The Case Against Gun Bans: Examining the Complexities of Firearm Regulation

Introduction

Parables have long been an integral part of human culture, serving as vehicles for moral and philosophical exploration. Found across various religious texts, including the Bible, Qur'an, and Rig-Veda, these narratives convey profound truths through allegorical storytelling. In contemporary society, the advent of the printing press has enabled the proliferation of stories for widespread consumption and contemplation. Two such narratives, "The Lottery" and "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," employ allegory to illuminate the darker facets of human nature and societal constructs.

Argument: Guns and Crime

I believe that guns should not be banned in the US. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” I am sure most of us have heard this saying at some point in our lives. Surely, it is a statement of the obvious, but the logic behind it rings true. It may seem rational to ban guns entirely to prevent people from killing, but it is not the guns themselves that are the problem.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified writer

Proficient in: Gun Control

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

That is just a simple solution to a complex problem. The criminals who kill others are willing to break the law and risk going to prison for the rest of their lives to murder, yet they are expected to follow firearm laws? If a nationwide gun ban is enacted, criminals will not suddenly follow the law and reject the thought of buying a firearm on the black market.

The Fallacy of Gun Bans

Banning all guns in the United States would be irrational because it would not lower crime or prevent firearm-related murders.

Outlawing firearms punishes the law-abiding citizens by leaving them defenseless against criminals who obtain their firearms illegally. Protecting yourself with a legally obtained firearm should not be against the law and should me more of a necessity for the safety of your family and property. The Department of Justice’s own National Institute of Justice study titled Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms estimated that 1.5 million Americans use guns for defensive purposes every year. People who commit crimes are already willing to break the law to kill someone, why wouldn’t they break the law and buy a firearm off the black market.

The Futility of Prohibition

As we’ve learned from the war on drugs, prohibiting a particular item only makes a stronger criminal enterprise. It would seem logical that the banning of firearms would lead to less firearms and less crime, but statistics show just the opposite. Washington D.C. has had a handgun ban in effect since 1976. After the ban, D.C.’s murder rate only once fell below what it was in 1976. Furthermore, Washington D.C. has been notorious for being one of the most violent cities in the country. Not only is this the case in the United States, but the trend continues in other countries around the world. For example, after firearms were banned in England and Wales in 1997, the number of deaths and injuries from gun crime increased 340 percent in the seven years from 1998 to 2005.

Socioeconomic Factors

The claim that guns are the problem is merely a scapegoat for larger socioeconomic problems such as poverty, drugs, poor parenting, and undesirable role models. As for the mass shootings that have become a staple for the fear mongering corporate media, it should be noted that every single mass shooter since columbine had been prescribed serotonin boosting psychiatric drugs, yet the media seldomly mention this and never correlate it with the crime. Perhaps they don’t want to point the blame towards their big pharmaceutical sponsors, whose ads bombard you during every commercial break. Furthermore, the media also sensationalizes these shooters making them seem like martyrs for the next potential shooter. An abundance of registered firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens acts as a deterrent against crime.

Case Studies and Examples

The city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed an ordinance in March of 1982 requiring each household to own and maintain a gun. Kennesaw’s crime rate dropped significantly after the ordinance, and there has not been a single murder over the twenty-six years that it has been in effect. The claims that a high gun ownership results in high amounts of violence is nothing more than a fabrication. Switzerland, a country known for having one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, also maintains one of the lowest firearm-related crime rates in the world. In areas where gun ownership is high, the threat of an armed civilian acts as a hindrance against the criminal element.

Conclusion

Overall, I speculate that the United States will continue to see a reduction in crime in areas of rising gun ownership. A firearm ban would not stop crime and would only hurt responsible, law-abiding citizens. As long as there is a criminal element, people will always feel the need to protect themselves against a perceived threat. The second amendment was implemented by the founding fathers of the United States as a fundamental right of the people to protect themselves from all forms of tyranny. The right to keep and bear arms is deep-rooted in American culture, and it will not be going away any time soon.