The Right to Bear Arms
The right to bear arms is an intensely contentious issue with much passion on both sides of the debate. On the pro side, the National Rifle Association has a very powerful lobby group to promote its agenda. On the con side there is increasing support for restrictions to gun ownership. Ninety-seven percent of the populace think that minor restrictions are necessary and fifty-seven percent think that major limitations are necessary.
In the early days, every settler had to own a gun for self-protection and citizens lived in remote places far away from friends, relatives, and police. Immediate assistance was not available. Each of us had to protect ourselves properly and adequately. The state had not established its ability to protect each citizen. It also had not proven its power to do so by actual practice. Therefore guns were a necessity.
Now that the state has demonstrated its power and intention to protect all citizens, it is not necessary for each of us to carry arms for self-protection.
Moreover, carrying arms will eventually cause injury to the bearer as well as those who deal with him/her. A simple misunderstanding can escalate into extreme anger. Lost tempers plus guns equal injury or death. Senseless massacres such as the Columbine incident and many similar attacks on innocent people have demonstrated the folly of gun culture.
If there were no guns, there would be no gun-injury. Therefore it is better not to have any guns.
More Americans were killed with guns in the 18-year period between 1979 and 1997 (651,697), than were killed in battle in all wars since 1775 (650,858).
According to the Morbidity Mortality Report of the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta Georgia, there are approximately 200,000 non-fatal injuries due to gunshot annually in the
USA. Each gunshot injury costs an average of $14,000 for treatment and loss of time at work. Economic loss due to time off work or permanent disability is estimated at 13.4 billion dollars annually in the United States
Many gunshot injuries result from accidental discharge of a loaded weapon and that weapon is often held by a child under the age of 15 who found it unsecured at home. About 1500 children per year suffer from gunshots. Lack of proper storage of firearms is a contributory factor. Lack of proper training in the use of guns is another.
A comparison between the United States and countries which have gun control legislation shows a large difference in fatality and injury statistics. For example, data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport. shows that per one hundred thousand population the United States had 3.98 homicides, 5.92 suicides, and 0.36 accidental deaths due to gunshot. In countries with stricter gun control legislation the ratios are drastically reduced. For example in Canada per one hundred thousand population there were 0.4 homicides, 2.0 suicides, and 0.04 accidental deaths from gunshot. In Japan, the statistics are even lower. The Japanese had 0.02 homicides, 0.04 suicides and no accidental deaths due to firearms. Gun control does work
Canada limits possession of handguns to collectors, target shooters and those who can demonstrate a need of guns to protect their lives. To own a gun, a Canadian must have a photo bearing licence either for “possession only” or, to buy a gun, for “possession and acquisition.” In addition, for every gun in their possession, a Canadian must have a registration certificate which, if the gun is sold, bartered or given from one person to another, must be transferred to the new owner.
Canadian citizens applying for a firearms license undergo a background check to exclude people with criminal records, mental illness, membership or affiliation with radical groups, ets. They are required to have their present and past spouse or common-law partner sign the application. Refusal of the spouse, for any reason, to sign the application triggers further investigation by law enforcement officers. The government has established a “spousal notification” toll free information line through which a spouse can report crimes or express their concerns about their partner’s possession of firearms.
To own or buy rifles and shotguns, Canadians are required to take the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and, to own or buy handguns, they must complete the Canadian Restricted Firearms Safety Course.
Japan’s gun control policies are far more stringent. The only firearm a citizen may have is a shotgun and, to possess this, must go through a lengthy licencing process. A prospective gun owner must first attend classes and pass a written test, shooting range classes and a shooting test. After passing the safety exam with a minimum of 95%, the applicant undergoes a simple ‘mental test’ at a local hospital to ensure that he or she has no readily detectable mental illness. Having completed these requirements, the applicant then produces for the police a medical certificate attesting that he or she is mentally healthy and not addicted to drugs.
The police investigate the applicant’s background and relatives, ensuring that both are crime free. Membership in ‘aggressive’ political or activist groups disqualifies an applicant.
The police have unlimited discretion to deny licenses to any person for whom ‘there is reasonable cause to suspect may be dangerous to other persons’ lives or properties or to the public peace’.
Gun owners are required to store their weapons in a locker, and give the police a map of the apartment showing the location of the locker. Ammunition must be kept in a separate locked safe. The licenses also allow the holder to buy a few thousand rounds of ammunition, with each transaction being registered.
Due to these rigorous requirements, there are very few civilian owned firearms (shotguns) in Japan. In 1989 there were only 493,373 shotguns.
In the United States, there are approximately 222 million civilian owned firearms of which 76 million are handguns.
If the U.S. Federal Government established more stringent laws restricting the manufacture and sale of fire-arms, the number of homicides, suicides, and accidental injury due to gunshot would be reduced.
By: Pullikattil Simon
About the Author:
In the early days, every settler had to own a gun for self-protection and citizens lived in remote places far away from friends, relatives, and police. Immediate assistance was not available. Each of us had to protect ourselves properly and adequately. The state had not established its ability to protect each citizen. It also had not proven its power to do so by actual practice. Therefore guns were a necessity.
Now that the state has demonstrated its power and intention to protect all citizens, it is not necessary for each of us to carry arms for self-protection.
Moreover, carrying arms will eventually cause injury to the bearer as well as those who deal with him/her. A simple misunderstanding can escalate into extreme anger. Lost tempers plus guns equal injury or death. Senseless massacres such as the Columbine incident and many similar attacks on innocent people have demonstrated the folly of gun culture.
If there were no guns, there would be no gun-injury. Therefore it is better not to have any guns.
More Americans were killed with guns in the 18-year period between 1979 and 1997 (651,697), than were killed in battle in all wars since 1775 (650,858).
According to the Morbidity Mortality Report of the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta Georgia, there are approximately 200,000 non-fatal injuries due to gunshot annually in the
USA. Each gunshot injury costs an average of $14,000 for treatment and loss of time at work. Economic loss due to time off work or permanent disability is estimated at 13.4 billion dollars annually in the United States
Many gunshot injuries result from accidental discharge of a loaded weapon and that weapon is often held by a child under the age of 15 who found it unsecured at home. About 1500 children per year suffer from gunshots. Lack of proper storage of firearms is a contributory factor. Lack of proper training in the use of guns is another.
A comparison between the United States and countries which have gun control legislation shows a large difference in fatality and injury statistics. For example, data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport. shows that per one hundred thousand population the United States had 3.98 homicides, 5.92 suicides, and 0.36 accidental deaths due to gunshot. In countries with stricter gun control legislation the ratios are drastically reduced. For example in Canada per one hundred thousand population there were 0.4 homicides, 2.0 suicides, and 0.04 accidental deaths from gunshot. In Japan, the statistics are even lower. The Japanese had 0.02 homicides, 0.04 suicides and no accidental deaths due to firearms. Gun control does work
Canada limits possession of handguns to collectors, target shooters and those who can demonstrate a need of guns to protect their lives. To own a gun, a Canadian must have a photo bearing licence either for “possession only” or, to buy a gun, for “possession and acquisition.” In addition, for every gun in their possession, a Canadian must have a registration certificate which, if the gun is sold, bartered or given from one person to another, must be transferred to the new owner.
Canadian citizens applying for a firearms license undergo a background check to exclude people with criminal records, mental illness, membership or affiliation with radical groups, ets. They are required to have their present and past spouse or common-law partner sign the application. Refusal of the spouse, for any reason, to sign the application triggers further investigation by law enforcement officers. The government has established a “spousal notification” toll free information line through which a spouse can report crimes or express their concerns about their partner’s possession of firearms.
To own or buy rifles and shotguns, Canadians are required to take the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and, to own or buy handguns, they must complete the Canadian Restricted Firearms Safety Course.
Japan’s gun control policies are far more stringent. The only firearm a citizen may have is a shotgun and, to possess this, must go through a lengthy licencing process. A prospective gun owner must first attend classes and pass a written test, shooting range classes and a shooting test. After passing the safety exam with a minimum of 95%, the applicant undergoes a simple ‘mental test’ at a local hospital to ensure that he or she has no readily detectable mental illness. Having completed these requirements, the applicant then produces for the police a medical certificate attesting that he or she is mentally healthy and not addicted to drugs.
The police investigate the applicant’s background and relatives, ensuring that both are crime free. Membership in ‘aggressive’ political or activist groups disqualifies an applicant.
The police have unlimited discretion to deny licenses to any person for whom ‘there is reasonable cause to suspect may be dangerous to other persons’ lives or properties or to the public peace’.
Gun owners are required to store their weapons in a locker, and give the police a map of the apartment showing the location of the locker. Ammunition must be kept in a separate locked safe. The licenses also allow the holder to buy a few thousand rounds of ammunition, with each transaction being registered.
Due to these rigorous requirements, there are very few civilian owned firearms (shotguns) in Japan. In 1989 there were only 493,373 shotguns.
In the United States, there are approximately 222 million civilian owned firearms of which 76 million are handguns.
If the U.S. Federal Government established more stringent laws restricting the manufacture and sale of fire-arms, the number of homicides, suicides, and accidental injury due to gunshot would be reduced.
By: Pullikattil Simon
About the Author:
Dr. Simon is a retired research scientist, philanthropist and author of two books: The Missing Piece to Paradise and The Philosopher’s Notebook. Visit his website at http://simonsecret.org
He would appreciate receiving reader’s comments, corrections, and counter-arguments on the contents of his articles.
lobby groups
« Oregon Personal Injury Attorneys Lawyers – Frequently Asked Questions | Home | K-Street »
Leave a Comment