Would more guns prevent gun deaths?

Hanya Omran, ID:181184

Recently, a strong debate ensues regarding whether to impose more restrictions and control on possessing guns or to permit wider circle of people to obtain guns in order to be able to protect themselves and consequently to prevent the occurrence of more death cases. Every argument has supporters and refuters. The topic is both personal and political, as it concerns both countries in regard to the national security and individual members such as the weapons producers and traders. Hence, every argument is motivated by utilitarian urge.

Firstly, on the scale of countries, having more guns is disapproved. Most countries all over the world have restrictive gun control or firearms regulations embodied in the existence of a set of laws that restrict and regulate the manufacture, purchase, possession and use of guns. Further, those countries restrict the categories of individuals who can be granted licenses to obtain small guns such as pistols, rifles, carbines, submachine guns and light machine guns. In a study by Molly Ball, entitled “Don’t Call it ‘Gun Control’”, communicated in 2007, it was argued that around 875 million small arms were in the hands of civilians, whether non-state groups , or gang members , a matter that threatened national securities of nations. According to Karp, language is manipulated by politicians as a tool to support the restrictive legislations through the coining of phrases that go in favor of these policies. For instance, these regulations are called “gun violence prevention”, “gun safety”, “firearms regulations”, “illegal guns”, “criminal access to guns”. These phrases play on the ideology of the ordinary citizen to create fear and disapproval of the wide scale access of guns among the civilians. Politicians recognize the danger of possessing firearms by civilians either relating to organized groups or not.

Secondly, on the scale of individuals, it was noted that the accessibility of guns can lead to the increase in suicide rates. In a study communicated in 1998, Lambert and Silva found out that suicide rates reduced following the enactment of gun control laws. Further, in another study carried out in 2016, Zeoli observed that gun control diminished the severity of domestic violence and consequently led to reduction of the homicide of the intimate partner. Generally, Santaella Tenorio argues that the implementation of successive restrictive regulations was closely linked to the decrease in the numbers of gun-related deaths. Studies show that the availability of firearm represents a risk factor rather than a protective factor. In the mid- 1990s, the United Nations Economic and Social Council passed a number of resolutions to regulate civilian possession of small guns. These regulations require the firearm safety and storage, imposing penalties for illegal ownership and misuse of the weapon. This is in addition to the introduction of a licensing system that guarantees that undesirable individuals would be prevented from possessing arms.

On the other hand, there is a counter argument that holds that the ownership of guns is a basic individual right or privilege of civilians. A study carried out by Parker in 2011 revealed that both the United States of America and Yemen are distinct from the remaining countries in defending the right of the individual to possess firearm. It is a matter of self- protection in case the individual is threatened by robbers or criminals. Furthermore, it is the source of income of a wide category of people who work in the arms manufacture.

To conclude, the second argument is weak and can be simply refuted. Having more laws and regulations concerning the possession of arms provides more protection for individuals and nations than the spread of arms. Those who seek self- protection in their homes against robbers can secure themselves by shielded doors and windows. Those who work in arms manufacture can produce other items that are useful to people.