常，一起令人震惊的枪击案会成为推动管制枪支立法的一个催化剂；可一旦事过境迁，对于枪支问题的关注度就会下降。如果恰逢共和党执政时期，反对枪支管制的组织就会卷土重来，或者推翻早先的法律，或者制定法律来维护持枪者的权利。
向来支持加强枪支管控的民主党为此付出过沉重代价。由民主党控制的国会1993年通过对手枪购买者实施背景调查的法案，1994年又通过禁止私人持有攻击性枪支的法案。结果在1994年的国会中期选举中，民主党失去了参、众两院的多数席位。时任总统克林顿曾表示，这两个法案极有可能是民主党选举失利的原因之一。
正是因为这些因素，尽管枪击事件层出不穷，但对于美国政府和美国社会来说，控枪仍然是难于上青天的一件事。