Argument: defensive gun usage
Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals nearly 760,000 times a year. This figure is actually the lowest of multiple polls done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, which was both conducted in 1993 and 1994, the numbers were even higher. The survey suggested as many as 1.5 million defensive gun usages a year. This survey was lead by Gary Kleck, a highly respected Florida State University criminologist. Based on the research that was conducted, he, as well as other top criminologists (such as Marc Gurtz), concluded that a life is saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. A fatal accident involving a firearm, however, occurs in the United States only about once every 6 hours. Furthermore, it was found that in 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference. In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.) Numerous citizens believe that guns are tools which can only be used for destruction. However, it is overwhelmingly evident that far more Americans still die each year from pneumonia and influenza than perish in all-not just gun related-homicides and suicides combined. In 1966 the police in Orlando, Florida, responded to a rape epidemic by embarking on a highly publicized program to train 2,500 women in firearm use. The next year rape fell by 88 percent in Orlando (the only major city to experience a decrease that year); burglary fell by 25 percent. Not one of the 2,500 women actually ended up firing her weapon; the deterrent effect of the publicity sufficed. Five years later Orlando's rape rate was still 13 percent below the pre-program level, whereas the surrounding standard metropolitan area had suffered a 308 percent increase.
Instead of focusing purely on present day, let us look back to a time period when guns were not as easily accessible to certain people. In 1640 Virginia created a series of laws preventing African Americans from owning guns for fear that they might revolt. After the civil war, African Americans still lacked the right to bare arms. White terrorist organizations attacked freed blacks who stepped out of line, and the black codes ensured that they could not fight back. Blacks were, in the words of The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867, "forbidden to own or bear firearms and thus . . . rendered defenseless against assaults" by whites.
America was founded on the principle that all citizens should have equal rights as well as equal opportunities. These principles do not exclude the right to bare arms and to defend themselves. To place regulation and gun control laws on firearms would prevent many people from buying firearms. It is unconstitutional to not give Americans the protection they deserve. In conclusion, based on multiple statistics provided by top criminologists, is has become evident that our country would be better off without gun control laws. After all, there’s a reason crime is rising in England, a place where gun controls are all too common. “Their criminals have nothing to fear from the law-abiding people.”
Statistics prove that a large majority of this country strongly believes in self protection through use of firearms. In fact, at this moment, according to recent CNN polls, 89 percent of Americans believe that as citizens they have a right to own a gun, and 87 percent believe the Constitution guarantees them a right to keep and bear arms.
First of all, many of the domestic killings in our country with guns involve self-defense. In Detroit, for example, 75 percent of wives who shot and killed their husbands were not prosecuted, because the wives were legally defending themselves or their children against murderous assault.
Some people, however, bring up a totally different argument and believe guns should be banned or eliminated because criminals would no longer has firearms at their side. In 1997, the United Kingdoms did a full scale ban and finally banned all handguns. “If the gun control thesis is the correct one, then it should follow that by taking out an element that allegedly incites criminal behavior, in this case guns, crime rates should drop.” By comparing two surveys, one done before the ban in 1992, and one after in the year 2000, it was found that this theory was not correct. Before the handgun ban, virtually all violence, such as robberies, rape, burglary with entry, as well as assault with force were all lower in the UK than in the US. In 2000, however, the statistics clearly showed that, in the UK, violent crime rates rose 100%, and, surprisingly, the crime rate in America was lower than the initial poll in 1992. It was also discovered that since the first report, America had distributed over 70 million additional civilian firearms. Based on this massive study, it was obvious that not only did banning guns cause an increase of violence, but adding additional guns lowered violence.
It is thought that gun accidents are extremely frequent in America. In reality, three times as many people are accidentally killed by fire as by firearms.[37] The number of people who die in gun accidents is about one-third the number who die by drowning. Although newspapers leave a contrary impression, bicycle accidents kill many more children than do gun accidents. In total, 30,000 accidental gun deaths have been recorded between 1979 and 1997, a total span of 18 years. In one year, nearly 1.5 million are saved. In the same 18 years it took for 30,000 accidental deaths to occur approximately 27 million have been saved. Through simple division it becomes evident that for every one accidental death that occurred during these 18 years, 900 people were saved by firearms.
In addition to the previous scenario, many people state that, “The more guns there are, the more accidents occur.” Statistically, this is not true. In fact, in America, per capita death rate from firearms accidents has declined by a third in the last two decades, while the firearms supply has risen over 300 percent.
It has been proven by the studies of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as polls conducted by criminologists such as Kleck and Gertz that, in many self protection cases where an armed citizen is faced with an attacker, it is more likely that the citizen will scare off the attacker than to actually shoot him or her. Even despite this fact, the FBI released statistics showing that citizens acting with full legal justification kill as least 30 percent more criminals than police do. On the whole, citizens are more successful gun users than are the police. When police shoot, they are 5.5 times more likely to hit an innocent person than are civilian shooters.
Even if the entire American gun stock magically vanished, re-supply for criminals would be easy. If small handguns were imported in the same physical volume as marijuana, 20 million would enter the country annually. (Current legal demand for new handguns is about 2.5 million a year). Bootleg gun manufacture requires no more than the tools that most Americans have in their garages. A zip gun can be made from tubing, tape, a pin, a key, whittle wood, and rubber bands. In fact, using wood fires and tools inferior to those in the Sears & Roebuck catalogue, Pakistani and Afghan peasants have been making firearms capable of firing the Russian AK-47 cartridge.
In conclusion, laws against gun ownership would only make it more difficult for the law abiding citizens who need them most, and rely on them to protect their families. After all, the constitution awards the right to bare arms to all Americans. It should be up to Americans whether they buy guns or not. After all, politicians are supposed to be representing the interests of the majority of this country. The fact of the matter is, 89 percent of Americans still believe that, as citizens they have a right to own a gun. Sir Winston Churchill spoke for all of us when he said, “Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” In order for this to stay true, firearms, remain essential.
- MeK
>>What do you think? Gun laws or the right to bare arms?
Sources for both Argument 3 and Concluding Statement
Source: Gun Control: The Australian Experiment Howard Nemerov
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
Source: Statistic release by the Australian Bureau of statistics: Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC).
Sources : "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalance and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of
Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995
Some statistics, as well as national polls courtesy of the FBI
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Reports and Murder Analysis by the Chicago Police Department
ncjrs.com
Trust the people: by David B. Kopel - © 1988 The Cato Institute
(184 foot notes contained in article at http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/1#1)
Source: Numerous New York Times articles.
Source: Rich, Young, Fowler, Wagner, and Black, The American Journal of
Psychiatry March, 1990
CNN.com
Source: “Mauser and Hart Studies”
Source: National Safety Council
The National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University
Source: http://www.chronwatch.com/site_search.asp?auth=141
Source: http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentD...ay.asp?aid=7862
