Blame the Man, not the Gun This work is considered exceptional by our editorial staff.

August 29, 2009
By
More by this author
For as long as they have been invented, weapons and guns were connotated with evil and disaster. Some insists that the more guns with which our society equips itself, the greater the likelihood for accidents or violent acts involving fire arms to occur. It is wrong that guns facilitate public crime and violence. It is wrong when guns are manipulated as weapons of murder, suicide, accidental death, and injury. It is most of all, wrong that these catastrophes are burdened upon amongst the normal, “good” people and “helpless” children in society. But, it is wrong for one to blame guns as the cause of all those deaths and injuries. Of course, the presence of guns is partially responsible for a small portion, but the gun is not to blame. A gun is a tool, guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Many proposed the solution of dismantling guns and weapons as a means of protection against devastation and demise. Unfortunately, this can be considered, at best, as an idealistic solution, an impractical one. It is impossible to lower any threats through dismantle for technology and knowledge is available. Unless all the nuclear weapons in the world are dismantled simultaneously, backed by a safeguard which does not allow nations to make them again, the above proposal would result in opposite of the desired effect. Consider a situation where many responsible nuclear nations, such as the United States, have dismantled their nuclear weapons while many unstable nations, such as Iran or North Korea, posses them. With no threat of an equal or greater retaliation, the threat of a nuclear attack is actually higher. To be more effective the proposed solution needs to simultaneously make sure that all the nuclear capable countries in the world dismantle their weapons and never make them. Because the threat is high without weapons, it is only logical that one continues ownership of the weapon to maintain safety.

Guns and weaponry are the sources for national dominance and protect a country from foreign threats. History has proven its necessity as during the nineteenth and twentieth century, feeble countries were imperialized by the superior countries. India had to submit toEngland,Vietnam to France, and China to eight different countries During the Russo-Japanese war, only Japan stood against Russia. Only Japan had essential knowledge to establish weaponry. The power of weapons is the reason why a small island can stand a chance against a country the size of a continent. At the time, totalitarian governments such as Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Bolshevik Russia, and some Communist states such as the People's Republic of China emerged out of this era of imperialism and subordination. As an example, Bolshevik Russia introduced gun control in 1929, which coincided with the beginning of the repressive Stalinist regime. Millions were forced to suffer under tyranny, with nothing to use against to rebel. It was hopeless. People were suppressed and countries were suppressed. The moral is that having guns and weapons is useful in defense. It is true that they can be implemented to destroy a country, but likewise, they can be used to save one as well.

On a smaller scale, guns are also used for personal protection against criminals. In America this is demonstrated nearly 2 million times annually. That's up to five times more often than they're used to commit crimes and nearly 128 times the total number of murders in the United States. According to the National Crime Victimization Surveys, people who use guns to defend themselves are less likely to be attacked or injured than people who use other methods of protection or don't defend themselves at all. Gun control advocates often point out that using a gun for self-defense is not a good argument for owning a gun. They feel that self-defense does not occur often enough to warrant owning guns for that person. This may seem to be a reasonable argument, until you look at the facts. A 1993 nationwide survey showed that citizens use firearms in self-defense against crime 2.1 to 2.5 million times each year, and they use handguns in 1.5 to 1.9 million of those cases. In comparison, firearms are used in approximately 238,000 robberies and 14,000 murders each year. This would mean that people use guns in self-defense almost ten times more than guns are used in crimes. Since criminals can get guns no matter what bans or restrictions are in effect, the only number such regulations will affect would be the number of self-defense cases.

Overall, guns were created by humans for a good cause. Despite serving as an instrument for destruction, it also saves lives. If they didn’t exist, all would live in an animalistic society based on Darwinian natural selection. Those genetically built best fit for survival can bully others into submission just as powerful countries bullied the weaker ones. The firearm isn't the danger. It is our lack of discipline and degradation of our culture that is the real danger.





Join the Discussion

This article has 5 comments. Post your own now!

C.E.Roth said...
Feb. 17 at 7:51 pm
While your writing is amazing, I definitely disagree with some of your points. You claim that a world without guns is "an animalistic society based on Darwinian natural selection," but there were plenty of complicated civilizations without the gun, including our forerunners the Greeks and Romans. And while I agree that at this point taking away the guns would do more harm than good, we wouldn't need the gun if we weren't prone to violence and death. There was violence before the gun, but we shou... (more »)
 
Heidi S. This work has been published in the Teen Ink monthly print magazine. said...
Aug. 30, 2010 at 9:52 pm
Well done! We must support our Second Amendment rights. I'm thrilled to see other teens who feel the same way about the proper use of firearms.
 
Chicko said...
Oct. 3, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Amazing! I lovethis topic and I totally agree with you, but maybe it is okay if you are liscensed in other countries including the USA
 
Mr.Pantz said...
Sept. 29, 2009 at 3:04 pm
WOW! I don't even remember how long i was sitting here reading this... So BRAVO. I do not share the same opinion as you do about guns becuause if you are old enough to bare arms than you should have the right(only if you are a mature enough though). :)
 
some person said...
Sept. 29, 2009 at 9:36 am
wow! Your one of the few people who realize things about this kind of stuff!
 
bRealTime banner ad on the left side
Site Feedback