Project 5 overview and implementation

American citizens should have the right to bear arms because depriving law-abiding citizens of the right to own and carry a handgun takes away a powerful deterrent to crime. It is the right of every citizen to defend and a gun offers the protection that most people are searching for.

The debate generated by the possession and use of guns has been focusing on how much harm have guns made when used by disturbed teenagers. On the background of a relatively stabile crime rate, which decreased in the United States from 1992 to 1998, several incidents involving teenagers that had access to guns shocked the nation. It was then stated that there is a need for a tougher gun control, a debatable statement, since it is not the low gun control that generated unfortunate events.

In fact, the American culture can be considered responsible for the violence produced by guns. Guns and violence produced by guns are everywhere: at the news, in movies, in video games that teenagers play. It is only natural that such a culture so open to violence has a great impact on the public and it also creates the image of a society dominated by gun-related violence. Perhaps the idea that Americans should not be allowed to bear arms resides in the image created by the American culture that the society is increasingly violent and that accidental gun shots or violent incidents occur due to the fact that the access to firearms is easy for almost anyone, including kids. In fact, few people ever fire a gun, even if they own one, as there are many police officers that never fire a gun. "Most of us receive our images of guns and their use through television, film and newspapers." (Lott, pp 170)

American citizens should have the right to bear arms for three reasons: this is a deterrent measure, the number of accidental gun shots is really low, and this is a right protected by the Second Amendment.

Allowing citizens to bear arms is a deterrent measure because criminals are more likely to attack if they know that the person they are attacking is not carrying a gun than when they know that their victim could have a gun. Not allowing citizens to bear arms is not allowing them to defend themselves, so they are more exposed to violence. The fact that citizens are allowed to carry guns makes attackers think twice before attempting to assault someone. Due to the fact that citizens are allowed to bear arms, criminals have a greater fear of potentially armed victims. John Lott gives some very relevant examples in this aspect, stating that criminals avoid attacking cab drivers, "dope boys," or brake into houses when the residents are in because the chances of them being armed are pretty big. Instead, they reorient towards more fragile victims that are do not represent the danger of being armed. So, allowing bearing guns is a deterrent measure because criminals are aware of the risk of being shot while attacking someone and the crime rate is therefore reduced.

Another aspect of allowing citizens to bear arms is that in reality, the number of accidental gun shots is really low. Sustainers of the ban against bearing guns claim that they are dangerous because many accidental gun incidents occur from the fact that people that do not know how to handle a gun have access to it. In fact, in America there are only about 30 accidental gun shots every year, which is a relatively small number comparing to the number of innocent victims that police officers shoot each year (330 people) (Lottt, pp 170). There is a common belief among sustainers of the gun control that there is a too easy access to guns, hence the fire incidents that shocked the world in American schools. Although these incidents are serious and alarming, it is not a good enough reason to stop citizens from bearing arms. Children are not allowed to bear guns and normally they should not have access to them, so the measures should be taken on how to limit the access of children to guns, not on how to limit the access of the entire population to their self-defense. Gun owners should be forced to lock their guns in order to limit the access of kids to them, instead of limiting the gun ownership drastically.

Another argument in favor of bearing arms is that this is a right granted by the Second Amendment, which states that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." So, people should be allowed to keep and bear arms as a measure of self-protection. As a well-organized police force is needed to maintain security, so is the right of citizens to bear arms needed to protect themselves. (Brent, 2000)

Individuals should have the right to bare guns because such a measure permits them to defend themselves and not to become victims of attackers that take advantage of their weakness. Instead of being a measure that sustains violence, allowing citizens to bare arms is a measure that decreases the criminality rate. American citizens have the right of individual freedom and not respecting their rights to protect themselves is a serious brake of their rights granted by the Constitution of the United States.

Another important issue in favor of the right to bear arms is that such a practice is traditional in the American society. Americans traditionally bare arms for self-protection and this measure more likely discourages criminals than encourages violent use of fire arms.

With Americans being unable to protect themselves, they are forced to rely more on the police and this would call for more police officers that would have to deal with a greater number of violence acts reported. Today, many citizens that use their guns to defend themselves do not report the incidents to the police. Many people use guns to defend themselves against a threat and it is not necessary for them to actually fire that gun, so they believe that there is unnecessary to report the case. Not being able to hold a gun, all these citizens would have to count on the police and this would increase the number of assault cases that the police would have to deal with.