I agree as i cant understand people on a catholic forum saying that we should be allowed to have guns in our homes to protect us! In the UK the police dont carry guns as ‘normal’. As catholics and followers of Christ we shouldnt be condoning having guns in our homes.
I’m fine with eliminating all guns from the planet, everywhere, once and for all. Of course, I also have several quality swords sitting around, all of which I know how to use effectively. I’m not sure how many other people can make that claim, and I would guess that if all guns were gone, evil intent would still remain and be acted upon in ways that reflect a great disparity of force.
Let’s just look at the catechism for example: 2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow.
The Church is not opposed to self-defense. In addition: 2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
Obviously, while not everyone is a paid or recognized member of the police or military, parents are responsible for the lives of their children. Would it be morally appropriate for a parent to barricade themselves in their bedroom and allowing their children to be killed instead of them?
Now, going back to guns – I’m sure that you will say that “self-defense is fine. We just don’t need guns to do it.” Unfortunately, the gunpowder cat is already out of the bag, and is not going back in anytime soon. But, let’s assume it were possible to completely rid of the earth of all guns. This means that the disparity of size and strength between attacker and victim suddenly comes back into play – a 5’2" woman weighing 120 pounds cannot easily deal with a 6’5" man weighing 250 pounds. Any honest martial arts instructor will concede that there is a serious physics problem to overcome there. If there are three or four attackers, it’s an even more serious issue. However, if the woman has a 9mm pistol and knows how to use it effectively, then things are back to an even playing field and she will be able to defend herself.
Now, probably most important: 1883 Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”
Transferring the means and right of self-defense from the individual to police agencies completely violates the principle of subsidiarity. The police are there to assist a person by answering a call for help, but cannot logically replace the individual’s right to life through self-defense, nor accept responsibility for that person’s defense. Police departments in the U.S. are not legally obligated to “protect” people – this is simple pragmatism so that they are not sued when they cannot respond in time (or at all) if a person is a victim of crime. They cannot be everywhere at all times. If the government bans guns – the most effective means of defense available to the common person – then it further violates this principle.
I understand that you feel strongly about guns, and this is a common attitude in other English-speaking nations. However, I think that re-examining your stance through what is mentioned in the Catechism would be fruitful. In addition, consider that our Bill of Rights was modeled on the Bill of Rights of 1689 which explicitly mentions the right to have arms for defense, as well as other precedents for this in English law.
One last point – I also want to mention that America has by far the most guns in private hands, yet ranks only 26th in firearms-related murders. There is no reasonable correlation between gun ownership and crime, unless guns were simply not available to the public. Even Japan, where it’s basically impossible to obtain a gun, averages around 45-50 murders a year with them.
