Gun Control Makes Criminals More dangerous while Making People less Protected

Throughout the history of the United States, firearms have been a necessity to many people. According to an article done by Gallup, “43% of Americans report living in a gun household.” People own and use guns for multiple different reasons, but most importantly, guns are used for protection in a time of crisis. Based on these statistics, gun control takes away the first line of defense from around 100 million people. Furthermore, many people believe guns should be used only by militia organizations, like the National Guard. In this instance, firearms would only be owned by the government, and taken away from law-abiding citizens. In an article written by Nelson Lund, The Second Amendment and the Inalienable Right to Self-Defense, Lund states “the governments of larger nations are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people”. Unarming the citizens of the United States will make the people venerable to the quartering of soldiers by their country or another. Also, unarming the people will hinder the ability of a “militia consisting of ordinary civilians”. In other words, if one’s country were to be invaded by an enemy nation, there would be no means of defense for innocent civilians so the invader will be able to infringe as much damage as possible. As discovered by the colonial Americans, a temporary militia created by the people can go a long way, and sometimes even win a war. Gun control takes this ability away from a country, ultimately making their frontlines of defense weaker. Firearms can serve as a countries first line of defense in sudden invasion, while keeping an individual protected in an unsafe area. Lund also writes in his article, “nearly all of these [gun control] laws are aimed at preventing the misuse of firearms by irresponsible civilians, but many of them also interfere with the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against violent criminals”. If guns are abolished, law-abiding citizens will be left in deep water with their only means of defense being their hands. On the other hand, criminals will still regard all laws and participate in criminal activities. This means that guns will only be owned by violent criminals. Law-abiding citizens will now have no means of defense if they come into contact with a criminal that owns an illegal firearm. In a repot done by The Heritage Foundation, it is noted that “Americans use their firearms in defense of themselves or others between 500,000 and 2 million times”.Amy Swearer and Peyton Smith, the commentators of this report, write on multiple different cases where a law-abiding citizen uses a firearm to protect his or herself. For example, “on February 2^nd: a restaurant owner in Akron, Ohio scared off a masked man who attempted to rob him with a knife”. This restaurant owner was able to escape robbery and potential injury by using a firearm to scare the masked man off. Swearer and Smith go on to explain multiple other instances where a firearm protected a civilian, and all these cases carry a similar pattern. All of these people were law-abiding citizens who were prepared to come across criminals on their everyday routine. The authors state, “They did not go looking for evil but were nonetheless prepared to deal with the evil that found them”. In all the examples given, if the civilian were without a firearm their result would have been much more harmful, and sometimes it could have ended in the loss of a life. While firearms are mostly used as a means of defense against criminals or national invasion, many people believe abolishing guns will stop gun crime altogether. However, statistics prove that a country where more guns are owned is safer than a country that does not allow the ownership of guns. Author John R. Lott wrote a novel called, More guns Less Crime. In this novel Lott expands on the idea that more guns equal less crime. In an interview done by the University of Chicago, the interviewee, John Lott goes on the explain the meaning behind his novel. Lott states “there is a negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate”. This relationship is better explained as the number of owned guns goes up, crime as a whole decrease. Lott explains that crime is decreased due to concealed handgun laws because, “they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves”. Furthermore, the result is less crime as the number of owned guns increase. Whether through the use of self-defense or national defense, it is seen through statistics that gun control makes violent crimes increase while making civilians venerable to these crimes.