Banning Guns Doesn't Fix The Problem

It used to be that only true firearms and the laws surrounding them came under scrutiny when someone used one to commit an act of atrocity. More recently however the likes of pellet guns, air rifles and bb guns have come under fire as those without access to true firearms have selected these things as alternative weaponry. Many now call into question not just the legitimacy of pellet guns and their air based cousins but are unsure of whether or not the public should be allow to own such things.

There are multitudes of rationales that one can make in favor of the banning of firearms both deadly and non deadly force. Those who support such actions against firearms often site the success other countries have had with their banishment of guns. They will also cite that those same countries have much lower crime rates as well as crime to fatality ratios. Though these examples as well as many others they may make all make convincing arguments I think perhaps that they may be missing several points.

I will never defend the actions of individuals who commit such odious crimes against other human beings but I will defend the right to own both real firearms as well as the more recreational different types of pellet guns. While I have great respect for those who wish to remove firearms from our society completely, I could not disagree with their stance more. Regardless of the object or weapon used while engaging in criminal activity, the object is not responsible for any injury or fatality that may occur. Those individuals who choose to commit crimes and deal out physical injuries to others will do so regardless of the weapon they choose. Surely being shot has the potential to kill or at the very least permanently damage the human body but a knife of any type or other kitchen utensil can be just as deadly in the hands of a psychopath. A simple roll of coins can also be used to deal heavy and deadly damage out to another person. Even in the event that all objects capable of being used as a weapon are banned we are still left with our arms and legs. Surprisingly enough more individuals lose their lives to physical beatings delivered by fists and feet. Surely fists and feet can never be banned or removed as they are attached to our body’s. What then would those opposed to firearms say?

Should our society continue to act in a manner as to punish the mass for the mistakes of the few? Of course there are some who would say it’s not about punishment but protection and that removing guns will save lives. I say to these people, fine take our guns. In doing so you are indeed punishing those who have a right to own a firearm or even other types of guns such as pellet guns. Once guns are out of the equation, what’s next? These people hell bent on crime and injury will turn to knives, rocks, and anything thing else they can get their hands on. What then? Do we ban those too?

Instead of placing such a hyper focus on objects we should be looking at people and the behaviors of such people. I don’t know that its possible to “fix” another human being or if its possible to show violent people the error of their ways before committing such horrid acts but we’d at least be looking and pointing in the right direction. Death and violence will not decrease nor will it cease simply because we remove weapons from the equation. People who want to kill will always find a way to accomplish the act regardless of what’s available to them.

Scott is a proud owner of both firearms and pellet guns and will defend the right to own these things to the end.