I came across this news article where a guy shot two burglars who broke into his home and wondered, “What would I do if my own house was burgled?” In India, it’s almost impossible for an average citizen to get a gun through regular legal means. Is that a good thing?
For one, gun control laws in India don’t stop criminals from obtaining them. Every idiot gangster has a “country made” pistol and I don’t think they shell out a fortune for them either. They only prevent law abiding citizens from obtaining them for self defense.
Second, many Indians are helpless to defend themselves in case of a break in or when some rowdy attacks them. Criminals are mostly cowards and I’m willing to bet that they would think twice before engaging in violence if there were even a slight risk of them getting killed or wounded. In my opinion, allowing citizens to obtain guns legally would necessarily reduce the rate of violent crime in India.
I particularly like this quote from Andrew Ford:
25 US States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it’s crazy. However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?”
During 26/11, many Indians felt helpless and outraged that they could do nothing to defend themselves.
Third, gun control laws were originally drafted in India by the British to keep the population from rebelling. The fact that these laws are still in place gives a hint as to how we Indians view our politicians and the government as our rulers instead of our servants. It might surprise you to know that Gandhi was against gun control. Here is what he said in his autobiography:
“Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.”
Of course, there are many objections to making guns easily available. Some feel that it will encourage crime. I don’t share that opinion since it’s already easy for a criminal to get a gun. Others feel that it’s dangerous to have children handle arms, and of course this is a valid concern. But that’s the responsibility of parents surely? We already have dangerous stuff lying in our houses like nitric acid for cleaning the bathrooms, sharp cooking knives and dangerous drugs which we lock away safely. Banning guns just to keep children safe is an irrational decision.
Imagine what would have happened had ordinary law abiding citizens possessed guns during the Godhra riots. A mob gets its power because it feels strong and is assured that the risk of injury is low. Would anyone have dared to just burst into another’s home if the homeowner had a gun? I think not.
There are lots of sensible people who feel strongly about either side of this issue. So what’s your take?
[poll id=”26″]
Watching Bowling for Columbine by Michael Moore and thought I would share something that a regular Canadian guy said – ‘if guns were to make people safer, then the US would be the safest country in the world. But it is not.’ The US statistic for gun related crime at the time the film was made was 11,172 shootings. Versus 68 in the UK, 255 in France and 381 in Germany.
In reply to Sangitha
What we really need to do is to see whether other types of crime are increased or decreased. Take suicides for example. There are many ways to commit suicide, but if guns are legal, naturally the number of gun based suicides will be higher than a place where they’re not. But are there total fewer suicides?
Also, we should also discount systemic problems by comparing within the US in states where guns are legal/illegal. I believe the data there is very far from conclusive.
In reply to Sangitha
Note that US Constitution allows the citizens to bear arms and it’s the 2nd amendment in their Constitutional Rights. That alone should tell you the importance of bearing arms. However, like many others, I used to ridicule that idea up until a few yrs ago but not anymore, when I realized the real reason behind why Americans are allowed to carry guns.
First of all, understand that the gun ownership rights were given to theAmericans not for duck-hunting or for defending their properties against theft or decoit. The SOLE REASON why the founding fathers of US penned down that right was that IF EVER THE GOVERNMENT TURNS OPPRESSIVE AGAINST IT’S PEOPLE, THEN THE GOVT. SHOULD KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE WEAPONS”. In other words, if the Govt. turns oppressive against its own people and becomes a tyrant, then the people should be able to defend themselves because the Govt. is for the people and according to the constitution of US it says: “We the people give FEW rights to the Government and RESERVE THE REST with us. This is the very reason why the Constitution allowed the citizens to bear arms.
Note that this rule was there for over 200 yrs and there wasn’t any gun related crimes up until some 10 – 20 yrs ago. So what has changed in last couple of decades? Do a little research and you will be shocked. There was a time (30 – 40 yrs ago) when Americans use to leave their home unlocked; there was a time when they used to leave the keys in the ignition of their cars and trucks with loaded guns in it and nobody ever cared to steal it and shoot others.
These days you see an explosion of gun related crimes in US and it’s hyped 10 times more by the mainstream media. Guns are often blamed by the media and government for most of these crimes committed by psychics and school children. What they won’t say is the history of these psychics. If you take each individual cases and trace back into their life, you will find that in 99% of the times, the people who commit these crimes are under the influence of drugs and more shockingly PRESCRIPTION drugs. Millions of children in America take psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin, Paxil, Zoloft and even Prozac for presumed disorders such as ADD/ADHD. You won’t believe it but wait a minute. On the other hand, America is becoming a full-fledged NAZI germany kind of country and they are only inches away from being/becoming a full NAZI Nation. People posseing weapons are a threat to any Govt. take over and that’s the reason why the Govt. and their controlled media propagates the myth of guns as the cause of crimes. Blaming guns for these shooting crimes is like blaming spoons for being fat. It’s as silly as that. I’ve written about this issue in an article titled “The Drugging of Our Children” and you can find the real reason why these gun related crimes are on the rise. Check the foll. link:
http://indian007-newswithviews.blogspot.com/2010/01/drugging-of-our-children.html
Coming to the question of should Indians own guns, I have no definite answers. I would answer a Big NO and a small Yes. NO, because I don’t think Indians have matured enough to be like Americans who had no problems with guns for nearly 200 yrs although Indians and their children are far less drugged by the pharmaceutical companies. Yes, because in these days when the Govt. is taking more rights and freedom away from us, we may want to defend ourselves.
WHY SHOULD SMALL ARMS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CIVILIANS
The new millennium has been described as the age of communication but in the game of the shooting world this communication often takes place at hearsay. The legitimate procession of firearm was considered a hall mark of social recognition and responsible citizenship in our society for decades but now due to poor knowledge about firearms or other type of weapons, the same society is looking questioningly at the procession of the weapon.
The Arms Act was discussed and drafted after wide circulation to general opinion and made into Act in 1959 with rules and regulation to whom the licence to be issued and how to control its misuse under the regulation.
It was also accepted that the service of civil licence holders can be ultilised in emergency or other time when the same will be required.
Now, it has been questioned by many dignitary people that why weapon should be allowed to the civilians without knowing that in today’s scenario it is widely required by each bank, goldsmith shops and every public place where safety is required.
What Bearing Weapons Teaches About the Good Life
The bearing of arms is the essential medium through which the individual asserts both his social power and his participation in politics as a responsible moral being… (Historian J.G.A. Pocock, describing the beliefs of the founders of the U.S.)
Girrish Sharma
Why Citizens need to be armed
Curtailing gun ownership, to curb violent crime, through denying licenses or making legal arms & ammunition ridiculously expensive is based on flawed reasoning. The fact is that licensed firearms are found to be used in a statistically insignificant number of violent crimes, motorcycles & cars are far more dangerous. The certainty that a potential victim is unarmed is an encouragement to armed criminals. Less guns, more crime. Most violent crimes involving firearms are committed using untraceable illegal guns. Terrorists or the mafia are not going to be deterred by gun-control laws, they will be willing and able to procure arms of their choice and use them to commit crimes irrespective of any laws. Ironically in India it is cheaper (by several times) to buy the same gun in the black market than it is to buy it legally!
“Gun control? It’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I’m a bad guy, I’m always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You’ll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I’ll pull the trigger. We’ll see who wins.” — Sammy “The Bull” Gravano, Mafia hit man
“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” — Thomas Paine, Thoughts on Defensive War in 1775
And from the world’s gentlest human being:
“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” — The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the “Educating Heart Summit” in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate
It is, of course, no coincidence that the right to have guns is one of the earlier freedoms outlined in U.S.A.’s Bill of Rights. Without guns in the hands of the people, all the other freedoms are easily negated by the State. If you disagree with that statement, ask yourself if the Nazis could have gassed millions of Jews, had the Jews been armed with rifles and pistols–there weren’t enough SS troops to do the job. Lest we forget, in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, a couple of hundred Jews armed with rifles and homemade explosive devices held off two fully-equipped German divisions (actually about 8,000 men) for nearly two months.
Closer home take the case of the Godhra carnage and the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. Would wanton mobs have slaughtered so many innocent people with such disregard to consequences if their potential victims had been armed and ready to defend themselves? A serious consideration should be given to an armed civilian population as a solution to religious and racial riots as well as other crimes. Since all criminals are instinctively driven by self-preservation allowing legal ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens would act as a serious deterrent. This will make sure that if the Govt. fails to do its duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens (as it has so often done in India’s recent past), citizens will be able to protect themselves. I’ll take some potential objections and try to answer them