Handguns Argument: People Should Be

¶ … Handguns

Argument: People Should Be Allowed to Own a Handgun

As laid out in the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution, Americans have the right to own guns. The second amendment was essential to the formation of a free and democratic state, and it remains a fundamental right for all Americans.

When the second amendment was drafted, it promised Americans the right to bear arms as a protection against a repressive government. That is, early Americans feared the situation so many of them had fled: a powerful, dictatorial government that was armed, inflicting its whims on an unarmed and therefore helpless populace. By guaranteeing the right to bear arms, Americans were therefore assured that their new government would lack the power to bully or coerce them. These concerns are alive and well today, with many Americans fearing an over-powerful government. Individuals who are allowed to own a handgun will be protected from abuse by corrupt government officials. This is a fundamental right according to the Constitution.

Perhaps even more than the government, Americans have cause to fear crime. If handguns are outlawed, the saying goes, only outlaws will have handguns. That is, making it illegal to own guns only applies to law-abiding citizens. Criminals have no respect for the law (by definition), and they will find guns on the black market. The result will be a society with armed criminals and un-armed targets. Allowing responsible citizens to own handguns allows them to defend themselves against violent crime and robbery. Criminals are aware of the legality of personal guns and may therefore tread more carefully when approaching a potential victim; without knowing for sure who has exercised his or her right to own the gun, criminals likely assume everyone is armed. Through deterrence, the legality of owning a handgun effectively reduces crime overall.

Those who oppose gun rights argue that society suffers from violence already, and arming more people will only make the problem worse. However, this argument is misguided. As explained above, deterrence alone helps to reduce violent crime. Furthermore, gun safety classes and permitting requirements go a long way toward ensuring that only mentally sound, educated, and qualified individuals may possess a gun. Waiting periods are mandatory in many states, and serve to reduce the opportunity for would-be shooters to behave impulsively. Guns don't kill people; people kill people.

Finally, recent public shootings provide another argument for the right of average citizens to own and carry guns. While this line of thinking may be counter-intuitive, it makes sense to note that if, for example, teachers or staff at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado had be carrying handguns on that fateful day in 1999, they may have been able to prevent the needless deaths of so many young people. In a world where anyone can get guns if they want to, making guns illegal would only make the problem worse by preventing innocent bystanders from defending themselves and interfering on behalf of others. In a public place, if a terrorist begins to fire randomly into a crowd, it would be useful for a gun-owning good Samaritan to shoot back and end the incident.