The topic of gun control has led to people wondering whether it prevents violence or crushing constitutional rights. Americans have been sharply divided on the issue, with some people believing that inadequate gun laws make the country a dangerous place. Others, however, strongly disagree and believe that the shooters – not the guns – are to blame for gun-related deaths. Where do we draw the line in acceptable self-defense? Is it okay for the government to restrict gun rights?
Gun control is a hotly debated issue across the country, with the U.S Constitution clearly defining the basic principles and laws all Americans have. This includes the right to keep and bear arms. Conservatives have intended to preserve what the founders have written. A gun in the wrong hands can be deadly and both parties agree that children, criminals, and people with serious mental illnesses shouldn’t have easy access to guns.
Conservatives have a firm belief that guns don’t kill people – people kill people. Guns are nothing more than the tools and the shooters are to blame for the deaths. Millions of gun owners are law-abiding citizens and use these tools for hunting, self-defense, target shooting, including an array of safety precautions.
Looking back at history, the issue of fighting over weapon control isn’t anything new. In the 1100’s, Europe raged into debate over weapons called crossbows. Crossbows are a medieval kind of bow that is fixed across a wooden support and has a groove for the bolt and a mechanism for drawing back the string and releasing it. Crossbows shoot arrow-like projectiles called bolts or quarrels. In 1139, Catholic clerics met in Rome, Italy and held the Second Lateran Council where they banned the crossbow. Despite this ban, European and Christian armies continued to use the crossbow.
In the 1300s, armies began to use cannons and guns. Early firearms, including those using gunpowder, originated in China and spread across the Middle East and Europe. Gunpowder needed careful handling and was a time-consuming task. Most people argued that blades and bows were more reliable and efficient than these weapons. On the battlefield, most people stuck to blunt objects and proven weapons but people continued to experiment.
By the late 1500’s, pistols and long guns were common and advanced rapidly. They became accepted in military combat, although European aristocrats saw guns as a threat to their ruling power. They thought that if common people had guns, then they could easily revolt against their rulers. European nations began to control and restrict guns, including Queen Elizabeth 1 of England, who banned the Wheellock pistol in 1594. That was a weapon considered easy to hide and carry.
As wealth grew in the European nations, the cost of guns fell. A culture of guns began to develop across England, France, Spain, Portugal, and other European nations that never existed before. People were able to defend themselves with guns and gun ownership became a new pathway in life as traveling expanded and people opened new frontiers. Colonizing communities were able to depend on guns for food and defense, often seen walking through the forest with a gun in hand for defense.
Gun-wielding citizens had an advantage over those bearing bows, clubs, spears, and knives. They even became an important trading tool among colonists and Native Americans. Gun ownership in British colonies, however, was slightly different. European countries restricted firearms and prevented common people from owning or using them.
By the 1700’s, the thirteen colonies grew more self-sufficient and resentful of British involvement. One of the greatest conflicts included the French and Indian War from 1754-1763, after Great Britain attempted to slap higher taxes on colonists to pay for its military expenses. Colonies argued that Britain was taxing them without giving them a voice. Tensions broke out and in 1775, the American Revolution began. On December 15, 1791, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, along with nine other articles of the Bill of Rights. The United States Bill of Rights was created by the thirteen sovereign states, followed by the Articles of Confederation. The Supreme Court affirmed that the rights belong to individuals, for self-defense in the home and that state/local governments are only limited to the same extent as the federal government from infringing upon those rights.
It is clear that over time, gun control laws have only placed limits on freedom. Politicians and gun control advocates have argued that these laws are necessary (even if they infringe upon your rights). But gun control, when looking at the state of things today, doesn’t work the way that some liberal activists want them to be. Federal gun control legislation such as the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 created certain nationwide requirements that made it difficult to obtain a firearm.
While these laws have been in place for decades now, it is clear that gun control doesn’t work. Conservatives have argued that criminals don’t (and never will) obey gun control laws. The gun control laws put in place by liberal politicians have only affected the law-abiding citizens who go through legal avenues in order to obtain firearms. A 2016 Obama Administration study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics even examined how prison inmates obtained firearms and used them during crimes. They found that only 10.1% obtained their firearms through a regulated legal source. The vast majority of criminals admit to using guns in gun-related shootings/violence through illegal underground sales, family friend, gifts, purchased by another individual, theft, from a victim, or from the scene of the crime.
Conservatives have also argued that only law-abiding citizens would be impacted by expanded background checks while criminals obtain their weapons through illegal avenues. They’ve also argued, in terms of background checks, that they mean nothing. A person with no criminal history can still walk into a store, purchase a gun, and commit a crime. Others can lie about their addictions on federal background check forms. Even Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, committed a felony offense and lied on a background check before purchasing a gun. He answered “no” in response to the question “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic, drug or any other controlled substance?” As part of a background check. The check was administered on the Firearms Transaction Record he filled out in order to purchase a .38 revolver on October 12, 2018.
Just take a look at California, for another example. This is a state that has bad background checks in place for decades. A 2018 study was released examining the effects of these background checks, in which they found nearly two decades of data and zero correlation to the effect on homicide rates in the state. Conservatives have continued to argue that more easily accessed firearms does help reduce violent crime. Some studies have even suggested that criminals fear armed citizens more than they fear the police. Cities like New York and Chicago with the strictest gun control have the highest crime rates.
In 2020, homicides increased 41% in New York while shootings and murder rates surged 50% in Chicago. It was a deeper insight that the existing gun control laws aimed at criminals in place don’t work. Liberal cities have been given the additional resources and tools to prove their case and have come out the other side of it with nothing. They have launched crime control organizations and pushed politicians to advocate gun control.
Conservatives, on the other hand, have argued that one of the best ways to curb the violence in American cities is through imposing lengthy sentences on those carrying illegal firearms and not placing burdens on law-abiding citizens. Projects such as “Project Exile” launched in Richmond, Virginia, were about imposing those lengthy sentences and getting illegal guns off the streets. The project was an enormous success for the state and safety of its communities. Conservatives have argued that voters should learn more about the gun laws in their states and stay up to date with gun legislation.
Winning the argument is about knowing the facts on crime trends and gun ownership. The battle on banning weapons has been going on for centuries – and will keep going until all voices subscribe to freedom first.
