The author of the article, ‘Why I own Guns’ is Sam Harris. His article was published in 2013 in ‘The Week’ after the incidence of gun violence committed by Adam Lanza, a psychotic killer who murdered his mother and 26 individuals (6 adults and 20 minors) at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut on 14th
December 2012. The author also writes about neuroscience, politics, philosophy, and religion.
Thesis: This essay aims to support gun control thus support the regulation of gun ownership.
Introduction
Why would an innocent individual want unrestricted access to firearm and ammunition? Many people in the U.S.A. today feel the need to own a gun, therefore, exercising their adverse political influence in the National Rifle Association. The critical question is why in today's world is gun ownership a vital issue in society rather than other more essential agendas such as access to quality food, science issues and the health risks of Chinese paint to children (Harris, 2013). According to the author, the domination of firearms in the American society is an indication of accumulative psychosis and is a topic to be desired.
Discussion
Guns should be controlled in society because they increase the risk of harm to one’s family. Harris (2013, p. 347) argues that most of his acquaintances do not own guns and given the free will, would choose not to because the gun could go off without warning or could be used against them by a criminal. Those who choose not to own guns are ‘otherwise intelligent people’ because dialing 911 in case of a criminal attack is the most effective means of protection.
Regulation should be imposed on gun ownership because not all individuals have the capability to use them responsibly. The author quotes “owning a gun is not a responsibility that everyone should assume” (Harris, 2013). In other words, not all people purchase guns for self-defence, but rather others have ulterior motives such as committing suicides and threatening innocent family members. Unfortunately, there are no reliable means of assessing whether one is psychologically stable to handle the responsibilities of safe and ethical handling and utilisation of guns.
There are ethical implications to gun ownership in which the U.S. government should enforce stricter policies to restrict the possession of firearms particularly among those who are more likely to use them irresponsibly (Lott, 2013). However, Harris (2013, p. 348) mentions that “there are already 300 million guns in the United States and no one appears to have a plan for reducing this number”. He also states that criminals will continue to enjoy easy access to firearms in the U.S.A. unless the government imposes regulation policies such as instituting a $150 billion grant on existing guns and imposing adverse penalties against people who illegally acquire firearms.
Gun control policies should be strictly enforced to reduce the number of murder incidences especially of innocent parties such as children. The author gave an example of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown that left 20 children dead. Since 1982, the U.S. has experienced 70 mass shootings which left 543 deceased victims (Harris, 2013). Additionally, in the same period, 564,452 brutal homicides took place which involved the use of firearms. Unfortunately, guns that innocent citizens claim to possess for home defence or recreation activities such as hunting are the same ones that are used for mass shootings, and homicides and restriction policies do not regulate the ownership of handguns.
All handguns should be confiscated in the U.S. because they pose the highest risk of danger to innocent people as they are portable and cannot be detected when one is entering a shopping mall, classroom, and restaurant or movie theatre (Lott, 2013). Hunter rifles should also be regulated or otherwise banned because they can be extremely harmful to civilians at close hunting range when used by unskilled or inexperienced shooters.
The current gun control policies such as detailed mental health screening, a ban on assault firearms, evaluation of the terrorist checklist, global background checks, and a state registry among others have achieved little in reducing mass shootings because the most unsuspecting weapons are often the most dangerous. Harris (2013, p. 348) recommends that a gun license is made extremely difficult to attain, requiring rigorous training which could reduce the number of mass shooting incidences due to guns falling into the wrong hands.
Gun use should only be restricted to licensed law officers who are authorised to protect citizens from attacks by psychotic individuals. For instance, Harris (2013, p. 348) acclaims that the mass shooting of children at Newtown would have been different if there was a well-trained security guard with a licensed gun who could have offered defence against the mentally ill criminal.
Apart from restituting the ban on assault firearms, the author claims that the society needs to restructure its attitude for example by implementing mental health programs for children and teenagers and instituting protocols on how to examine and deal with the mentally disturbed to avoid incidences of gun violence against children and other innocent parties.
Conclusion
In support of gun control, it is observed that firearms cause more harm than good in society and the highest risk lies with the unsuspecting weapons such as handguns and the hunting rifles. When they fall into the hands of psychotic, or unlicensed, or inexperienced individuals, guns can cause great harm to innocent and vulnerable civilians. Apart from enforcing restriction policies against weapons the society needs a general attitude shift toward public violence, for instance, mass murder and homicide which are conducted by mentally incapacitated individuals.
References
Harris, S. (2013). Applying Critical Thinking to Reading. Why I Own Guns, 346-349.
Lott, J. R. (2013). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University
of Chicago Press.
