Everyone Should Have a Gun
"Everyone should be well armed and well trained in all manners of self defense including gun control." is what a good friend of mine tells me. He has a theory about guns that would make most people raise their brow with a look of you're an idiot.
He believes that everyone in this country should be armed with a gun at all times. He thinks that everyone would be safer, crime rates would decrease, and less blood would be spilled.
I know, I know...you disagree. I did too, but after throwing every argument I had at him, he convinced me that he was right.
It goes something like this:
Ideally, eliminating guns altogether would be the way to go. If we could somehow manage to take every single gun in the world and destroy them, we would be all set and I wouldn't have this Hub topic.
BUT, since that is absolutely impossible, we must then implement the next best option. which is arming every single person. No, we don't just have everyone line up and give out guns all willy-nilly. It will require an extremely in depth and complex training regiment, and it should be mandatory for all people.
People will be trained in all areas of gun use, safety, control. They will be trained in self defense, which will include scenario training. Each person will know what to do in the event that something goes awry. The training would be ongoing. (monthly, yearly...whatever is decided when instilling this theory) It seems like an extremely daunting undertaking, but it would be necessary to get everyone in society to where they need to be for this.
After the training is done for everyone, and we see this implemented, gun use, control and safety would become part of the education system. Children would be taught and trained starting at the time they enter school all of the necessary skills related to guns. It would be no different than learning math, science and history. The early and ongoing exposure would eliminate the fear of guns that children are generally taught now.
The gun safety and usage is the easy part of this. The scenario training is what will really make this theory successful. As long as this part of the training is on point, then giving every person a gun should indeed work.
Like I said, I debated the issue with him for a long time. The arguments I had were repeated by several people whom he talked with after me.
No guns is a much better way to go.
You are right, no guns would be better, but that isn't possible. There is already a black market for guns, and we obviously can't control it. We have regulations and laws already in place to control the guns; but because of that black market, anyone can get pretty much any kind of gun they want on the streets.
If everyone has a gun, more people will commit crimes.
Not true at all. Because everyone knows that everyone else is armed, people will be less likely to commit a crime. They have a much smaller chance of getting away with it when everyone around them is armed and trained. This is where the scenario training comes into play. Let's say a guy walks into a bank to rob it. As soon as he pulls out his gun or makes any kind of threat, the 5 employees, and 2-10 customers will have their weapons drawn and aimed right at him. He could try to shoot his way out, but he is outnumbered and will inevitably be shot.
People would just start shooting at anyone with their gun drawn. It would be chaotic, and the bad guy would not be the only guy that gets hurt.
People would be trained to assess every situation. They would be so well trained that they would know what is happening, and where to aim. If they do not, then they would not have their gun aimed at anyone. It all boils down to the training.
What happens if a person is attacked when they are by themselves?
The people who are going to attack a person who is by themselves is going to do it no matter what. They won't do it just because they have a gun. At least now, the victim has a better chance of protecting themselves because they have a gun and know how to use it.
Think about all the drunken bar fights...things would escalate and people would get shot instead of just beat up.
A person that is too drunk to realize that if they shoot someone, they will also be shot is definitely too drunk to use a gun. And if this is not the case, well we have one victim, which we would have had anyway, and a dead shooter who was useless to society anyway.
Say someone gets fired, becomes enraged, and brings a gun into the building and shoots the person that fired them.
This would happen anyway! If someone really wanted to shoot someone for firing them, there is nothing stopping them from getting a gun, legally or illegally. The fact that they know everyone in the office including the person who fired them is armed, will make them think twice before acting. They will be less likely to take this action knowing that they will be shot immediately.
What Do You Think?
Should everyone be armed?
There are several more arguments, but they always seem to come back to the same answer..."scenario training".
Examples of road rage and other whimsical moments in which people become angry causing things to escalate will be offset by training as well. As part of training, people will learn how to appropriately deal with stressful events.
Think of the benefits that we would all reap if everyone was armed. To name one...
Events such as Columbine and Virginia Tech would never happen. Sure, the shooter might get a couple shots off and might take a few victims, but if everyone in the room has a gun, the death count would drop dramatically in those types of situations. Imagine if just one person was armed during the Virginia Tech shooting spree...It could have been stopped long before it ended.
This is not my theory, however I do agree with it for the most part. I am sure that I have not done my friend justice in what he actually says about this, but lucky for us he will most likely read this, comment and answer comments that anyone might have.