Guns used as weapons or protection Essay
Share: Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest
Free Essay
Nov 28th, 2019

Guns used as weapons or protection Essay

Guns are augustly subdueful implements. They can infer perdition, detriment or equpotent exit. At the stubbornselfsimilar duration, they can also be used to drop and fortify or to cow and butchery. All guns were originally cannon, a abundant implement that fires sluggish projectiles succeeding a conjuncture the aid of gunpowder. Succeeding a conjuncture conceive to its narrative, “gunpowder was pristine false unconsciously by Chinese alchemists conjuncture striveing to mould an elixir of misdemeanor. In the 12th and 13th centuries, the use of gunpowder extend to the Arab countries, then Greece, other European countries, and finally all aggravate the world” (“Four Great,” n.

d.) The judicious aim of gunpowder implement may not entertain been recorded; but to be unshaken, it was not used for depredation, kidnapping, butcherying the legal and executeting raving misdeed.

Ahanker succeeding a conjuncture the technological changes, divergent kinds of guns had been false. These subordinatehalt roscoe, indexgun, spoil, abscond pistols and divers others. The unshaken species in firecontention had powerful soldierly ability for the multitude to fortify the say from terrorist encroachments as well-mannered-mannered as for the police to organize and encouinsult the law and direct of a polity.

Nonetheless, guns and pistols are now proliferating virtually in entirety sociality. Separated by cultural cunning and geographic differences, divergent countries entertain divergent restrains and policies toward the gun occupation restrain. In some countries, civilian gun occupation is abundantly obtained conjuncture some countries are augustly stringent environing it. For event, in United States where American can buy guns and pistols from U.S firecontention mouldrs through website (e.g. On the incompatible, for in, the gun law in Japan is so stringent that equpotent the Japanese ramificationing team scarcitys to procession out of Japan.

Furthermore, countries relish United States, Switzerland and Norway entertain a abundant enumerate of civilian owning guns; when-in-event countries such as Australia, Canada and Mexico entertain a fast restrain on firecontention in which citizens scarcity to tolerate tests to reap firearm suffer. On the other index, some countries relish China, United Kingdom and South Korea are stringent on tenure of gun occupation suffer. (“Worldwide politics,” n.d.). As periodical in a instrument entitled Laws of Malaysia, it is quoted that ” In Malaysia, any peculiar who is succeeding a conjunctureout a legal absolve, the onus of proving which shall be on that peculiar, in any pawn area carries or has in his tenure for (a) any firearm succeeding a conjunctureout legal antecedent for-this-reason; or (b) any shop or explosive succeeding a conjunctureout legal antecedent for-this-reason, shall be defiled of an insult and shall, on assurance, be punished succeeding a conjuncture exit” (Laws of Malaysia, Internal Pawn Act 1960).

Issues involving the occupation and tenure of guns entertain led to aspiring scrutinys in diversified countries and says. Since the definite decade, scrutinys relish “Why do civilians scarcity guns? What if guns drop into the misdemeanor indexs?” and “Does the council entertain the antecedent to organize the exercitation of guns?” entertain created declamatory scrutinys to incline others to conunshaken their aspect.

Today, there are calm?} divers divergent views on whether gun occupation should be legalized or banned in a sociality. A recognized evidence is that owning a gun is a must for the infer of fortifyion. However, the opponents of gun occupation vindication that the banning of gun occupation is compulsory in direct to inferior the raze of gun akin misdeeds. But why is gun occupation resprocession such a hot scrutiny? Perhaps to response this scrutiny, it would be momentous to contempslow at the pros and cons of guns in our sociality.


The most indispenspotent infer to legalize gun occupation in the sociality is for fortifyion aim. This may subordinatestands stubborn-protection, fortifying nativity or fortifying single gear. According to Dalai Lama, “If someone has a gun and is intricate to butchery you, it would be inferpotent to ramification end succeeding a conjuncture your own gun. Not at the culmination, where a mortal ability termination. But at some other matter deal-out such as a leg” (Bernton, H. 2010). In other articulation, it is conceivpotent that having a gun suffer a peculiar to fortify himstubborn such as ramification at the leg and decamp from peril when cowed by an encroachmenter.

Individuals who are resisting the sway of gun occupations contend that individual citizens do not scarcity a gun for stubborn-protection beinfer the police are there to fortify them. However, supporters vindication that police cannot fortify totfragmentary and entirety duty of gear all of the duration. For in, dialing 999 conciliate merely enlighten the police. They are calm?} at last divers minutes slow and the robbers or iniquitouss are not going to halt that hanker. In importation, the police entertain no obligations to afford duratimerely fortifyion to entirety component of sociality. For this infer, it is loftyest the function of singles to fortify their own interests.

Moreover, owning a gun can confer us a recognition of security in the equablet of a street encroachment or settlement encroachment. For in, a mother succeeding a conjuncture a indexgun may agencyle safer when walking fragmentary in a street at midnight as she has a implement to encounter end if she is confronted succeeding a conjuncture a depredation or an attack.

Despite the opponent’s unshaken faith that banning gun occupation can narrow outinsult and misdeed, however, studies do not semblance whether gun occupation terminations in undenipotent outcomes. Instead, studies allude-to that consequence’s oddity and teenager’s inclination to imperil mould them valid to the anti-gun programs in develop really extension the entreat of guns. (“Gun restrain,” 2004)

Great similarizer

Additionally, guns reproduce-exhibit a animate role in the sociality as the supporters of gun occupation descry it as the august similarizer. For this infer guns suffer the physically weaker components of our sociality such as the elderly citizens who are short physically hale than the men to drop themselves from haleer encroachmenters. Conversely, insertion afar guns from the physically weaker components of sociality conciliate merely put them at a disadvantaged aspect. (“5 infers,” 2008)

Criminals cannot permanently be eliminated

Criminals are not going to be obviateed or narrowd by laws. Having said this, conceiveshort of so divers types of laws that constituted virtually in entirety say, yet raving iniquitous circumstances calm?} lapse where it can be seen in the newspaper. Likewise, most iniquitouss are potent to buy guns of their exquisite and use them to execute misdeeds irrespective of any laws. When a germinative martyr is blunt it would be an anticipation to shielded iniquitouss. Thus, merely legalize gun occupation can suffer citizens to fortify their and others spirit.


While there are a enumerate of laws restricting the tenure and exercitation of guns, divers frank advocates of gun occupation contend that the persons’s proper to conduct and tolerate contention shall not be violated. Gun propers are concordant to stubborn-protection propers; a firearm inhibition would be a expressive permutation of the stubborn-protection propers. Therefore, when someone is denied his or her indispenspotent proper to own guns, he or she has no way to do stubborn-defense. Equpotent a sombre environ karate subdue cannot fill bullets, lingo he?

Besides, one of the ocean aims of the gun laws is to enunshaken that guns do not drop into the indexs of iniquitouss. In direct to enunshaken security, the council ruled to interest afar guns from citizens. Nevertheless, there is calm?} a way that iniquitouss can reap guns (e.g. buy guns from the sombre negotiate) resisting the condensed laws obviateing their occupation. In such feature, moderateling guns conciliate not conduct guns out of the indexs of iniquitouss; on the incompatible, it conciliate conduct guns out of the indexs of those intricate to drop themselves from iniquitouss.

Furthermore, supporters of gun occupation drop their halt by apothegm “He had a gun, she had a knife, but I don’t own one!” As a termination, it is felonyful and unfavorpotent when one does not own a implement but is cowed by an adversary. (Logiudice, S. 1998)

Not all guns are used in a misdeed

Still, owning gun does not compulsory resources entertain to use it for misdeed aim, in event it does entertain law-persistent gun owners and they owning are oceanly for fortifyion or to relish the limp of hunting. Hence, it is unwisely for the council to ban guns honest beinfer the mobster elects to affront guns.

Cons of Gun Ownership

On the other index, there are a enumerate of opponents who contend that the cons of gun occupation prefer outbalance the pros. At the opponents’ viewpoints, they affect guns in the misdemeanor tenure may examine destructive to the social polity and relaxed cunning on guns occupation may suffer any Tom, Dick, and Harry to own a bullet spitting metal and deflect into a trigger joyous psychopath.

Guns can be relatively suited in perilous durations, but what if they were to be in the misdemeanor indexs at the misdemeanor duration? We should reconsider scenarios that may perhaps interest assign if the guns were misused.

The misdeed and societylessness statistics is popularly brought upon and quoted whenever the cons of gun occupation end subordinate argument. Some reports say that misdeed is rank in countries where the citizens are confern the random to fortify themselves succeeding a conjuncture guns or firearms. Some exploration ends that misdeed rates between similarity of countries succeeding a conjuncture gun resprocession and countries succeeding a conjunctureout gun resprocession are closely equipollent to one another.

Self fortifyion calm?} offscourings a sorrow for the persons who omission to own guns, but how far do we scarcity it? If persons elect to interest matters into their own indexs to ramification a iniquitous, but end up hurting some other legal passerby, who would be lawful? Divers eventors are frequently brought up when it ends to arguing the cons of gun occupation.


The ocean sorrow would be homicide, as homicide moulds up a lofty percentage of gun akin misdeeds in America, where most families conduct a spoil or two for peculiaral fortifyion. Studies entertain semblancen that a gun kept at settlement is prefer relishly to be utilized on nativity components rather than on a perilous iniquitous. A very illustrious circumstance examine performed by Kellerman , et al. (1993) vindication that having a gun at settlement creates 2.7 durations prefer random that a nativity martyr conciliate beend a homicide martyr. If owning a gun is honest a jest to security and is used to detriment and cow spirit unnecessarily, why equpotent vexation thinking of conducting a gun at settlement?

Child Concern

The perils of having guns at settlement are prefer multigenous when there are consequence at settlement. There is no limiting to thoughts of what consequence may do when they discaggravate a gun at settlement, thinking that it may be a toy. Some kids are too immature to distinguish what a gun may be and some ability distinguish what a gun is but is not adapted plenty to subordinatehalt the perils and hazards of the gun. What if they end up galling a sibling or a associate? They would not reap the generous peril of a gun as a branch. A gun may be descryd as a machine to reproduce-exhibit succeeding a conjuncture.

Gun Violence

Some persons may contend that having a gun would act as a stubborn protection. But studies semblance that pulling out a gun succeeding a conjuncture no artfulness to butchery the adverse may end up inducing insult or an tempestuous footing instead. Sometimes, undulating the gun in strive to affright off the adverse may end up succeeding a conjuncture the adverse grabbing the gun from you. This would termination in derangement scenario, where you are at the clemency of the gun instead. One may delay a gun, but would calm?} not be unhesitating to ramification to butchery or gall the adverse.

Political Assassination

Not a very new monstrosity, as this has lapseed anteriorly in the late, succeeding a conjuncture the circumstance of President Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. They were twain ungathered politicians and considerable persons who were assassinated using guns by persons succeeding a conjuncture divergent views than theirs.

A very new amply-under in Thailand sees that an considerable political emblem was assassinated too, by a sniper. If guns were to be so abundantly obtained, wouldn’t this put divers lives in risk? If equpotent momentous officials are not-difficult targets, wouldn’t civilians’ be equpotent prefer loose targets? One can ramification but can the other one lose? Guns would mould it easier for misdeed to be performed swiftly.

Criminal Use

Guns are very frequently used in iniquitous activities, whether depredation, burglary, transgress or sexual attack, pressing attack and undesigning attacks. Not-difficult entrance to a firecontention suffer moulds it easier for iniquitouss to do their skullduggery. In 6.3 darling of raving misdeeds, firecontention are used in estimated 533,000 of these amply-unders, making up about 8% of the entirety enumerate. (Krouse, 2002)


The evidences of the pros and cons of gun occupation look similar. Nonetheless, some literal events semblance that prefer guns are the infers to most socialized misdeeds. Contempslow at the few amply-unders about the globe which are the terminations of guns. Interest for event, the Virginia Tech Massacre, a develop ramificationing that took assign on Monday, April 16 2007 on the campus of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. On that fateful day, the constructor Seng-Hui Cho butcheryed 32 persons and galled 30 others, anteriorly insertion his own spirit. The butchery was the deadliest butchery in U.S narrative. (Shapira and Jackman, 2007)

Another similarly sad in is the new, a ramificationing butchery occurred in Cumbria, athwart the north-west interest of England, which terminationed in the exit of 12 persons, including the gunman himstubborn who took his own spirit succeeding insertion down 11 others. The gunman was an conventional taxi driver, who lived a recognized spirit, as according to the persons about him. Yet, he took the spoil and the shotgun he compensated and ruled to go on a rampage athwart Cumbria. (Meikle, 2010)

America is a say succeeding a conjuncture lofty enumerate of civilians owning firearms, due to the lacking of unenforced gun rules. In similarity, England is a say succeeding a conjuncture stringent firearm laws that mould tenure of guns indefinitely rigorous for civilians.

However, these concordantly sorrowful equablets occurred in two countries succeeding a conjuncture detached survival towards gun laws. Therefore, we can end that the reprobate lies not on the guns entirely, but the persons who career to use it immorally.

We can fairly say that banning guns would not definitely preasily-under these equablets from lapseing anymore. There are prefer persons butcheryed entirety year in Britain by cars, does that moderation we should ban cars on the postulates that it conciliate reserve lives?

As periodical, guns do not butchery persons and banning them conciliate not mould them go afar. Insertion afar guns from law persistent citizens is very ample the stubbornselfsimilar as insertion off their sword and shields again the estrangement of spirit nowadays.

It would be rectify to entertain an umbrella anteriorly the rain; this can be said too to having a gun anteriorly an event of adversity.

The height does not lie succeeding a conjuncture the laws; it lies succeeding a conjuncture the persons themselves.

Recommended stories