Huyboom 1

Austin Huyboom
Miss Stone
English 1010 Period 1
30 December 2015
Stop Gun Control
I remember I heard my parents talking about someone in the neighborhood loose
with a gun. I remember my mom seeming startled, with my older sister not being any
calmer. My dad however, seemed confident although serious. He gathered the family
together in our living room, near our hallway. He had his gun in his hand and in his other
hand he proceeded to dial 911 on the phone to call the police. If the man enters our
home or gets near my family, do I have permission to shoot? The dispatcher replied,
Absolutely. If anything to protect the wellbeing of you and your family. We have
policemen sent on their way to take care of the situation. My dad proceeded to tell us
everything would be alright and that he would protect us. Luckily no one ever got near
our house and everything was perfectly fine, and the man was caught by the police.
Me being as young as I was, it was horrifying to hear that someone dangerous
was out and about. But I understood that I was safe because we had a weapon that we
could fight back with. Everything that had went down was also completely legal, and yet
there are many people in the world who do not have the opportunity to protect
themselves like we were. I chose this topic because this is something that is a common
subject today and it is a widely controversial topic which I would like to explore more.
Firearms are widely seen as something that hinders protection, although my first
experience with a gun was in contrast to that. The Second Amendment was created by

Huyboom 2

our Founding Fathers in the Bill of Rights to ensure that we would never lose the right to
bare arms, in other words, the ability to protect ourselves. The desire for protection is
also increasing over the years. In 1999, 26% of people wanted guns for protection, with
the rest of the percentages going towards hunting, sport, and collecting. By 2013 48%
wanted guns for protection (Why). Protection is becoming more and more of a
necessity whether it is a home invasion or protecting your loved ones, known as the
Castle Doctrine. As defined by Brendan Purves, The Castle Doctrine (also known as
castle law or make my day law) gives citizens in their homes and in some states
cars or workplaces the right to protect themselves, other people, and their property by
force in some instances even deadly force. This is important because it gives people
the ability to protect themselves in their home, where protection is needed most. Many
people share a residency with people important to them, whether it be their children or
their spouse, and many would protect them at all costs.
Not only are guns needed to protect yourself from criminals, but also against
your country. The idea may seem extreme, however gun control laws give too much
power to the government and may result in a tyranny government (Gun). This idea is
relevant no matter what the time period is, thats why the Second Amendment was
created. Wayne LaPierre stated, "if you look at why our Founding Fathers put it [the
Second Amendment] there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they
wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be
subjugated again and have to live under tyranny (Gun). The greatest way to protect
yourself from a tyranny government is through having the right to keep and bear arms. A

Huyboom 3

tyranny government is something that has happened all throughout history and the
Second Amendment is what puts a stop to it.
A well known example of a government tyranny happened around World War II
with the Nazis. Stephen Halbrooks article describes, In 1931, Weimar authorities
discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons
refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed and Constitutional
rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident
publications ensued. Which sounds similar to what gun control laws intend to do.
Putting a ban on guns opens us up to a government dictatorship just like the Jewish
population was subject to in the 1930s. By disarming the people, it will give complete
power to the government.
Gun control laws do not stop crime either. As studied by Simon Rogers, the
United States has the highest gun ownership in the world, averaging out to be 88 out of
100 people who own guns, yet Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica has the worst
firearm murder rate (Rogers). Each of these countries own less than 10 out of 100 guns
per person, yet have at least 13 times the firearm death rate per 100,000 people than
the U.S. (Rogers). Mexico has very strict gun laws, but yet they have 9.9 gun murders
per 100,000 people compared to the U.S. only having 2.9 per 100,000 people (Rogers).
The U.S. ranks the highest with gun ownership yet the U.S. is ranke d 28 with firearm
deaths (Rogers). Gun control doesnt actually stop crime and it may be the opposite
case. The U.S. has a higher firearm ownership, and yet the firearm death rate is
substantially lower and it is only ranked 28 with firearm deaths.

Huyboom 4

Another study by Benjamin Domenech shows that an increase of gun ownership

may decrease firearm related crimes. In 2011, there was an increase of gun ownership
by a third as firearm related crimes dropped by 74 percent. Every year there are more
and more firearms in the hands of citizens and there are less gun related homicides
every year (Domenech). In 1992 there were 9.3 firearm homicides per 100,000 people,
by 2010 there were 4.8 homicides per 100,000 people and the number is decreasing
every year (Domenech). This study by Domenech also correlates with the study by
Simon Rogers. In 2012 when Rogers did his study, there were 2.9 homicides per
100,000 people. Firearm homicide rates are decreasing while gun ownership is
increasing. This completely puts the idea that guns increase homicides to a standstill.
As Thomas Sowells findings state: Russia, Brazil and Mexico have higher murder rates
than the United States despite having stronger gun control.
These statistics have been observed throughout history, and the pattern has
been observed many times. As Thomas Sowell put it,
In the middle of the 20th century, you could buy a shotgun in London with
no questions asked. New York, which at that time had had the stringent
Sullivan Law restricting gun ownership since 1911, still had several times
the gun murder rate of London, as well as several times the London
murder rate with other weapons.
It was safer to be in London where there were guns, compared to New York with the
Sullivan Law. In New York, the citizens had nothing to protect themselves meanwhile
the criminals used other weapons to commit crimes. The pattern was also observed
several decades later with robberies. In 1954 there were a dozen armed robberies in

Huyboom 5

London, but by the 1990s after strict gun control laws were put into place, that number
increased into the hundreds (Sowell). The pattern is still there. The less guns, the more
crime there is. Limiting guns will not stop crime or robberies.
Whether or not you have gun control laws, criminals will still be criminals. John
Lott from the Wall Street Journal took note of this, The problem with such laws is that
they take away guns from law-abiding citizens, while would-be criminals ignore them,
leaving potential victims defenseless. This will cause gangs and murderers to roam
free with no one able to protect themselves. Guns will even the playing field as Bill
Whittle described it. Without guns criminals will just turn to other weapons that they
could obtain, whether it be a knife, bat, or a piece of debris such as a sharp piece of
metal or a piece of wood. For example, this gives the hardened criminal an edge over
the small old lady, causing the playing field to be uneven. Having guns will allow the old
lady to have equal power against the criminal.
If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. says John Stossel.
Guns will only affect the actions of people who dont commit crimes in the first place
(Stossel). By putting a ban on guns, you are putting a ban on people protecting
themselves from criminals. Not only will banning guns stop lawful people from protecting
themselves, but it will also cause guns to be illegally imported. This means that
criminals will have leverage against their victims. It will also cause money, that would
otherwise go in the U.S. economy, go into circulation of gang groups that smuggle guns.
More guns (in the right hands) can stop crime, and fewer guns (in the wrong hands)
can make for more crime. Gun control isn't crime control (Stossel). Keep guns in the
right hands.

Huyboom 6

Ian Ayres argues that guns stimulate burglary and theft, with 1.4 million guns
stolen from homes over 6 years (procon). While that statistic is true, it could be lowered
by stopping gun control laws. If a someone is denied from buying a gun, then they will
find another way to get one, which includes breaking into peoples home and robbing
them of their personal possessions. Gun control stimulates burglary and theft.
Additionally, if there is a burglar that has broken into someones house, they will target
expensive items. Guns are expensive items. Not only does gun control stimulate
burglary and theft, but it will create theft on a larger scale, something never seen in the
history of the United States. Government seizure of private possessions on a massive
scale and without compensation (Domenech). Banning firearms would be an
infringement towards the Fourth and Fifth Amendment (Domenech). If guns are revoked
from the population, it will create a bigger problem than an increase of crime, an uneven
playing field or a government tyranny. It will create a civil war.
Maintain your right to keep and bear arms. Why have guns? Guns are great for
protection, whether it is towards criminals or your state. Guns reduce the crime rate,
and no matter what law is in place; criminals will be criminals. Gun Control laws are
detrimental and should not be enacted. It has been observed throughout history that the
gun laws laws are ineffective and firearms are needed to protect us from crime and
tyranny. To own guns are our right, it is an honor that we live in a nation which its
citizens can keep and bear arms. It is a freedom that we must maintain responsibility
and safely.

Huyboom 7

Works Cited
Domenech, Benjamin. "The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control."
EBSCO. 1 Feb. 2013. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
"Gun Control." ProCon.org. 11 Nov. 2015. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Halbrook, Stephen P. "How the Nazis Used Gun Control." National Review Online.
National Review, 2 Dec. 2013. Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
Lott, John R. "Gun Control Misfires in Europe." WSJ. The Wall Street Journal, 30
Apr. 2002. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Purves, Brendan. "Castle Doctrine from State to State." Castle Doctrine from State to
State. South University, 1 June 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.
Rogers, Simon. "Gun Homicides and Gun Ownership Listed by Country."
Theguardian. Guardian News and Media Limited, 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 2
Dec. 2015.
"Second Amendment." Legal Information Institute. n.d. Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
Sowell, Thomas. "The Great Gun Control Fallacy." Theguardian. Guardian News
and Media Limited, 18 Dec. 2012. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Stossel, John. "Gun Control Isn't Crime Control." ABC News. ABC News
Network, 26 Apr. 2007. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
"Why Own a Gun? Protection Is Now Top Reason." Pew Research Center. 12
Mar. 2013. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.