Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leff, C. S.
Right arrow Articles by Leff, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Politics of Ineffectiveness: Federal Firearms Legislation, 1919-38

Carol Skalnik Leff

Mark H. Leff

The federal firearms legislation proposed and enacted between the two world wars, although a breakthrough in federal activism on the issue, left a neutral legacy for future regulatory efforts. The 1927 statute barred handguns from the U.S. postal system without closing off alternative shipping routes. The National Firearms Act of 1934 ultimately limited its registration provisions to "gangster" weapons, like machine guns. The more inclusive Federal Firearms Act of 1938 proved impossible to effectively enforce. In view of the New Deal Justice Department's ambitious regulatory pro posals, which would be considered far-reaching even by later standards, this lackluster record proved decidedly anti- climactic. The minimal impact of federal law was partially rooted in the low enforcement priorities of the Treasury De partment and was in part attributable to the influence of a traditional individualist ethos hostile to the "civilizing" pre tensions of federal intervention. But just as important as the administrative and cultural barriers to gun control effective ness was the character of the policymaking process. Anti- regulation forces out-organized Justice Department regu lators, with their vaguer public anticrime constituency, and parlayed their intensive commitment into a formidable in fluence on the legislative outcome. This capacity to circum scribe federal initiatives helped to neutralize the impact of the first federal gun control legislation.

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 455, No. 1, 48-62 (1981)
DOI: 10.1177/000271628145500106


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
American Behavioral ScientistHome page
G. KLECK
Crime, Culture Conflict and the Sources of Support for Gun Control: A Multilevel Application of the General Social Surveys
American Behavioral Scientist, February 1, 1996; 39(4): 387 - 404.
[Abstract]