Intro

Hello everyone, today we are here to discuss a topic of some debate in both the political
and everyday life circles, that is whether or not we need to, as a country, execute and enforce stricter
control and regulations on guns. In America, it is a well known fact that we like our guns. In fact, we
are founded on this fact in part. However, in our modern day and age, guns and firearms (I will make
that distinction at a later point) have been involved in many forms of crime and other unsavory deeds.
This involvement has led to many cries for stricter control on these historical tools, brought with us
through time since the beginning. Yes, times change and things go away with the passing of time,
however we do not believe firearms to be one of these things. But before I launch into our reasoning
therein, allow me to define our terms. Based on the definitions, a 'gun' is anything that uses a 'explosion
to launch a projectile through a metal tube, or barrel' and a firearm is simply a 'portable gun'. Ergo, a
pistol and stationary artillery are both guns, though a pistol is also a firearm. For this debate we will
mainly focus on firearm regulation, as very few people recreationally possess artillery.
Now, for the reasoning; there are many reasons for firearms to stay at the current level of
regulation. To start, they are an undeniable part of our past and present, even protected by the
constitution. Secondly, contrary to many peoples beliefs, allowing more people to possess them will
actually benefit our safety, and more regulations and restriction of them will not necessarily cause
crime to go down. Lastly, the current regulations work, and while there are many examples that seem to
fly against that, we will cover that at a later point.
Depending on how well you were following, you may have noticed that earlier I referred to
firearms as tools, not weapons or entities, and yes this was intentional. This is because firearms are
simply that, tools. They were made to hunt, to protect oneself, and to allow for a greater level of ease
while doing both. The classic example for the argument of firearms being nothing more than tools is
the 'I left my shotgun on the porch, and it didn't shoot anyone, I was so surprised', and while this is a
simple argument, it is true. Very few times are the tools blamed for mistakes, just as you wouldn't
blame a hammer or saw for a house being constructed poorly, you'd blame the crew that built it. After
all, you can have the best tools available and still do a sub-par job. The problem with this logic of
blaming the weapon for crime is that not only does it punish those who used it (or may use it) to do
mischievous things, it also punishes those who don't. Many people own firearms for hobby or self
defense, and have never once used these objects to hurt or kill another unjustly. But even beyond that,
there are people who depend on firearms for their ways of life, even today. This may seem odd, but I
can almost guarantee that you've seen or heard of some of them...anyone watch Duck Dynasty or
Alaska: The Last Frontier? If so, you know what I mean. Both groups of people rely on firearms for
their ways of life. The folks at Duck Dynasty wouldn't have half the business they do if firearms
became more restricted, and most of the people in Alaska would be in serious danger, if not dead. By
ourselves, humans have very little defensive ability, especially compared to some of the things that
reside in Alaska. Many people initially think of bears in this case, which can kill 3-10 people per year,
but surprisingly, moose kill almost as many, averaging 3-5 per annum. Neither of these are particularly
outstanding numbers, and don't hold much sway. But, many more attacks are warded off by personal
firearms every year, saving lives. And what is the cost in murders to save 15 people per year from the
fauna, you ask? A whopping 4 per 100,000 people. That is just in relation to direct life or death
situations, not including all of the lives saved due to hunting, where 91% percent of the moose and
caribou harvested in Alaska went to feeding the population thereof. Further restricting firearms in

Safety
And many other states share this data set, in fact across america there are roughly 10,800 murders via
firearms (circa. 2008), compared to an astounding 162,000 cases of life saving self defense, and a 69%
rate among convicts of knowing someone dissuaded from crime by a potential victim having a firearm.
All of these point to the fact that firearms, contrary to popular belief, are a very large part in self
defense