Cottrell 1

Jason Cottrell
2015
More than Guns
As the media continues to shape public thought and influence what people perceive to be
the greatest threats to society and personal safety, the media has recently turned public attention
to the threat of guns, and the violent crimes attributed to the owners of these weapons. Although
there have been no recent changes in the laws regarding gun ownership or the banning of certain
types of weapons, there has been a perceived rise in gun violence. The media has effectively
focused public attention on sensational crimes committed by criminals that used legally obtained
guns. One recent example is the elementary school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School
in Connecticut that left 26 people dead, most of them children (Sandy Hook Shooting). Such
heinous acts deserve attention and analysis because violent individuals continually seek to rip
communities apart and cause disorder among people. Even though the intentions of the media
and those with an agenda to severely restrict gun ownership may appear noble and benevolent,
only seeking to eliminate the threat of future incidents, is the passing of new laws that would ban
or seriously restrict gun-ownership the right solution to gun violence?
Throughout history, mankind has been on a constant search to improve weapons. This is
because weapons serve as a tool for protection against those who would unlawfully encroach on
anothers person or property. With a gun, the weak are able to defend themselves against the
strong, the powerless against the powerful, and the law-abiding citizens against reckless
criminals, thereby making it the greatest equalizer in society. Although criminals use guns to
commit terrible acts, thereby establishing and promoting the agenda of those advocating stricter
gun control laws, guns have also been seen to bring peace and harmony among communities.
One such example is a 70 year old women named Sandra who stopped a burglar in her house at
gun point while calling the police. When interviewed she said, Guns aren't all bad, only in the
hands of the criminalguns can be as good defense (Platt, Seventy-Year-Old Woman). What
must be noticed is that guns are merely an inanimate object which have the capacity to be used
for good and evil, depending on whose hands they are in. Once this reality is known, it becomes
evident that if restrictive gun control measures were to pass, there would be an immediate spike
in crime rate. The greatest equalizer would be taken from law-abiding citizens who pose no
threat to others and stand ready to defend themselves and others with their legal firearms.
Banning guns would also raise controversy because such laws would infringe upon the
American citizens historical right of gun ownership. Restrictive laws contradict what many
people believe the Second Amendment stands for.
It is widely believed by people throughout the United States that the Second Amendment
stands for the free ownership of guns to those who are ordinary, law-abiding citizens. The
United States, throughout its history, has been known to support and protect the right of citizens
to bear arms. The Second Amendment states that a Well-regulated militia being necessary to

Cottrell 2

the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
(U.S. Const. Am II). This is saying that freedom is in danger of being ripped away when guns,
the greatest guarantee of governmental restraint, are taken out of citizens hands. The reason for
this is two-fold. First, all governments, both foreign and domestic, are prone to take advantage
of power. This could be the result of another country invading America or possibly a tyrannical
government ruling unopposed. Second, if guns are taken away from the public it will cause
internal turmoil as a result of criminals being able to break the law without the risk of a lawabiding and armed citizen taking action. If the widely held view of the Second Amendment is
altered so drastically as to bring about the banning of guns, the United States, which has for so
long been characterized by personal freedom in the right of gun ownership, will undergo a
significant change.
The Second Amendment serves to protect America from external forces by arming
ordinary citizens. When inhabitants are armed and able to fight for their land, this empowers
them to resist the threat of foreign nations and possibly tyrannical government. Communities are
more inclined to fight when threats upon their daily lives are sensed, and fear is placed upon
those in authority who would use their power to oppress when the populace is armed and able to
revolt. Would-be dictators think twice about a sudden grab for power when the people have
guns. During World War II, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy, Isoroku
Yamamoto, said that invading America would be impossible because There would be a rifle
behind every blade of grass" (Yamamoto). Isokuru is stating the obvious that it would be foolish
for any foreign nation to invade America when the populace is so heavily armed. The authors of
the Second Amendment knew well that armed citizens insure Americas freedom by discouraging
foreign countries from making war with the United States on American soil. They also knew the
difficulty the government would face in controlling armed citizens. It is far less likely for
tyrannical rule to take place when power is in the peoples hands. Thus, if the ban on guns goes
into effect, this will place citizens under the mere whim of those in authority over them, thus
posing an eminent threat to their lives and freedoms. Therefore, the Second Amendment does
more to protect people from foreign invasion, and the possibility of tyrannical rule than most
people would care to admit.
The Second Amendment also serves to protect the country from internal turmoil by
arming law-abiding citizens. When law-abiding citizens are able to carry guns, they have the
opportunity to stop direct gun violence just as much as the police. If an armed citizen is at the
scene of a crime, he is able to act quickly and prevent further violence. However, if strict gun
control legislation were to pass, only law abiding citizens would turn in their weapons while the
criminals would keep theirs and possibly obtain those which were obediently turned in! A
person becomes a criminal by disobeying the law. It is foolish to assume that criminals will
suddenly begin to obey the law when they are notoriously called criminals for breaking it. Gun
control will only backfire and create more violence because it takes a great equalizer out of law

Cottrell 3

abiding citizens hands and places it firmly in the hand of those who would disregard the law
anyway. Thomas Jefferson says,
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor
determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better
for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed
man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one. (Jefferson)
Jefferson is saying that laws are only effective against those who obey them, and that gun control
laws only penalize law abiding citizens and do nothing to prevent criminal behavior. John Lott,
author of More Guns, Less Crime, argues that in light of the large stock of guns in the United
States, it is quite doubtful that the government would be adequately able to regulate the flow of
guns because of the preexisting Difficulties the government [already has] in preventing other
illegal items, such as drugs, from entering the country (11). Therefore, in light of criminals
natural disobedience of laws and the low chances that the government would be able to
completely restrict guns, it is certainly accurate to say that gun violence cannot be solved by
enacting gun control legislation. James Torr believes that Crime cant be curbed by disarming
its victims (62). If more restrictive gun control measures are passed, the first people affected by
it will be those who submissively turn in their guns first.
The people who push for gun control as the only answer to solving gun related violence
argue against the Second Amendment, claiming that it is no longer applicable today. They claim
that the Second Amendment is invalid because it was written as a direct result of the situation in
history when Americans actively needed armed militia men for protection against their enemies.
Gun-control advocates push to invalidate the Second Amendment by arguing that it is no longer
necessary because the United States now has local police and the National Guard for protection.
People who look toward the government to solve their problems also say that the abundance of
guns contributes to more crime by making guns more easily available to criminals. However, it
is still important that law-abiding citizens who want to carry guns are permitted to do so because
they can quickly halt an attacker. Mark Steyn says that in his ghetto neighborhood in New
Hampshire, everyone is so well armed that any gangster who causes trouble would be Quickly
ventilated. He says guns are important in the hands of law-abiding citizens because The right
of individual self-defense deters crime, constrains it, prevents it from spreading out of the druginfested failed jurisdictions (Steyn). Thus, the ownership of guns by good citizens helps
communities prevent crime by making the potential criminal think twice before breaking the law.
In extreme situations, armed citizens may prevent further violence by acting on behalf of the law
when the police show up to the scene too late. However, even if gun violence was solved and
murder prevented, criminals will always find new ways of committing crimes by using whatever
technology is available at the time, be it sticks or a homemade bomb. Humanity has always been
on a progression towards the improvement of weapons and is used to commit crime, and there is
no way in which it can be stopped. Instead of blaming the gun, it may be more useful to focus

Cottrell 4

societys attention on finding solutions to gun violence rather than resorting to a complete and
needlessly restrictive ban on guns.
Because the media has chosen to turn peoples attention toward guns, America is at a
pivotal point in her history. The decision about gun control will greatly influence the way the
United States continues its history. If the significance that guns have had in shaping the United
States is forgotten, the United States that was once envisioned as a free country may quickly fall
under tyranny. The instant guns are banned from the hands of citizens, the inevitability of strife
and conflict arises between those in authority and the powerless. Conflict will ensue because the
greatest equalizer of power at this time in history, the gun, will be out of the hands of lawabiding citizens and the government will have unmatched power.
One of the most common techniques used to conquer a nation, both ancient and modern,
is to disarm them. If a country is disarmed, it stands no chance in fighting against its enemy.
The ancient Philistines knew this well and actively practiced it when they conquered nations. In
the Bible, after the Philistines defeated Israel, it says that Not a blacksmith could be found in
the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, Otherwise the Hebrews will make
swords or spears! (New International Version, 1 Samuel 3.19). This is an example of the affect
of disarming a nation and why the importance of owning weapons is so vital to freedom.
A look at recent history illustrates the effects of an absence of private gun ownership.
Just before Nazi Germany invaded Austria, Hitler had gained the peoples trust and convinced
them to rid themselves of guns in order to promote peace. A survivor of Nazi Germany, Kitty
Werthmann retells how the Austrians fell victim to Hitlers grand scheme of military domination
by ridding Austria of personal guns. Soon after the Austrians disarmed themselves, Hitler
quickly swept through Austria and was unmatched because of the lack of weapons.
Although there must be attention given to gun related violence, it has been shown that
gun violence has been on a steady decline since the 1980s. The United States Department of
Justice has released statistics showing that homicide rates have been on a steady decline since the
1980s, from a peak of 10.2 victims for every 100,000 to just 4.8 per 100,000 in 2010 (Cooper
28). Instead of blaming guns, perhaps it is more important to turn the eye of the public onto the
criminal instead of the device used in the crime. The United States tends to place more blame on
the weapon used and attack that, rather than arguing for the criminal to be brought to justice.
Will correcting the environment prevent criminal behavior? Criminals will always find a way to
cause destruction and harm. Therefore, it is time to recognize that the solution to gun violence
does not lie in the further restriction of gun ownership, but rather by acknowledging that guns are
merely instruments that may be used to commit acts of violence and are not the cause.

Cottrell 5

Works Cited
Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment II
Cooper, Alexia, and Erica L. Smith. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Homicide Trends in the United States, November 2011. Web. 6 May 2013
Jefferson, Thomas. Monticello.org. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, 1987. Web. 8 May 2013.
Lott, John Jr. More Guns, Less Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Print, 2010. Print.
New International Version Bible. Ed. Carlson Leslie and Edmund Clowney et al. Grand Rapids:
Biblica, 2011. Web, 8 May 2013.
Platt, Sarah Seventy-year-old woman holds home intruder at gunpoint, talks about ordeal.
WNDU News. 6 Jan. 2009: Web. 21 May 2013.
Poe, Richar. The Seven Myths of Gun Control. Roseville: Prima Publishing, 2001. Print.
Sandy Hook Shooting: What Happened? CNN. Web. 21 May 2013.
Steyn, Mark. This is what happens when governments try to ban guns, The Telegraph 5 Jan.
2003: Web. 22 Apr. 2013.
Torr, James. Gun Violence, Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2002. Print.
Werthmann, Kitty. She Survived Hitler and Wants to Warn America. Eagle Forum 11 Mar. 2003:
Web. 21 May 2013.

Yamamoto, Isoroku. Great Quotations of World War II. Skylighters. Web. 6 May 2013.