With the increasing number of mass murders occurring across the nation, gun control has again become staple topic for discussion everywhere. From Virginia Tech to Cleveland's Success Tech Academy to Nickel Mines in Pennsylvania to Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut, debates are going on regarding the stance on gun ownership and gun control. The issue has always generated a buzz on the political and social arena regarding the availability and restriction of guns in the country. It has caused a great divide among people as one sector of society believes and endorses the use of firearms, while another division pushes for stricter gun control measures. Control or restrictions on the use of guns, according to pro gun control advocates, is needed to ensure that guns are owned by responsible owners, and not by unlawful individuals. Thus, the problem of the law is that guns can be used both ways, that is, make criminals out of normally harmless individuals or create more victims. Should teachers be allowed to carry concealed firearms in schools? Should homeowners be allowed to keep guns at home? Are guns the solution to peaceful living in the neighborhood? With the advent of the shootings, it is not a surprise that more people opt to protect themselves and prevent the killing of otherwise innocent victims. Thus, I believe that citizens must be permitted to own guns without curtailing an individual's right to gun ownership.
First of all, banning ownership of guns or even prohibiting the citizens from using it in public, does not make the tool less dangerous. Regardless whether use of guns is prohibited and turned into law, the mere fact that it can be used to kill people already makes it dangerous. However, guns per se do not hurt people nor does owning guns. People who have guns are responsible gun owners and know its harmful effects. Thus, they do not go out of their way to show it to other people. While it is true that owning a gun changes how people respond to situations, the fact still remains that the mere ownership of guns do not contribute to tragedy (Myers) unless it is explicitly used to inflict harm on another human being.
In addition, there are other types of assault weapons that can be used to inflict harm, such as knives and rocks. Does that mean these, too, should be banned in order to ensure the safety of the people? Banning any type of assaults weapon does not guarantee violence and crimes will decrease especially since only a few of the various types of weapons are banned, while some of them are even banned primarily because of features and accessories associated with the weapon, but not with how the guns are actually used (Lee).
Secondly, restricting gun ownership does not guarantee that the world will be a safe place to live in, as guns do not kill people, people kill each other. As I said, most gun owners are responsible owners and are very much aware about the ill effects of gun incidences. However, the blame should not be put on the gun itself, but on the person who used the gun. Take the case of the mass murders that happened in Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Newton. What is common among the three is that all schools are gun-free zones, which made it easier for the perpetrators to carry out their plans. In the article "There's a Reason They Choose Schools", Wheeler (2007) points out that the "no guns policy" did not stop Cho Seung-Hui from attacking the students in campus. The policy on gun control did not save the victims from their assailants. In fact, the typical first-responders in situations involving shootings are those armed with guns as well.
Likewise, too much emphasis is placed on how guns are used as weapons of assault, thus becoming the root causes of criminal behavior. However, a glaring truth is that not much is being said about what pushes an individual to commit the murders. Especially when the youths are perpetrators of the crime, it means that this behavior is related to a mental illness that may not have been apparent during the individual's growing up years. The psychological profile of the executor plays an important role in the crimes, thus, blame cannot be pinpointed at guns alone (Simpson).
Thirdly, owning a gun makes owners feel safer as they have a tool that can help them and their families during times of crisis. A popular argument in relation to gun ownership and gun bans is why guns are used to protect politicians from possible assault, and yet the law prohibits the citizenry from using guns to protect themselves against criminals. In a survey conducted by Pew Research (2013), of the 1,500 people surveyed, almost half of those who participated in the survey shared that owning a gun makes them feel protected from criminals and other forms of aggression.
Pro gun supporters also contend that the citizens' right to carry firearms must not be violated as what is stated in the Second Amendment, which calls upon an individual's right to defend himself, especially in the premises of his home. Historically, the Second Amendment allows the government to buy and use firearms for the security of the nation, but what is not clear is whether this right also applies to licensed gun owners (White). What the government must check thoroughly is who the buyer of guns is as gun manufacturers and sellers might unknowingly sell the guns to criminals (Masters).
On the other hand, naysayers of pro gun advocates claim that guns are lethal and regardless of the reason for gun ownership, its only purpose is to kill; therefore, the fewer the number of people owning a gun, the better for the society. This argument already assumes that gun owners cannot responsibly purchase, maintain, and use guns because owning a gun could lead to crimes done on purpose or accidentally. However, this is exactly what happened in Sandy Hook. While the perpetrator used a licensed gun to carry out his plan, the school and the children were left unprotected because no one at school had guns or were ready to handle such crisis.
Alternatively, not all perpetrators of mass murders use guns to execute people. In Alaska, an 18-year old killed four people using a 5-inch knife in March 2008. A man stabbed six police officers to death and inflicted injury to four others using a knife in China in July 2008. In April 1995, 168 people died, while 680 were injured when Timothy McVay blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building using explosives. In The Netherlands, a man purposely drove his car directly into a group of people killing six and injuring 12 more people. In August 2004, four men bashed six people using baseball bats with the intent of stealing an Xbox that belonged to one of the victims. In Australia, a family of five was clubbed to death as they slept in July 2009. All these statistics prove that psychopaths do not need guns to inflict harm on other people, as there are other assault weapons that can be used (Adams).
Another point of contention raised by those in favor of gun control is that use of guns for leisure and sports promotes a glamorized gun culture, which makes gun ownership legal. This results to a desensitized, cold, and indifferent populace when it in fact, the NRA comes to the effects of guns and firearms in general. This is a false assertion because gun owners are responsible and know how and when to use guns. The mentally unstable citizens are the ones that could prove to be a menace to society because they resort to killing without understanding the consequences of their actions – how it affects their families and the families of the victims. As Simpson (2013) points out, society and the government must address this epidemic. When the youths are educated about the use of guns, the psychological side of gun handling, the behavioral changes it brings, the effects on the perpetrators and the victims, and the delusional powers it brings, then the youths become more responsive about the threats that guns bring (Simpson).
In the final analysis of the issue of gun control and gun ownership, the matter has not made any headway at the Federal level. Allegations saying guns are the root cause of evil and murders is false. As pointed out, other objects may be used if an individual intends to inflict pain on another individual. In addition, mentally unstable individuals also have a hand on the crisis of crimes, thus, as the government finds ways to resolve the problem, they must also not forget the role of psychology in the gun ownership issue. It is an epidemic that must be addressed and the earlier solutions are created, the chances of having lesser crimes increases.
In addition, considering the current reality that we face, not having a gun when psychopaths or criminals begin preying their victims makes people vulnerable and defenseless in a possible criminal situation. Criminals have no respect for laws, thus, despite gun control laws instituted by the Federal or state government, criminals will still find ways to acquire guns illegally. Therefore, it is the government's role and responsibility to inform all about the effects of guns on people.
I personally believe that as part of the government's thrust in allowing people to get their own guns for their self-protection, firearms manufacturers must not carry the burden of gun control laws, including the manufacture and selling of the guns to the citizenry. Otherwise, this will be the same as deprivation of the citizens' right to self-defense, especially when responsible gun owners are not allowed to choose the type of firearm they want. Likewise, requiring gun owners to register their own guns may be considered as invasion of privacy and violation of the Second Amendment. When faced with a situation that requires individuals to defend themselves against an attacker who is most likely possessing a gun, it is not fair to remain defenseless and simply let an attacker commit a crime. Gun ownership is not the real cause why heinous crimes are committed. It is generally due to the individual's or assailant's current state of mind at the time of the offense.
Works Cited
Adams, Becket. "Let's Set the Record Straight: 5 Common Misconceptions about Guns & Mass Shootings." 2013. Web. <http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/14/lets-set-the-record-straight-5-common-misconceptions-about-guns-mass-shootings/>.
Lee, Jack. "7 Reasons Why an Assault Weapon Ban Will Fail to Reduce Violent Crime." Polymic. 2013. Web. 25 July 2013. <http://www.policymic.com/articles/23290/7-reasons-why-an-assault-weapons-ban-will-fail-to-reduce-violent-crime>.
Masters, Jonathan. "U.S. Gun Policy: Global Comparisons." Council on Foreign Relations. 2013. Web. 25 July 2013. <http://www.cfr.org/society-and-culture/us-gun-policy-global-comparisons/p29735?cid=ppc-Google_grant-gun_policy_backgrounder&gclid=CNbKkq7gvrgCFa1FMgod3yoA3g>.
Myers, Ryan. "Gun Control Debate: How Owning a Gun Changes the Dynamics of Conflict." Polymic. N.d. Web. 27 July 2013. <http://www.policymic.com/articles/20094/gun-control-debate-how-owning-a-gun-changes-the-dynamics-of-conflict>.
Pew Research. "Why Own a Gun? Protection is Now the Top Reason." Pew Research – Center for the People & the Press. N.d. Web. 27 July 2013. <http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/about-the-survey-60/>.
Simpson, Stan. "Gun Violence Requires Focus on Young." Web. 27 July 2013.
<http://articles.courant.com/2013-01-03/news/hc-op-simpson-gun-violence-requires-focus-on-young-20130103_1_gun-violence-metal-detectors-youth-violence>.
Wheeler, Timothy. "There's a Reason They Choose Schools." 2007. Web. 27 July 2013 <http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/222453/theres-reason-they-choose-schools/timothy-wheeler>.
White, Deborah. "Pros & Cons of Gun Ownership & Use Laws for Individuals." n.d. Web. 27 July 2013. <http://usliberals.about.com/od/patriotactcivilrights/i/ProConGunLaws.htm>.
