Are gun laws in the United States racist? We ask Professor Darrell Miller of Duke Law School to evaluate the history and contemporary landscape of gun laws in the United States and how they relate to race. Prof Miller explains some race-based firearms regulation and sheds light on the nuanced and often complex nature of this critical issue.
Professor Miller begins with a discussion of a number of historical gun laws that were explicitly racist. These regulations singled out former slaves and Black Americans, imposing restrictions and prohibitions on gun access and ownership. The Black Codes (passed in many southern states during Reconstruction), for example, often denied freed persons of color rights to gun ownership.
While some historical gun laws include racially discriminatory language, more recent concerns involve facially neutral laws with racially discriminatory application. Miller explains that gun licensing regimes, for example, granting unfettered discretion have been used by local and state authorities to limit gun access to Black Americans. Miller points out that the practice of applying racially-neutral laws in a racially-biased way is, by no means, limited to gun law. For example, discretionary licensing regimes have been used to restrict Blacks from a number of rights and privileges such as restricting their ability to gain employment in skilled trades and blocking access to housing or to state benefits.
In concluding, Miller explains that the legacy of racially-biased gun laws should not disqualify gun regulation more broadly. Given the history of race-based slavery in the United States, many laws are tarnished by racial bias in their history. Historical bias, however, cannot prevent governments from developing modern laws to solve modern problems. For example, licensing requirements for doctors or lawyers, despite racial biases in the past, serve consumer protection and quality control purposes. Miller cautions that if we overread our flawed history, we may undervalue the costs of failing to act.