"All Citizens Should Carry Guns to Ensure their Security"
At the recent past, there have been sparking debates on the legalizing of guns and allowing them to be carried by ordinary citizens. Around 50 of the states of the United States have permitted its citizens to take concealed firearms in public as of 2013. This debate arose as a result of the “Virginia Tech tragedy,” which saw 32 people dead as 25 people sustained injuries. This marked the shooting in the Virginia College a fatal shooting that have ever happened in the campuses. Another recent mass shooting occurred at Oregon Umpqua College in Oregon which claimed the lives of seven people. Of the two incidences, the shooters carried out the evil and afterwards committed suicide. Of late, legislators have been agitating for the citizens for them to get a permit to use the firearms everywhere without restrictions including their places of work, homes and even learning institutions. The security demands of the contemporary society are such high, and therefore, every citizen should be permitted to carry a gun anywhere for their security purpose.
A citizen, a premise or an institution that is armed prevents itself from receiving security threats and thus reduces crimes. It is a common belief that being an armed citizen will aid in lessening crimes. This notion has gained many arguments as of whether carrying of guns will improve safety for people especially for those in learning institutions. The definite advantage of carrying a weapon is that a person is armed any time and ready for anything. Robert (8) points out that as a result of the increase in crime rates, people desire to protect themselves and increase their security by carrying a weapon in a place within reach. Labeling a place “gun free zone” will render it exposed to terrorist attacks and other criminal activities. It is the responsibility of the state to mobilize institutions and other governing bodies to educate the citizens to maintain accountability and subsequently to keep safe from terror. A citizen of above 21 years should thus be certified to have a license to a gun because they are perceived as responsible grown-ups who are a target for crime.
As a privilege stated in the constitution, carrying a gun ought to be beneficial to all citizens to enable them to uphold their security. The adjustments made in the law sought to protect the freedom of the licensed gun holders and the correct use of the weapons. According to Gary (10), one way to put into practice this constitutional right and freedom is by permitting all citizens to carry the guns in any manner depending on their choices. It is essential to allow citizens to have their voice by proclaiming that their guiding principle is the Constitution of the States. It is claimed that even though it is a right, carrying a gun be it concealed or open is also a critical adjustment to the gun laws. If this adjustment is allowed to all the citizens, it will enable them to cope with emergencies for instance in case of a sudden mass shooting. A citizen who is responsible will use the gun effectively with care whenever such a crisis erupts. According to Brinker and Gary, “the second change in law has been put in place to protect citizens and allow them to possess and keep guns and thus every citizen should benefit from the law” (23). Statistics indicate an increase in the cases of mass shooting in the United States, and as the case, every citizen is worthy of the right to protect themselves. Employing every tendency for Gun Safety's examination, of the institutions and premises that are known to be well armed, there have been zero reported cases of mass shootings and killing (Jonathan 9). All Americans irrespective of race, religion or ethnicity have the chance to make sure that they are safe and make use of the opportunity secured by the Bill of Rights. Therefore, denying some citizens guns and making some places gun-free zones amounts to denying a fundamental right to citizens.
Also, everyone deserves the right to defend themselves and as a way of doing that they should carry guns. There are a couple of reasons why all citizens should carry licensed concealed or open-carry firearms anywhere. First, self-defense is a legal privilege for everyone notwithstanding any location as bound by the law. The laws provide for the people so that they don’t demonstrate lack of self-defense. Secondly, terrorists or criminals target unarmed places and unarmed people. These criminals feel more powerful more especially when they know that nobody will offer resistance when they attack. John and Ayres (30) argue that American learning institutions are the most targets for mass shootings because they are perceived as the most firearms-free zones of all other places. A criminal would avoid areas with individuals who are armed when they need to execute harm because they are sure of unwelcoming fight back. They would want to attack a place where they cannot be stopped or frisked and thus the ideal location is gun-free zones as is the case with campuses. Riedel and Brian point out that allowing every citizen to carry guns would render criminals uncertain of places to carry out shooting (12).
Contrary to the many remarks put forward by the debaters backing up the carry of guns by all citizens, assessments done concerning the potential dangers of allowing everyone to have and carry about the firearm demonstrates the dull side of the argument. From the research, a wide-ranging of explanations why carrying guns should not be endorsed to everybody is laid down. There are possibilities that a firearm may fall on wrong hands and thus there are chances of unintentional release (Ryan et al. 551-56). For instance, a tired person is likely to misuse the gun as well as someone who has been confronted by a friend or a neighbor. Moreover, permitting guns results in a varied number of issues including the wrong use of a weapon (threatening others with it), losing weapon during physical exercises or carelessly among other gun-related incidences. The counter arguments of carrying guns suggest that it is wrong to believe that massive carrying would render a place safe for it will affect it tremendously. Taking the case of colleges and universities, some tutors and professors claim that allowing students to carry guns to school will make them fearful especially when they are performing their duties. For example, a professor would be frightened to summon a student to his office to discuss any issue more especially regarding his or her discipline and poor performance. Besides, it great worries from the management of an institution that allowing guns will intensify the security cost as the institution would be compelled to employ skilled tutors to teach students on proper use and handling of firearms (Jeffrey et al. 283-343). William McRaven, a former naval commander and the University of Texas Chancellor, believes that “Concealed weapons if allowed to be carried everywhere by citizens, would damage the security of a place rather than making it safe.” He likewise points out that carrying of weapons everywhere would cause fears and psychological stress to the entire population. The unresolved trouble is that unplanned shootings or suicides can occur anywhere anytime.
Furthermore, openly carrying a weapon or carrying it in a concealed manner (under-belt) can make someone be a target of a criminal who intends to attack the armed person and snatch the firearm. It goes without a saying that, “what you possess has a potential to put a target for crime.” Katherine et al. (345) highlight that, given that there are reported cases of police officers that have been snatched off their firearms by criminals, citizens would be more likely to be attacked and robbed off. Besides that, carrying a gun everyone may not be of interest to some people because it may distract them in their comfort zones.
In conclusion, carrying guns will continuously play a vital role in our society, and when utilized effectively can be of great significance as it offers self-protection. Despite this, firearms can be so disastrous when it gets into the hands of felons, robbers or under-aged citizens who may have little knowledge of proper handling and use of the guns. It is vital for a society to keep an eye to ensure that qualified people and those responsible are granted their right to possess this kind of a powerful weapon. Both critiques of allowing all citizens to carry guns for security purposes on ordinary occasions have one point of agreement that, “it is essential to educate and train all the individuals on how to use weapons, and before someone is entitled a license of possession, he or she should be skillful to avoid dangers of misuse of the weapon.. By embracing these expectations, imminent occurrences of insecurity will be barred, and the general security of the society is boosted.
- Quote paper
- Anonymous, 2018, Should all citizens carry guns to ensure their security?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/454996