Guns in a Failing Society

 
WP_20130709_0099

GunsThis is a discussion which has been going on for years should the general population have access to guns for self defense or does it just create more of a problem.  There are many people that feel that guns are barbaric and that because we live in such an advanced world and are so advanced as people that guns are no longer necessary.  There are also those that feel that if we are to own guns that we are living in some kind of wild west where we are going to have shootouts.  What they don’t realize is that these criminals don’t really respect an laws.  If we look at many of the highest homicide and crime rate locations in the US you will find most of them have very restrictive firearms policies that really haven’t shown in any capacity to be beneficial.

Guns ultimately provide protection for oneself and family all responsible owners know this and will agree that through no fault of their own the police take longer than needed most times to arrive after dialing 911, than if they picked their gun up to defend themselves and their family.  This is by no means an endorsement to become a vigilante and go chasing down bad guys as if you were Dirty Harry.  One of our basic needs is protection and a gun helps to increase your protection.

Most people who think that a world without guns would be a better one in principle are not wrong however think of it like this and see if you understand why i disagree,  a world without guns give people the opportunity to rule with violence it happened before them and it would happen again without them.  I know your thinking guns are violent, however they also deter violence.  In the US the statistics don’t lie more crimes are stopped by the use of guns.  The low estimates of guns saving lives is about 80 to 100k and high estimates say 2.5 million.  This can be hard to find the true number as there are many times crimes are stopped without firing a shot, but are never reported.
For example : violent men using knives bats or other weapons will stop and think if they have a gun aimed at them, because they are ultimately not as quick as the gun.

Guns also give people the option to help,
For example : A man attacking a woman with a knife in your home your wife / daughter or mother even, would you pull a gun to stop them from being harmed?
Now ask yourself how much could you do unarmed?

Lets face it unstable people will always find a way to hurt ; a world without guns leaves others unable to protect themselves without becoming violent themselves, it would leave us vulnerable and open to attack from enemies with more violent tendencies than our own.
Do you remember the saying Guns don’t kill people, people kill people never has this been more relevant.

The supreme court has already ruled twice that a ban on handguns would be unconstitutional due the fact that the second amendment states the right to keep and bear arms.

I feel the need for guns in society especially a failing one are necessary, key people should be trained to handle a gun safely for protection and self defense. Imagine a situation where a madman enters a building like a school with the intention of killing.  If there is  no one in the school that is armed to protect therefore until the police arrive people are at his mercy. If you had a trained key person with firearm on site then they could intervene ( as they will have been trained) and prevent the unnecessary loss of life while the police are on route.  In almost all instances of mass shootings as soon as another armed individual enters the scene the gunman normally kill themselves and stop anymore killing.  If companies don’t allow guns on their premises then they should have armed guards as the people are not able to protect themselves.  This is the reason there are really never robberies and shootings at gun stores and gun shows because there is a deterent to those who believe they can prey on the weak and unarmed.

Is our society failing?  It’s is hard to see how we will get out of some of the bad financial decisions, but we may very well be just fine.  As preppers we are preparing for the other side of that coin where the problem is not fixed and we fall into dismay.  If this is a case it is hard to see where violence, self defense and crime won’t happen.  So being prepared with firearms and ammo is an essential part to prepping.  If you have years worth of food and water but nothing to protect yourself,  I can not see a person being able to successfully keep their things and thrive in that type of society.

Pinterest
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Google Plus
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
  • Diigo

About 

I am Josh the owner of Beat The End. I am a prepper and trying to be more self sufficient. The most likely thing I am preparing for is an economic meltdown/civil unrest. I am a hunter, fisherman and outdoors man. I have also made a part of the website to explain and inform to my readers the importance of liberty and freedom and libertarianism. If you would like to see the political part of the site please go to beattheend.com/politics.

    Find more about me on:
  • facebook
  • googleplus
  • twitter

6 Responses to Guns in a Failing Society

  1. Glenn says:

    The key phrase here is “responsible owners.” I have no problem with people owning firearms, as long as it is a reasonable number of weapons, and that they’re being used for their intended purpose.

    One problem is, some guns are often bought because they’re “cool.” Guns are tools, not toys, but far too many people don’t understand that.

    Many believe that since owning guns is a right, training in their use, maintenance and storage isn’t necessary. Most of the guns in the hands of criminals are stolen from legitimate owners who didn’t properly secure their weapons.

    If gun owners want to earn back the respect of the general public, they need to support laws that punish the irresponsible among them.

    • Beat The End says:

      To your first point everybody should be responsible. What is reasonable? I don’t believe there should be number restrictions we can only really use one at a time(maybe a rifle and side arm). What is their intended purpose? From what I know the intended purpose is only to fire a projectile. So are you saying if they are not firing a projectile they are not being used for their intended purpose? Would the intended purpose be to hunt, target shoot, or stop a tyrannical regime(which is what the 2nd amendment really is for)?

      I see no problem with cool guns being bought. Would having “ugly” non cool guns help with anything? I have bought cars and tools in the past because they were cool, but they also serve a purpose. Guns are definitely tools not toys, but that is not to say you can’t have have fun while shooting them, just as you may have fun driving a car or using a saw. I do believe safety is the number one aspect. You should always be safe around guns just like other tools.

      While I do believe gun owners should get training and do classes, I personally do not think it should be mandatory. Do you feel that we should have to take a test or pay a poll tax to vote(which is a right)? I also agree that we should secure guns properly for not just the damage a criminal could do with them but also because we don’t want our possessions stolen. Each persons idea of irresponsible can be different. I think the people who left a .22 in the corner of a room where their 5 yr old son played(the gun was the 5 year old sons) then he ends up shooting and killing a 2 yr old. This seems like negligence to me. I also believe that while the closet isn’t the best place for a gun because it is not totally secure, I think if you have a door locked and your gun hidden like this that you are not responsible for someone breaking in your home and stealing your gun. Would you then be in favor of responsibility being placed on a car owner for a car thief stealing and unlocked car (possibly running) and then doing damage or killing somebody? I feel we should be placing the responsibility on the criminal.

      While I do believe some people may respect gun owners if they are “responsible”(which someone may say a person who has an AR15 is irresponsible whether locking it up in the best safe or not). I think there are many more that just don’t care and would rather throw the 2nd amendment right out the window. I think the reason for this is that they actually believe gun control is a good way to stop crime. It has really never been shown to work. Criminals don’t seem to care.

      So in conclusion guns can be very fun, but you should always be safe when handling guns. It is a great idea to lock them up just like you may lock any valuables up. You also don’t want to secure your guns so much that you are not able to get them when you need to protect yourself. So a finger print or number code safe would probably be the best bet. I also am not for rights having stipulations until your right takes away others rights. Just having and holding a gun does not take away others rights. Now assaulting, shooting or threatening people with a gun is a different story.

      Just remember Ben Franklin’s quote “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    • Steve says:

      Sorry Glenn I’m going to disagree with you on almost every point you’ve made or tried to make.

      First off, let’s set the foundation for this discussion. Owning and carrying firearms is a right GUARANTEED by the Constitution for all law abiding US citizens and is as inalienable as the pursuit of happiness. This right was designed to guarantee that this land for the people and by the people remains that way. I would go so far as to say that owning and knowing how to use and care for a firearm is as much a responsibility as voting. Whether or not this person or that politician agrees is a sideline discussion and I would suggest you are in the wrong country if you disagree. Again, that’s another conversation.

      Second off, who are you going to appoint to decide whether or not a person is responsible? With regards to firearms, sadly Darwin’s law typically weeds out the irresponsible. It’s tragic and sad and easily avoidable. And what is reasonable? A collector may be just getting started with 100’s of functioning semi-automatic and automatic weapons throughout history and would not be out of order. In either case I could use your argument with most parents in this country with regards to responsibility and reason and yet I don’t hear any legislation trying to limit the ability to have kids.

      Third, guns are cool. They look cool, they feel cool, they do cool things. Function is usually the first consideration, but form is always a close second. It’s true of every thing else we purchase and use, why not with firearms? And yes, some are “toys”; purchased for the sheer enjoyment gained from using them. But just like a plane or a sports car or an ATV, they aren’t meant to be used without care or training. I’ll take my primary carry pistol to the range just for fun. I can’t say the same for my angle grinder.

      Most gun owners I know are trained in firearms handling, usage, safety, maintenance and storage. I’m not sure what gun owners you are referring to who don’t think these things are important. As for stolen weapons, I could say the same of cars and SUVs (also known to be indiscriminate killers).

      As for your respect, I doubt many gun owners care if they have it or not. I’m not trying to be offensive, but that is the truth. The vast majority are law abiding citizens who are punished to the full extent of the law where it is warranted. As a matter of fact every time a new law gets put on the books to prevent criminals from obtaining firearms, law abiding citizens are double punished. Criminals don’t care about your laws…that’s why they’re called criminals.

    • Stacey says:

      I’m in full support of laws that will punish people for using firearms irresponsibly, however, one of the major problems is the fact that the laws we currently have are NOT being used, or used to their fullest extent. I also take issue with the way in which you prased the last paragraph. It assumes that “gunowners” are a club seperate from the general public with a few irresponsable members. Please don’t lump me(a responsable firearm owner)in with criminals who happen to use a firearm to commit a crime, or exclude me from being a member of the general public because I exersize my constitutional right.

  2. Rick says:

    Personally I don’t think that the government, nor other citizens should have any say in other people’s lives, especially when it comes to firearms. Shootings happen… its gonna happen no matter what. Thinking you can control them with more laws is just asinine.

Leave a Reply to Stacey Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pinterest