{"title":"美国的武装联邦制、枪支市场和持枪权","authors":"Jonathan Obert","doi":"10.1093/publius/pjae020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article argues that fragmented and varied regulatory, cultural, and electoral responses to guns and gun rights in the contemporary United States are a result of two long-standing features of American political life––its tradition of armed federalism and its unique, domestically oriented market for small firearms. As a result of the intersection of these two phenomena, the past 150 years have seen the growth of a fragmentary regulatory response to firearms on the part of local, state, and federal jurisdictions; the emergence of an organized national gun-rights movement; and, most significantly, the ascendance of a legal strategy by supporters of gun-rights constitutionalism. Only by examining the historical contingencies of American political institutions and markets does the contested transformation of a “right to bear arms” into gun rights make sense.","PeriodicalId":507126,"journal":{"name":"Publius: The Journal of Federalism","volume":"97 49","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Armed Federalism, Gun Markets, and the Right to Bear Arms in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Obert\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/publius/pjae020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article argues that fragmented and varied regulatory, cultural, and electoral responses to guns and gun rights in the contemporary United States are a result of two long-standing features of American political life––its tradition of armed federalism and its unique, domestically oriented market for small firearms. As a result of the intersection of these two phenomena, the past 150 years have seen the growth of a fragmentary regulatory response to firearms on the part of local, state, and federal jurisdictions; the emergence of an organized national gun-rights movement; and, most significantly, the ascendance of a legal strategy by supporters of gun-rights constitutionalism. Only by examining the historical contingencies of American political institutions and markets does the contested transformation of a “right to bear arms” into gun rights make sense.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publius: The Journal of Federalism\",\"volume\":\"97 49\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Publius: The Journal of Federalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjae020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publius: The Journal of Federalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjae020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Armed Federalism, Gun Markets, and the Right to Bear Arms in the United States
This article argues that fragmented and varied regulatory, cultural, and electoral responses to guns and gun rights in the contemporary United States are a result of two long-standing features of American political life––its tradition of armed federalism and its unique, domestically oriented market for small firearms. As a result of the intersection of these two phenomena, the past 150 years have seen the growth of a fragmentary regulatory response to firearms on the part of local, state, and federal jurisdictions; the emergence of an organized national gun-rights movement; and, most significantly, the ascendance of a legal strategy by supporters of gun-rights constitutionalism. Only by examining the historical contingencies of American political institutions and markets does the contested transformation of a “right to bear arms” into gun rights make sense.