The ethics of restrictive licensing for handguns: Comparing the United States and Canadian approaches to handgun regulation

Jon S. Vernick, James G. Hodge, Daniel W. Webster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

The United States and Canada regulate frearms, particularly handguns, quite differently. With only a few state and local exceptions, the U.S. approach emphasizes the ability of most individuals to purchase, possess, and carry handguns. By comparison, Canada has a form of restrictive licensing for handguns that places a premium on community safety. The authors first review the potential individual and community level harms and benefits associated with these differing fre-arm policies. Using this information, they explore the ethical dimensions of the U.S. and Canadian approaches through three major themes of autonomy, prevention of harms, and social justice. The authors conclude that the Canadian approach is consistent with respect for the autonomy of persons, fosters the prevention of harms, and more appropriately furthers social justice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)668-678
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Law, Medicine and Ethics
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Health Policy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The ethics of restrictive licensing for handguns: Comparing the United States and Canadian approaches to handgun regulation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this