Debate in the U.S.A.:
The debate over gun ownership for protection remains highly contentious in the U.S.A. Supporters argue that owning a handgun is a fundamental right tied to personal safety, while opponents highlight the risks of widespread gun ownership and its potential to increase violence. This debate is influenced by the country’s history, constitutional rights, and ongoing gun violence issues.
Around 72% of gun owners cite protection as a primary reason for owning a firearm. Smaller percentages mention hunting (32%), sport shooting (30%), gun collecting (15%), or using a gun for work purposes (7%) as major reasons for ownership.
The Second Amendment to the U.S.A. Constitution, enacted in 1791, guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, which is seen by many Americans as a fundamental right essential for self-defense. Gun ownership, particularly handguns, is strongly justified by the need for personal protection in a society with high violent crime rates, especially in urban areas. Advocates argue that firearms provide a critical means of defence when law enforcement cannot respond quickly, offering a level of protection, particularly for vulnerable groups such as women and the elderly.
Debate in India:
The debate over gun ownership for protection in India is shaped by legal, cultural, and practical concerns. Proponents argue that firearms are essential for self-defence, particularly in high-crime or remote areas with slow police response times. They also emphasise India’s cultural ties to weapons, particularly in regions with a history of hunting and martial traditions, viewing gun ownership as vital for personal and family protection.
The recent crimes committed against women in Kolkata & other areas also add value to arguments for the usage of guns. However, the opponents worry about the risks of increased gun violence, accidents, and the potential for escalating conflicts, such as domestic disputes or road rage incidents.
The opponents advocate for strict gun control laws, arguing that these laws help maintain public safety, support law enforcement efforts, and prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands. India’s gun ownership laws are stringent, requiring background checks, police verification, and proof of legitimate need. The civilian market is limited, with most firearms produced for military and law enforcement use. Overall, the discussion seems to balance the desire for self-defence with the need for public safety in the world’s most populated country, with current sentiment favouring strict regulation to reduce gun violence and ensure public order.
Debate in Pakistan:
The debate over gun ownership in Pakistan is complex. Supporters argue that firearms are crucial for personal safety, especially in areas with high crime rates or political instability, and are rooted in Pakistan’s cultural and historical ties to weaponry. Guns are seen as vital for self-defence, hunting, and sporting activities. However, opponents warn that widespread gun ownership could worsen gun violence, accidental shootings, and crime, potentially escalating conflicts. They also highlight the challenge of controlling illegal firearms, which could fuel militancy and organised crime. The government has implemented strict licensing laws, but the debate persists, reflecting the tension between individual security and public safety.
Legal Framework for Self-Defense
The right to self-defence exists in all three nations, but each country implements it differently. U.S.A. laws give people more freedom to use guns defensively, especially in stand-your-ground states. India focuses more on matching the response to the threat. Pakistan combines traditional defence rights with modern rules.
Stand Your Ground Laws in the U.S.A.
“Stand your ground” refers to a legal principle that allows individuals to use force, including deadly force, in self-defense if they believe they are in imminent danger of harm, without the duty to retreat. This law applies in situations where an individual feels threatened, and they have the right to defend themselves, even if they are able to escape the situation. Stand your own law shows some striking patterns in the U.S.A.
As of January 2024, 35 states in the U.S.A. have adopted stand-your-ground statutes or extended the castle doctrine (The Castle Doctrine is a legal principle that allows individuals to use force, including deadly force, to defend themselves against an intruder in their home or “castle” without the duty to retreat. This doctrine is based on the idea that one’s home is their sanctuary, and they have the right to protect it and themselves from harm) beyond the home, allowing individuals to use force in self-defense without the duty to retreat. However, in the 13 states with stand-your-ground laws, all but one require individuals to attempt to retreat before resorting to deadly force, unless they are within their home or place of business.
It is also pertinent to note that However, these laws have been linked to over the past four years, the U.S.A. has experienced more than 600 mass shootings annually, averaging nearly two per day. In 2021, gun-related injuries led to the deaths of 48,830 people, a nearly 8% increase from 2020, which had already set a record for firearm fatalities, according to the U.S.A. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
On average, more than 50 people die from gun violence each day in the United States. Furthermore, studies have shown a racial disparity in the application of stand-your-ground laws, with cases involving white perpetrators and African-American victims being ten times more likely to be ruled justified compared to cases where the racial dynamics are reversed.
Restrictions on Defensive Use in India & Pakistan:
India takes a different path with its “right of private defence” under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita, 2023, which states that “nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence”. In India, defensive actions must match the threat level, ensuring that the response is proportional to the danger.
The threat must be immediate and accurate, and individuals can only use force if police assistance is not available. Obtaining a gun license in India requires fulfilling specific criteria and obtaining authorization from authorities. The law emphasizes the need for caution and proportionality in the use of force, even in self-defense situations. This framework is designed to ensure that defensive measures are used appropriately and only in situations where immediate action is necessary for self-preservation.
Pakistan’s system allows people to discharge weapons to defend against robbery and other threats. The Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) allows people to use force in self-defence to protect themselves and their property. Section 96 states that actions taken in self-defence are not considered offences; Sections 100 and 101 cover the right to defend oneself, and Sections 103 and Section 104 cover defending property. In Pakistan, self-defence laws about gun ownership are shaped by both legal regulations and cultural factors.
The legal framework for gun ownership and the use of firearms for self-defence is governed by the Arms Ordinance of 1965, which regulates the possession, use, and trade of weapons in Pakistan. The laws are stringent, and the government requires citizens to obtain licenses to possess firearms. These licenses are typically granted based on specific conditions, such as proof of need (e.g., for self-defence, hunting, or sporting purposes), and an individual must also meet age and background requirements.
In Pakistan, the government enforces strict regulations concerning firearm ownership and use. During civil unrest, individuals must obtain special permits to possess firearms, ensuring that gun ownership is closely monitored in times of heightened tension.
Additionally, open carry is restricted in urban areas to prevent the proliferation of visible firearms in public spaces, which could lead to security concerns. Furthermore, weapon licenses are only granted to individuals at least 25 years old, reflecting the country’s cautious approach to gun ownership and its emphasis on ensuring that only responsible and mature individuals are authorised to carry firearms.
These regulations are designed to balance security and public safety while limiting the potential risks of widespread gun ownership. These legal frameworks aim to balance the right to personal safety with preventing unnecessary escalation in self-defence situations.
Continue Reading: Chapter – 3: Laws Governing Guns
