LR09: Gun Ownership | Liberty Revealed

We may earn money or products from the companies mentioned in this post.

Liberty Revealed Episode 09 Show Summary

This episode discusses gun ownership and gun control issues.

Listen to Liberty Revealed Episode 09

Liberty Revealed Episode 09 Show Notes

Welcome back to another episode of Liberty Revealed with me, your host, Mike Mahony. Today I want to discuss gun ownership and why it is vital to our personal liberty.

I will be upfront and let you know that I have never owned a gun and probably never will, but I support the right to own a gun for many reasons. Today I want to discuss what those reasons are and give my own insight on gun control in the process. This will be a quick and easy discussion, but many of you won’t agree with me, even those who are gun owners presently. It is OK not to agree–that’s how dialogue is created. I enjoy a good discussion just as much as anyone else.

Gun Ownership is a Right

Most people would agree that the right to defend yourself is a fundamental right. At the same time, people will tell you that we should not be allowed to own guns because guns cause violence. I completely disagree with those who say we should not be allowed to own a gun.

I want you to stop for a moment and visualize this situation with me. A small person is walking home in the dark. They finished work and are headed home to get some rest. Along the way, they are attacked by someone twice their size. The smaller person fights back but is no match for the larger person.

Now change the scenario a little. Imagine if the smaller person was armed with a gun. Do you think the situation would then turn out differently? It most definitely would.

There is a group of people who politicize every single event that involves a gun death. They claim that we need to ban guns entirely. How has that worked out for the rest of the world? Let’s have a look at that right now.

To me, the key factor is the homicide rate. People who want to ban guns claim it is because so many people are killed by them. These deaths are included in the homicide rate. But will the homicide rate decline if guns are banned? History tells us no. In each country where guns were banned, the homicide rate is flat or slightly higher than it was prior to the ban. What this tells me is that if someone wants to kill another human being, they will find a way to accomplish that. Banning guns will not change the homicide rate at all. So why take away a basic protection mechanism if it isn’t going to change the homicide rate? What is even more interesting is that when they did a study of the intentional homicide rates of dozens of countries, those with the highest rate of intentional homicide also have the strictest gun control laws. What does this mean to everyone?

Gun Bans Don\'t Work

Please remember that banning guns will not curb violence or death…it will simply change the nature of the deaths. Criminals don’t obey laws. Banning guns would simply give the criminals more power over the average citizen. Violent criminals will be emboldened knowing average citizens cannot defend themselves.

Banning guns would mean people who should be free to go about their business, for example traveling home from work after dark, will live in greater fear. It will mean that people who live in more dangerous areas (and who are typically poorer) have fewer options to defend themselves and their families.

People who own guns feel safer. They own guns for their own protection. This is what the studies show. For those like me who don’t own a gun, safety is the number one concern. Still, there are some who scream and yell for stricter gun control laws.

When it comes to enacting stricter gun control laws, Americans see both pros and cons. Most (58%) worry that new laws would make it more difficult for people to protect their homes and families. Roughly the same number (54%) say stricter laws would reduce the number of deaths caused by mass shootings.

Gun owners themselves are split on the idea of stricter gun control laws. Many believe stricter laws will reduce deaths, while others see it as a move by the government to exert unnecessary control over them. I tend to side with those who feel it is an attempt to exert unnecessary control.

The problem as I see it relates to the definition of terms and how they are used in the debate about guns and gun control. Proponents of gun control talk about “assault rifles”, but that’s a term that was coined as part of the debate. Silencers don’t completely silence a weapon, they make them quieter. Purchase limits won’t stop a criminal from planning ahead. Any competent person can quickly swap out gun magazines. Gun shows account for only a small percentage of sales, and dealers still must follow the usual rules. Machine guns are extremely hard to obtain, and the legally owned ones have been used in a crime only three times since 1934.

Gun Crime

It is important to note that none of this means there aren’t problems that we should address. One is a crime. Gun control would ensure that only criminals had guns. We need to do better at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals instead of harassing the law-abiding. We also should focus on protecting people from criminals, whatever their weapon of choice.

Gangs are an incubator of crime, including gun violence; the problem has been exacerbated by the illegal entry of violent gang members from Central America. “Gun control” for the law-abiding won’t disarm these killers.

Women are arming themselves in greater numbers. They do so to be safer. Women will tell you they are prey. The female gun owner is different from the male gun owner. She only owns a handgun. She’s more likely than male gun owners to live in an urban area, and less likely to have grown up in a gun-friendly household. And regardless of how many and what types of guns she owns, she’s more likely to report owning firearms for protection than men.

The interesting aspect of female gun ownership is that most of the female gun owners live in urban areas. At a recent meeting of the Well Armed Woman’s Central Maryland chapter, members of the women-only gun club were emphatic that they own guns for self-protection. These women hailed from the suburbs and city in the Baltimore area and if they did not already own a handgun, they were in the market for one.

Regardless of which side of the debate you are on, it is important to acknowledge both sides and come to some real conclusion. Stricter gun control laws is really not the answer. Just have a look at Chicago and the constant gun violence there. It has some of the strictest gun control laws in the United States and gun violence runs rampant. The evidence is clear that being allowed to own a gun is something that is related to personal safety and personal liberty. What are your thoughts?

That’s all for today\'s episode. If you like what you’ve heard, please rate us 5 stars on Apple Podcasts and Google Play. If you’d like to learn more about personal liberty, grab your free copy of my book “Liberty Revealed” by heading over to https://yogispodcastnetwork.com/libertyrevealed. Until next time…stay free!

Catch Yogi\'s Podcast Network on YouTube

Yogi\'s Podcast Network YouTube Channel

Subscribe: