An armed confrontation typically lasts less than five seconds and results in two to four rounds being fired
The Reality of an Unarmed Society
Some political circles and media organizations promote the idea that a world without firearms would be a safer place, directly associating individual gun ownership with violence. However, this claim is an illusion unsupported by data. The reality that criminals disregard the law is often ignored, and instead, firearms themselves are blamed as the root cause of crime. Yet, history and statistics demonstrate that armed individuals serve as a crucial deterrent to criminals.
The claim that disarmament enhances security has been debunked through research conducted in the United States, Europe, and Australia. Studies have shown that crime rates tend to rise in countries where legal firearm ownership is restricted.
For example, after individual gun ownership was banned in the United Kingdom, home invasion and robbery incidents increased by 40%. This demonstrates that attempts to create a disarmed society have led to unintended negative consequences.
Facts About Gun Control and Crime Rates
There is no solid scientific study proving that gun bans reduce crime rates. On the contrary, research and field data suggest that restricting the right to legally acquire firearms does not prevent crime but rather increases it.
Examples:
According to FBI data, in 2020, homicide rates in Chicago and New York, where strict gun laws are enforced, increased by 50%, while armed assaults rose by 95%.
Research from the Heritage Foundation indicates that criminals prefer targeting unarmed individuals. Crime rates have been observed to decline in areas where legal gun ownership is widespread.
In Australia, following the implementation of gun bans in 1996, crime rates rose by 60% within the first five years.
In the United Kingdom, after the ban on private gun ownership, burglary and assault cases increased by 40%, and police response times lengthened.
These findings clearly indicate that gun bans do not reduce crime but instead create an environment more favorable to criminals.
The Deterrent Effect of Firearms on Crime
The deterrent effect of individual firearm ownership on crime has been confirmed by the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). According to research findings:
In 80% of cases where a firearm was used for self-defense, the attacker fled, and no shots needed to be fired.
In regions where individuals have the right to bear arms, home invasions and armed assaults significantly decrease.
A Harvard University criminology study found that crime rates are lower in areas where armed civilians are present, and criminals are more cautious in such regions.
John R. Lott Jr.'s "More Guns, Less Crime" study demonstrated that in states where gun ownership increased, crime rates declined significantly.
These statistics confirm that the right to self-defense and firearm ownership is not only crucial for individuals but also contributes to overall public safety.
Conclusion: What Is the Real Solution?
The most effective way to prevent crime is to establish deterrence before it occurs. Gun laws worldwide often fail to hinder criminals but instead leave law-abiding individuals defenseless.
Throughout history, the right to life has inherently included the right to self-defense. By nature, humans must strike a balance between security and freedom. The right to protect oneself and loved ones is not just a personal choice but a fundamental social responsibility.
The right to self-defense ensures not only individual protection but also enhances the security of society as a whole. Armed individuals not only protect themselves from threats but also contribute to crime prevention. Criminals thrive on defenseless victims. A disarmed society disempowers law-abiding individuals while creating opportunities for criminals.
Therefore:
Lawful firearm owners must undergo regular training and continually improve their skills.
Gun owners are responsible not only for their own safety but also for the security of those around them.However, this responsibility should not extend into the domain of law enforcement duties.
Rather than banning firearms, efforts should be directed toward crime prevention and enhancing the efficiency of law enforcement agencies.
Ultimately, the right to self-defense is a fundamental pillar in balancing security and freedom. True security is not achieved by making individuals dependent on the state but through the empowerment of responsible and informed citizens who can defend themselves. Freedom and security are interconnected—one cannot exist at the expense of the other.
Final Thoughts:
Let us remember that the most fundamental and lasting solution to crime is to prevent and control it before it happens. Additionally, it is crucial that firearm owners undergo periodic training and practice exercises. Individuals who possess or carry firearms must be proficient in handling them safely and effectively for the safety of both themselves and those around them.
Author:
Dr. Selçuk Aksak
Shooting Sports InstructorIDPA CSO, Gunsmith
Burkut Academy
Sources:
FBI Crime Statistics Report, 2020
CDC Firearm-Related Injury and Death Report, 2013
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2022
Harvard University Criminology Research, 2021
Heritage Foundation Self-Defense Statistics, 2021
John R. Lott Jr., More Guns, Less Crime, 3rd Edition
UK Home Office Crime Statistics, 2018
• • Australian Bureau of Statistics Crime Report, 2001
Comments