David Kopel's Argument For Gun Control

Gun control is a very controversial topic in both the United States and around the world. America in particular has been a battleground for debate on the subject in recent years. The debate is centered around two broad contradicting viewpoints regarding the answer to gun violence. David Kopel, who is an American author, attorney, and current research director of the Independence Institute in Colorado, identifies the pro-gun crowd as critics of gun control who believe that it violates the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and by forty-three States Constitutions (Kopel, “Hold Your Fire” par. 6). The other side of the argument consists of people who Kopel describes as well meaning Americans who believe that the answer to gun crime is gun control (Kopel, “Hold Your Fire” par. 4).

It is important to first understand why America has such a unique relationship with guns.

According to the small arms survey of 2003, Americans own between eighty-three and ninety-six guns per one hundred persons, or nearly one gun per person. (Kopel, “America's Fascination” par. 28) This statistic is even more interesting when compared to Norway, Finland, France, and Germany, the European countries with the most guns, which all range somewhere between thirty and thirty-nine guns per one hundred people. Meanwhile, the same survey shows that the number of guns per capita varies so greatly in each country that places such as the Netherlands, Hungary, and Romania have the least guns per capita with no more than two per one hundred

people.
Kopels findings lead him to the conclusion that Americans own far more guns than all developed nations because, “ Americans connect gun ownership not just to recreation but to survival and sovereignty” (Kopel, “America's Fascination” par. 29). Americans have the right to own so many guns because the founding fathers felt the need to create the second amendment, thus granting the ability for American citizens to lawfully own and carry firearms for the purpose of self preservation from any threat that should present itself to them. This includes the ability to protect oneself from any crime committed against them by another person as well as the possibility of government overreach. David Kopel states that, “In the American political tradition, the right to own a gun is seen as intimately related to the natural right to self-defense” (Kopel, “Hold Your Fire” par. 6). He also continued on to give English Philosopher John Locke’s take on the right to own a firearm, calling it, “the natural right to control and protect one’s body and property.”
Gun control advocates often claim that when the founding fathers created the second amendment it was only intended for muskets and other single shot weapons. However, this argument suggests that the founding fathers did not have the foresight to envision any advancements in weaponry. This argument is absurd considering that throughout the entire course of human history weapons have evolved and become more efficient over time. To say that the founding fathers would disapprove of citizens carrying weapons like AR-15s which are able to hold 30 bullets in a magazine completely undermines their reasons of implementing the second amendment in the first place considering the United States military carries similar weapons. The second amendment was created so that citizens had the ability to effectively oversee government and intervene if necessary.