Masaki Shibutani
Nov 5 · Last update 13 days ago.

Will society be better if a common person gets a gun?

There are many arguments about holding a gun. For example, it is the right to defend oneself, the suppression function. Brazil, known for its high crime rate, is trying to alleviate gun control under the new president. On the other hand, guns are used for many crimes. In the United States where people can have a gun, many gun shooting incident caused scores of casualties. Could it be that society is getting better by having a gun indeed by ordinary people?
Stats of Viewpoints
It depends on the society in question
1 agrees
0 disagrees
Peace through proliferation
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Access to a violent weapon will not alleviate violence
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Arms in the arms of the responsible
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint

It depends on the society in question

By comparing just the US and Brazil it is clear that gun violence has two very different patterns, as the two regions have very different social and criminal problems making the question of controlling guns essentially a completely different issue in each country, and this could be said for all states. In the US the main cause of gun homicides are suicide, which vastly overshadows criminal, accidental or domestic violence incidents. If suicide is the main driving force behind gun violence statistics in the US this is something that will not be addressed through firearm legislation, and is in fact more of a reason to start putting state money into healthcare than it is a reason to control guns.

Conversely Brazil has the opposite problem with the vast majority of gun deaths being related to criminal activity, however despite previously being subject to strict gun laws the number of illegal unregistered firearms meant the legislation didn't work and Brazils gun violence remained extremely high. Both regions have a completely different issue and the efficacy of gun control depends on the region, culture and society, and isn’t the simplistic positive control measure that always works as it is often depicted in the media. In fact the issue is even more convoluted as it is region specific within a county's borders also, with some rural US citizens being hours away from law enforcement, and in some places susceptible to dangerous wildlife, the question of gun ownership is a very different from someone living in a city. Guns remain a massively complex and region/lifestyle specific issue.

quora.com/Are-most-gun-homicides-gang-criminal-related-domestic-or-other tfp.org/what-about-gun-violence-in-brazil

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Oct 6
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Conversely Brazil has the opposite problem with the vast majority of gun deaths being related to criminal activity, however despite previously being subject to strict gun laws the number of illegal unregistered firearms meant the legislation didn't work and Brazils gun violence remained extremely high. Both regions have a completely different issue and the efficacy of gun control depends on the region, culture and society, and isn’t the simplistic positive control measure that always works as it is often depicted in the media. In fact the issue is even more convoluted as it is region specific within a county's borders also, with some rural US citizens being hours away from law enforcement, and in some places susceptible to dangerous wildlife, the question of gun ownership is a very different from someone living in a city. Guns remain a massively complex and region/lifestyle specific issue.

Peace through proliferation

Many instances of gun violence happen in gun free zones or happen despite gun control laws. Arguably the proliferation of gun ownership causes the likelihood of gun violence to diminish, as a criminal is less likely to commit an armed crime if they are unsure who is armed also. In countries such as America, where gun ownership is common, gun homicides, and likewise all homicides, are in decline despite gun ownership remaining fairly constant, demonstrating the link between gun ownership and gun deaths is not as strong as is often claimed.

Guns are tools and do not carry any moral weight in and of themselves; an armed and trained individual would make themselves, their family and the community around them, safer by owning and being able to use such a tool in a responsible way. To make it harder for people to access these tools leaves them less able to defend themselves in some of the worst circumstances. Furthermore any efforts to control things in this way will just feed into a black market around their trade; there will always be ways to access guns and banning them just limits gun ownership to those with the right criminal connections.

Despite mass shootings and mental health problems gaining the most media attention internationally when it comes to guns, such incidents only account for a tiny fraction of gun violence statistics with positive self-defence stories that involve guns never making it into the news. As a result the majority of people end up with a very skewed perception of gun ownership. A good recent example of positive implications that gun ownership can pose is the case of Brazil, as their most recent president, Jair Bolsonaro, relaxed gun laws upon taking office, Brazil’s murder rate subsequently fell by 25%. It is still a comparatively high rate internationally, but it is clear that when innocent people are better able to defend themselves, an increase in gun owners can have a very fast effect of reducing crime.

truthinmedia.com/more-gun-laws-do-not-mean-less-crime ammoland.com/2019/05/murder-rates-drop-in-bolsonaros-brazil-more-guns-less-crime/#axzz614m15mXP

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Oct 1
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
http://truthinmedia.com/more-gun-laws-do-not-mean-less-crime/ https://www.ammoland.com/2019/05/murder-rates-drop-in-bolsonaros-brazil-more-guns-less-crime/#axzz614m15mXP

Access to a violent weapon will not alleviate violence

If you maximise the number of guns in a society, you will provide that society not only with a dangerous weapon but also a weapon that can be used remotely and therefore maximise the opportunities of violence in the society. This level of remoteness from the violent action arguably goes some way to explain the raised statistics of violent crime in societies that have more guns. For example in the United States there is a direct correlation between a state's gun ownership level, how many people own a gun, and its murder rate.

Research into firearms compiled by the Harvard School of Public Health’s Injury Control Research Centre demonstrates clear patterns in firearm ownership and many of the statistically high social problems the United States suffers from. They found that gun ownership even goes as far as negatively affecting the severity of road rage an individual experiences. Various researchers have found that in addition to greater murder rates in countries with more gun owners, gun owners are statistically more likely to accidentally shoot a family member than they are an intruder. Furthermore it has been found that reducing gun owner ship may go some way to reduce instances of suicide, as suicide is more common in households with access to a gun in the United States.

The United States should try to educate their population to better recognise this relationship, and then look to countries such as Australia for a way forward in addressing this issue. Australia saw a 60% drop in gun related mortalities between 1979 and 2013, during that time the country experienced one of its worst mass shootings and took appropriate gun control measures so address such unwarranted issues of mass murder. Australia implemented detailed background checks on gun owners and a compensation-based buyback scheme, which some experts believe that the U.S. could also benefit from implementing, even though the country’s situation is vastly different.

hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research vox.com/cards/gun-violence-facts/gun-homicide-effect-increase knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/what-the-u-s-could-learn-from-australias-gun-control-laws

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Sep 30
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
If you maximise the number of guns in a society, you will provide that society not only with a dangerous weapon but also a weapon that can be used remotely and therefore maximise the opportunities of violence in the society. This level of remoteness from the violent action arguably goes some way to explain the raised statistics of violent crime in societies that have more guns. For example in the United States there is a direct correlation between a state's gun ownership level, how many people own a gun, and its murder rate.

Arms in the arms of the responsible

There are many scenarios where gun ownership can be a force for good and is a necessity, most countries have some laws that control gun ownership though, to make sure it occurs responsibly. For those that live or work in rural areas guns may be an everyday fact of life, being used in controlling animal numbers, hunting for food or protecting property, guns are undoubtedly a force for good in certain situations. However just like a driving a car, fishing, fly a plane and practising law or medicine, a licence would safeguard society by making sure guns are in the hands of responsible people.

While the usual defence for liberal gun ownership laws focuses on the fact that people will still injure or kill each other even if guns are illegalised, or that guns are not the most statistically significant method of murder, there is still a problem with mass shootings in a country like the US and there is obviously somewhat of a legal void. However gun advocates are right in that calling for an outright ban on a weapon will not solve the problem of mass murder or the social problems that underline this phenomenon, more effort needs to go into appreciating the complexity here, it is not simply a case of changing gun laws, and it cannot be simply a case of an outright ban.

Banning guns in all circumstances would leave some in America, although a small minority in more difficult positions and would have a negative impact on some cultural pastimes such as hunting. The narrative on guns is complex and the control of them needs to be, they cannot be completely banned but some countries really do require greater controls, a mental health test should be a minimal requirement for example, and would be a good place for the US to start. The United States need to focus on responsible gun laws, and gun ownership should be controlled to some degree to limit gun possession to responsible owners.

debate.org/opinions/should-guns-be-banned-in-america npr.org/2018/01/26/580143957/what-it-takes-to-get-guns-out-of-the-wrong-hands

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Sep 30
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Banning guns in all circumstances would leave some in America, although a small minority in more difficult positions and would have a negative impact on some cultural pastimes such as hunting. The narrative on guns is complex and the control of them needs to be, they cannot be completely banned but some countries really do require greater controls, a mental health test should be a minimal requirement for example, and would be a good place for the US to start. The United States need to focus on responsible gun laws, and gun ownership should be controlled to some degree to limit gun possession to responsible owners.
Translate