The Merits of Liberal Gun Policy

Since the ratification of the United States Constitution on June 21, 1788, concerns regarding the welfare of the public and potential government tyranny have spurned several movements with the goal of maintaining gun rights for American citizens. While a rash of recent mass shootings may have seen many previous proponents of gun rights waver, increased gun control will not guarantee the safety of the public.

The second amendment to the United States Constitution reads, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (Bill of Rights). Many politicians, celebrities and citizens have spoken out against the wording of the second amendment, but it remains clear: The right of an American citizen to bear arms is non-negotiable. Despite many attempts to rescind these rights and many social and economic studies performed on the subject of gun control, one particularly potent piece of information in the fight to allow Americans the right to retain their firearm’s, is that there is no correlation between strict gun control policy and decreases in violent crime. According to a study published by the Harvard School of Law, an increase in the number of guns per capita actually correlates with a statistical decrease in violent crime rates (Kates and Mauser). For example, the homicide rate per 100,000 persons in Russia was 20.54 in the year 2002; the number of guns per capita was 4,000 firearms per 100,000 individuals. Conversely, the homicide rate per 100,000 individuals in Finland was 1.98, while their guns per capita were 39,000 firearms per 100,000 individuals. This represents a 91% decrease in the number of homicides per 100,000 persons from Russia to Finland while seeing a 35% increase in the level of gun ownership. Additionally, the data set (table 1) encompasses more than a dozen European nations for both categories, descending in murder rate while presenting scattered levels of gun ownership. Based upon this research, one can reasonably infer that the level of gun ownership does not directly cause or correlate with higher levels of violence- rather, it is likely that the two statistics are in no way directly linked, but rather individual statistical representations of other, more subtle societal issues.

Yet another argument against the implementation of further gun control policies in the United States, is the fact that other first-world nations that maintain high levels of gun ownership do not see the levels of violence experienced in the United States. Switzerland has maintained relatively lax gun laws for the entirety of its sovereignty, and many historians credit the high levels of gun ownership and comparatively high levels of participation in the national militia (in addition to their insistence on keeping all major infrastructure on alert for demolition at a moment’s notice) for keeping Hitler and the Third-Reich at bay during World War II (Bachmann and Helena). In keeping with the tradition of a strong civilian militia, the Swiss military conscripts nearly all Swiss male citizens at the age of 20. The Swiss armed forces have a very large militia element in comparison to other countries, and as such, nearly 130,000 of the 140,000 soldiers in Switzerland are conscripts or volunteers. These men and women (for whom military service is voluntary) attend 18-21 weeks of basic training, are issued military equipment (including firearms and ammunition) and operate much in the same way the United States Reserve Armed Forces do- that is, they are active when called. Because of this, nearly every home in Switzerland is equipped with one or more military-issue rifles, and gun culture is part of every-day life. Rather than self-defense, however, Switzerland’s gun ownership is rooted in a sense of patriotic duty and national identity. As such, it is not the level of gun ownership or the strength of their gun policies that dictate the effects of firearms on their society, but rather the social and cultural values the Swiss have embraced that allows them to responsibly harbor many more guns than almost every country in the world.

The final argument in defense of not implementing further gun control measures is that legislation aimed at curbing the types of weapons American citizens can own and use only serves to take said weapons out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. If the law mandates that assault rifles (or the arbitrary aesthetic components that lawmakers seem to think to constitute “military-style weapons,” upon which such laws are based) be banned from public ownership, then citizens whose prerogative it is to obey the law will certainly give up their semi-automatic rifles. Unfortunately, citizens who did not wish to comply with the new law would simply keep their rifles under wraps, effectively rendering the efficacy of the legislation null and void. Additionally, some of these individuals may now feel compelled and empowered by the new legislation to begin using their superior weaponry to break the law even further. In situations such as this, where the proposed legislation would have the unintended effect of allowing the balance of power between criminal and law-abiding citizen to shift increasingly in favor of the former, it may simply be best to allow the weapons in the hopes that citizens with no ill intentions will act as a criminal deterrent, as they are similarly armed.

While the battle for gun rights in the United States rages on, it is important to note that, despite the differences in opinion on either side of the political spectrum, it is, in fact, the goal of both parties to create a safer and more equal society. While there may be disagreement on how exactly such a utopia may be achieved, it is imperative that gun control advocates and gun rights advocates recognize that not addressing the societal issues that either cause or accelerate violence must be addressed as soon as possible.

Works Cited

Bachmann, Helena. "World." The Swiss Difference A Gun Culture That Works. Time Magazine, 20 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. <http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/>.

"Bill of Rights Transcript Text." Bill of Rights Transcript Text. N.p., 4 Mar. 1789. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Kates, Don B., and Gary Mauser. "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?." Harvard Law School. Harvard University, n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf