The right to carry handguns for law abiding citizens has been a continual social and political debate in our nation. Actually, the right to carry defense weapons has developed to become one of the major controversial issues of our time. The main reason attributed to the development of this issue is the constitutional provision regarding firearms and the government’s responsibility to prevent criminal activities, maintaining order, and safeguarding citizens’ well-being. The debate has been characterized by different reasons that have been raised by intellectuals, social activists, and advocates in support and opposition of the controversial issue. There is no end in sight for this!
Historical Overview
The debate regarding the right to carry and keep firearms can be traced to the inception of the gun culture. This is explained by the affections of American’s citizens in adopting and celebrating handguns as part of the nation’s heritage. Actually, the right to possess a gun, particularly for self-protection is largely considered as a central tenet of the American identity. In America’s frontier history, guns were important to westward expansion as they were used to enable settlers to protect themselves from native Americans. During this period, the frontier citizens usually assumed the responsibility of protecting themselves from animals and foreign armies. Moreover, the significance of guns also comes from the hunting role in the culture of the nation and has remained to be famous as a sport in America today.
Hunting has long been a part of American life, stemming from the agrarian days of subsistence farming. It was a way to provide food and protect against raiders, as well as a rite of passage from boyhood to manhood. It has stayed popular ever since, due to its usage in controlling animal populations.. Notably, the history of the modern right to carry or concealed carry in America began with Georgia in 1976 when the then governor introduced the model for subsequent laws. The decision and effort by the Georgia governor to introduce the law was inspired by a former border patrolman and NRA director. As a result of the enactment of the legislation, Georgia joined the few other states that permitted concealed carry without the requirement of a license. This contributed to an emergence of a trend in which other states enacted such regulations like New Hampshire in 1923, Washington in 1961, Connecticut in 1969, Indiana in 1980, Maine and North Dakota in 1985, and South Dakota in 1986.
Despite this, not all states adopted the law. For example, Florida refused until 1987, due to fear of turning it into a dangerous place. People worried that the legislation would increase violence and minor collisions would escalate into major disputes.
The right to carry a handgun for self-protection has been around for a long time, and it is difficult to trace its beginning. The period from 1989 to 1998 was when the laws were being passed in several states, such as Oklahoma, Oregon, North Carolina and South Carolina.
Arguments in Favor
Self-defense is a fundamental human right across the US, leading to the adoption of right-to-carry laws. All of America's constitutions, state laws and common law recognize the right to bear arms for self-protection. Laws generally permit citizens to own firearms for security. Nonetheless, there is current debate over whether citizens have a constitutional right to carry handguns.
For instance, in a 2008 case in the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns. The Supreme Court stated that the inherent right of self-protection has been a main issue in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. The court also ruled that the Second Amendment safeguards the individual right for law abiding citizens to own and carry firearms or handguns in case of confrontation. Consequently, the court reinstated and approved the fact that the common-law principle allows citizens to repel force by force when attacked for the purpose of self-defense and protection. Other arguments that have been raised in support or favor of whether law abiding citizens have the constitutional right to carry handguns for self-protection include:
Common-law Rule
The Supreme Court's decision clearly stated that people have a right to bear arms in self-defense. This has been a common-law principle for over 2,000 years, and it is still considered valid today. For 2000+ years, self-defense by individuals has been seen as morally correct when facing violence, robbers, or enemies. This common law provides the right for law-abiding citizens to use handguns for protection; the right of self-defense is in the natural law, superseding any social law.
Success of the Legislation in Reducing Crime
The second argument for allowing gun ownership by law-abiding citizens is the success of laws in reducing crime. Crime trends in several counties were analyzed, and it was found that allowing gun ownership for self-protection deterred violent crime. In every state or county where gun laws were enacted, murder cases decreased by 8.5 percent, as did rape and provoked assaults by 5 percent and 7 percent, respectively.
Since 1991, violent crime in the U.S. rose, prompting states to permit firearm possession for self-defense. This led to the rise of privately-owned guns, which caused a 52% drop in murder rate and a 48% decrease in total violent crime.
Impact of the Use of Handguns by Law-abiding Citizens
Law-abiding citizens use firearms to prevent crime four times more than criminals use them to commit them. The Department of Justice survey found that 40% of criminals avoid criminal activity if they fear their victims may be armed. The right to bear arms is based on the estimated 2.5 million protective uses of handguns annually, which is more than four times the number of offenses committed using firearms.
Provision in the Second Amendment
People support the Second Amendment because it allows law-abiding citizens to keep guns for self-defense. The Second Amendment was written by the founding fathers of the United States to protect the rights of individuals to keep guns for self-defense. The intent of this amendment is to protect the rights of individuals to keep guns for self-defense. Since the Second Amendment has not been altered in any way, people should honor the intent of the Second Amendment.
Lack of Constitutional Amendment
Law abiding citizens have a constitutional right to bear and use firearms like handguns to protect themselves since there is no constitutional modification that contradicts or changes the Second Amendment’s provision. While legislators have tried to enact several laws to not legalize these efforts, law-abiding citizens are constitutionally permitted to carry handguns. Actually, these legislators should amend or re-write the constitution rather than make such attempts.
Opposing Arguments
There are opposing reasons for opposing the constitutional right to carry firearms for protection. These arguments are based on assumptions that are not based on reality, and are misinterpreted by the Constitution. The reasons for opposing the assumption include:
Enactment of Permit Laws in Various States
Permit laws in many states regarding the use of firearms or handguns for self-defense are often cited in opposition to the idea of a constitutional right to self-defense. 49 states have established laws allowing citizens to carry firearms outside their home and 41 of those states have legal systems that allow well meaning citizens to obtain a license or permit to carry guns for protection. This claim has been used to support the claims on the basis that the presence of a constitutional provision or right would negate the establishment of such rules. Therefore, the fact that states have enacted carry permit legislation implies that law abiding citizens don’t have the constitutional right to carry guns for self-protection.
Emergence of Interstate Reciprocity Concept
Following the enactment of the carry permit regulations across states, the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012 was introduced in the United States Senate. The regulation would allow people with valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry firearms of handguns to other states that also issue permits. Furthermore, the law will also enable such individuals to carry a concealed handgun in any state that does not prohibit carrying of these weapons for legal reasons.
The emergence of the concept and introduction of the law to the senate is an indication that law abiding citizens do not have a constitutional right to carry handguns for protecting themselves, their family, and property. If individuals had this right, there would be no need to establish such regulations since they will be at liberty to carry their firearms or handguns in any state for protection purposes.
Possibility of Federal Gun Registration or Licensing
Opponents view the potential for federal registration/licensing of guns as a violation of citizens' rights to bear arms for self-defense. They fear the creation of agencies implementing gun control laws or controlling issuance of permits.
Viewpoint of the Issue
There are gun control laws in the United States at all levels, which have different local codes. The laws exist because the use of guns is part of American culture, and whether or not law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry handguns is a controversial issue. The issue has attracted debate for various reasons, including the advantages and disadvantages.
The Supreme Court has ruled that law-abiding citizens have the right to carry handguns for self-defense. The court has tried to resolve the issue of the Second Amendment by clarifying the historical ambiguity of the issue.
According to one of the decisions by the Supreme Court, the right of law abiding citizens to carry firearms was supported by the historical narrative that existed before and after the amendment was adopted. However, the constitution does not allow the unconditional prohibition of handguns or firearms possessed and used for self-defense in the home. As part of the ruling, the right to carry and use arms is not necessarily the right to carry a loaded handgun in public. In decisions the Supreme Court struck down the handgun bans in both Washington and Chicago.
The Supreme Court has rejected some of the main arguments against gun rights. For example, the Court has ruled that there are several permit issues and that reciprocity between states does not exist under the Second Amendment. Furthermore, the claim that legislation could lead to the creation of federal standards for gun ownership is not true.
The Supreme Court has confirmed that law-abiding citizens have a constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense, and this is supported by various legal arguments. However, it is important for people to be aware of the limits of this right in the event of a confrontation over carrying a concealed weapon, or any other aspect of concealed carry licensing or law. Some states require concealed carry licenses, while others do not, which can be confusing for law enforcement.
