Amanda Campanha
Dr. Huffman
109-01
6 Dez 2024
Guns in Society
The authorization or restriction of citizens’ access to firearms is a topic that has always been
controversial in society. It continues to cause countless debates and divide opinions. Some people
defend the prohibition of firearm access, while others argue that access should be granted, primarily
to ensure individuals’ right to self-defense. The truth is that the ideal scenario would be a balance
between these two positions – allowing people to exercise their right to self-defense through firearm
access, but with more stringent and limited regulations. This would help achieve a balance between
public safety and individual freedom and security. After all, the right to have guns, when effectively
regulated, is essential to ensure personal and public safety.
First of all, the main reason why firearm access should be allowed is the necessity and the
right to self-defense. That is, people have the right to protect themselves, their homes, and their
families, and one of the most effective ways to do it is through firearm ownership. This is because,
in an unarmed society, criminals become the only ones with power and influence because they have
weapons. Malicious individuals with bad intentions will have access to firearms regardless of
whether it is legalized or prohibited, leaving citizens unprotected and vulnerable. In countries where
firearm possession is entirely prohibited, such as Brazil, for example, only the police and criminals
have guns. Consequently, crime rates are extremely high, because people lack effective means of
protection, and criminals end up with disproportionate power.
Indeed, laws differ between countries, and each has its own culture and understanding of the
issue. In the United States, the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to bear
arms in defense of individual liberty and self-defense (Reagan Library). This reflects the
prioritization of a free society. Meanwhile, in Brazil, for instance, there is the Disarmament Statute
(Law n. 10,826/2003), which imposes extremely strict regulations and prohibited firearm possession
by citizens, only in exceptional cases (Presidency of the Republic of Brazil). This demonstrates a
restriction on firearm access under the false pretext of reducing violence, which, in reality, only
leads to more violence.
The ideal scenario for any society would be to allow citizens access to guns, so they can
defend themselves, reducing violence caused by criminals who have access to guns regardless of the
law. However, this must be accompanied by effective regulation, including limits, restrictions,
prerequisites, and background checks. Only then would it be possible to find a balance between the
right to own firearms and the reduction of violence and mortality caused by guns. Effective
regulation could include, for example, limiting access for individuals who present risks through
criminal and psychological background checks, as well as mental health evaluations. It could also
include raising the minimum age for firearm access, requiring specific and effective training for use,
storage, and handling of guns (Kristof).
This would increase safety by preserving individual defense while reducing domestic
accidents and mass shootings perpetrated by individuals with mental health issues. In some
countries, such as Switzerland and Canada, firearm-related violence rates are lower because strict
licensing requirements and regular training programs are already in place (Masters).
There are, however, individuals who believe that gun access should be entirely prohibited,
arguing that it increases gun violence, particularly mass shootings and domestic accidents involving
firearms. They use as examples countries with stricter laws, such as Japan and the United Kingdom,
which have lower rates of gun violence compared to the US (Yip). But this argument weakens when
viewed in a broader context, because those countries, for example, are developed nations with
significantly lower rates of poverty, lack of education, and poor health system – factors that heavily
contribute to lower violence rates. In many other countries, such as Brazil, stricter laws do not result
in lower rates of firearm violence. On the contrary, they lead to higher violence and mortality rates
(Naghavi et al.).
Therefore, it becomes clear that, when analyzing the risks and benefits of legalizing firearm
possession, citizen access is essential for self-defense, the protection of individual rights, and
society safety. However, this must be accompanied by effective restrictions and regulations to
establish sufficient prerequisites to prevent gun violence. A responsibly armed society ensures that
power and strength are distributed among all, not just criminals, thereby increasing individual and
public safety while preserving a balance between individual and collective rights.
Works Cited
Kristof, Nicholas. "How to Reduce Shootings.”The New York Times, 25 May 2022,
[Link]
Masters, Jonathan. “U.S. Gun Policy: Global Comparisons.” Council on Foreign Relations, 7 Oct.
2022, [Link]
Naghavi,Mohsen, et al. “Global Mortality from Firearms, 1990-2016.”Population Health Metrics,
vol. 18, n. 1, 2020,
https;//[Link]/articles/10.1186/s12963-020-00222-3#:˜:text=Bra
zil%20leads%20the%20world%20in,factors%20study%20(GBD)%202017.
Presidency of the Republic of Brazil. Law n. 10,826, of December 22, 2003. 22 Dec. 2003,
https//[Link]/ccivil_03/leis/2003/l10.826/htm.
Reagan Library. "Constitutional Amendments – Amendment 2 – ‘The Right to Keep and Bear
Arms'.” Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum,
[Link]
arms#:˜:text=and%20Bear%20Arms%E2%80%9D-,Constitutional%20Amendments%20%E2
%80%93%20Amendment%202%20%E2%80%93%20%E2%80%9CThe%20Right,to%20Ke
ep%20and%20Bear%20Arms%E2%80%9D&text=Amendment%20Two%20to%20the%20Co
nstitution,their%20rights%2C%20and%20their%20property.
Yip, Hilary Whiteman. "Why Gun VIolence is so Rare in Japan.”CNN, 8 July 2022,
[Link]
t=Gun%20violence%20is%20extremely%20rare%20in%20Japan.,Public%20Health%20at%2
0the%20University%20of%20Sydney.
