GUNS in SOCIETY
Morality and 'Munitions
The issue of gun violence has been a plague on society for a very long time. As societies become more modern and established, gun regulation policies have diminished and people have witnessed many tragedies in the hands of firearms globally. The United States especially has experienced many gun related incidents and the debate on weapon restrictions creates controversy between people. Issues such as the taking of lives and the preservation of rights are frequently discussed when guns are the center of debate. Morality becomes an important contributor of the schism because morality comes into question to defend both side of the arguments.
Fundamental Good
The establishment of the United States of America is grounded on the core principle of practicing freedom. This principle stems from the various injustices committed by the occupying British authority within the colonies and the rebellion against them. The ideologies of the rebellion became the building blocks of the social and political infrastructure of America. One of these ideologies was, and still is, the right to self-protection. During the revolutionary war, colonist would arm themselves to combat against the British authority to protect their rights and, as a result, protect the freedom they strongly desired. In 1789, the second amendment was added to the constitution, granting the freedom to own and use a firearm with the intention of using the firearm in case the rights of an individual were threatened or breached. The second amendment was based on the idea of self-protection from the British officers stationed in the colonies. After the colonies were declared free from British control, the second amendment was established firmly and every colonist practiced this freedom in order to continue protecting themselves from forces that may threaten their liberty, thus making guns a part of American culture. The guns were seen as a necessary good by the colonist because guns protected them.
Bone of Contention
Over time, guns have led to the injuries and deaths of countless lives and have become a controversial symbol in contemporary society. The issue on guns is a polarizing subject; on one hand, there are those who believe that guns should be banned or strictly regulated to avoid fatal disasters and on the other hand, there are those who believe that the second amendment should not be tampered with because the right to own a gun is rightfully given to the people to use as protection. The arguments have spanned across other varying subjects such as social effects, mental health, political issues, and most importantly, moral disputes. Although there are many arguements from both sides that have complex and often unsolvable answers, the simplest way to construct the issues present in the disagreements is by asking the question: “are guns good or bad?”
The Euthyphro Dilemma
In the subject of philosophy, morality is an important discussion because questions are raised that challenge the norm and what many people think about when it comes to the true nature of morality. Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma is one of the most important discussions of morality because of the contradictory statements that are made. The dilemma states: “If we say that acts are holy because the gods command them, then this makes holiness appear arbitrary, as if the gods had loved other acts then it would be these that are holy. However, if we say that the gods love these acts because they are holy then it seems that the god has no role to play in determining which acts are holy”. The dilemma essentially calls into question what is good and what is bad; is something good because an omnipotent god, who declares what is good and what is bad, says it is good or is something good because it, itself, is defined as good and is not proclaimed by the omnipotent god. The question of morality becomes obscured because the concept of good will vary depending on the individual or group as well as alter due to circumstances, which can affect the moral spectrum.
The Good
If a god has nothing to do with determining what is considered good, then what are the specifications of something that is good? This question has many answers from various standpoints, however the most prominent answer involves not only the subject in question but also the means. Samuel Baker of the philosophy department of the University of South Alabama dissects Aristotle's notion of good, stating “...Aristotle would seem to be noting that craft, inquiry, action and decision all inherently aim at goods, and in light of this observation he endorses the view (perhaps of the wise) that the good is that which is aimed at. From what follows it is clear that Aristotle. understands this more precisely as: to be a good is to have the character of an end.” Good is not what is achieved at the end, but the intention that ultimately results in such good. If someone tried helping someone, whether they succeed or they fail, they, their actions, and arguably the result of their actions, are considered righteous. From the standpoint of American history, the intention of liberation was noble and the tool for their liberation was considered good, but the actions taken using these tools aren't considered ethical, at least not by today’s standards. A war was waged for an idea that only benefitted one side, and while the one side had a strong desire, the methods were costly and arguably did more harm than good, even though a free nation was established. But were the guns truly bad?
The Bad
Aristotle's philosophy of good can also apply to the immoral. An act can be considered bad if done with malicious intent, no matter if the result is good or bad. In the case of the colonist against the British occupants, the intention for combat is unknown, but one may assume that they rebelled out of spite and anguish because of their oppression and for a cause that was relatively out of reach. However, since the rebellion was against an oppressive government, one may also assume that they took arms to protect themselves from a government that will continue to treat them like a lesser people. The war on the colonists’ front was a war that was fought out of necessity; the killing and violence were considered a necessary evil for an end that was good for the colonist. According to author Vinit Haksar’s analysis of the concept of necessary evil, “Violence may sometimes be necessary and excusable or pardonable and even honorable and the best that we can do in the circumstances, but it is always wrong and can never be permissible or justified.” The revolutionary war was a violent effort to escape the clutches of tyranny, an immoral form of authority. However, the violence itself was also immoral, albeit for a good cause. Even though the outcome of the war was a new country that practices a virtuous philosophy, the means to the end were unethical however the intentions of the colonist remain to defend themselves from tyranny.
The Second Amendment
Circumstances are what made the second amendment become a valued national ideology. During the revolution, guns are what helped the colonist rebel against the armed British troops stationed in the colonies and guns helped them gain their independence. Their idea and lust for freedom is what drove them to use firearms to defend the freedom they sought. Without the use of firearms, colonist would have not been able to successfully rebel against British control and they wouldn't have attained liberty. According to psychology author Dennis L Merritt “The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to be the mythic foundation of America as a nation of laws. Archetypically, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are in the realm of the Bible: they are like the Ten Commandments for Americans”. The significance of firearms in the foundation of America is the reason why firearms can be considered something that is good not by divine declaration, but because it fulfilled a purpose to the colonist. Firearms gave the colonist a chance at liberty and because they attained liberty after the revolution, the colonist proclaimed that owning a gun was good because a gun would protect what they have acquired. Since the revolution however, as the history of America progressed, guns increasingly became more controversial. Events such as mass shootings, assassinations and gang violence make people question whether the second amendment should still be applied.
Gun Control
Gun control is a controversial movement with the main goal of restricting gun use in order to prevent tragedies related to firearms from occurring. Restricting firearms, however, is a violation of the second amendment, which many people are trying to defend. While gun control can be a solution to the issue of gun violence, gun control not only obstructs gun use, it also obstructs what the second amendment stood for. According to American legal scholar Robert J Cottrol: “The movement wasn't simply about the control of weapons, it was an effort to truncate the right of self-defense, it agitated for a culture of nonresistance as a survival strategy tactically and morally superior to preparing and acting to defend oneself.” Gun control can be a necessary countermeasure to the contraband of guns, but for people who have licenses and who own a gun legally and who value the gun as a tool for protection would disagree with gun control because it restricts the right to bear arms.
Morality of a Gun
The issue with gun violence is that once there is damage, the damage is certainly done. A gun is capable of seriously injuring or killing someone very quickly and can have long term effects on people. Since guns now are being used for acts other than its intended purpose, does it mean that guns have become bad? Although the connotations are evident, that is not entirely the case. The second amendment still stands as an important law in the American constitution; guns are kept in homes to protect families and homes from intruders. Guns have also been used for hunting and other sports. The purpose of a gun has definitely changed for the contemporary world, however the debate on guns becomes more heated as guns are pushed more into the spotlight with tragedies occurring more often. The topic of morality resides much deeper than just the firearm. It is important to not only consider the gun itself, but also the people involved with firearms, both the victims and perpetrators of gun violence and the ones for and against gun ownership. J Michael Hogan, Director of the Center for Democratic Deliberation at Penn State University, states “Fortunately, the vast majority of Americans are neither “gun nuts” nor “gun haters,” and therein lies a glimmer of hope that something might be done about the epidemic of gun violence in America. For that to happen, however, we need an honest, open, and robust debate over guns and gun violence—the sort of debate that empowers the American people to make informed judgments and take political action.” Instead of arguing about which perspective is correct, political progress on the issue can be achieved through understanding each perspective. Once both sides are understood, a way to prevent firearm related tragedies can be enacted where both sides do not lose. Perhaps settling the issue domestically can translate to other countries where the problem of gun violence persists.
Cited Sources
Archer, A. (2015). Divine moral goodness, supererogation and The Euthyphro Dilemma. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 79(2), 147-160. doi:10.1007/s11153-015-9510-9
Baker, S. (2017). The metaphysics of goodness in the ethics of Aristotle. Philosophical Studies, 174(7), 1839–1856. https://doi org.lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu/10.1007/s11098-016-0824-y
Cottrol, R. J. (1955, undefined ). “The Morality behind the Second Amendment.” American Enterprise, vol. Retrieved December 11, 2018,
Haksar, V. (2011). Necessary Evil: Justification, Excuse, or Pardon? Criminal Law and Philosophy: An International Journal for Philosophy of Crime, Criminal Law and Punishment, 5(3), 333–347. Retrieved from http://lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=phl&AN=PHL2176460&site=ehost-live
HOGAN, J. M., & ROOD, C. (2015). Rhetorical Studies and the Gun Debate: A Public Policy Perspective. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 18(2), 359–371. Retrieved from http://lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=103156607&site=ehost-live
Merritt, D. L. (2018). Guns and the American Psyche. Anthropology of Consciousness, 29(2), 168-174. doi:10.1111/anoc.12098
Fundamental Good
The establishment of the United States of America is grounded on the core principle of practicing freedom. This principle stems from the various injustices committed by the occupying British authority within the colonies and the rebellion against them. The ideologies of the rebellion became the building blocks of the social and political infrastructure of America. One of these ideologies was, and still is, the right to self-protection. During the revolutionary war, colonist would arm themselves to combat against the British authority to protect their rights and, as a result, protect the freedom they strongly desired. In 1789, the second amendment was added to the constitution, granting the freedom to own and use a firearm with the intention of using the firearm in case the rights of an individual were threatened or breached. The second amendment was based on the idea of self-protection from the British officers stationed in the colonies. After the colonies were declared free from British control, the second amendment was established firmly and every colonist practiced this freedom in order to continue protecting themselves from forces that may threaten their liberty, thus making guns a part of American culture. The guns were seen as a necessary good by the colonist because guns protected them.
Bone of Contention
Over time, guns have led to the injuries and deaths of countless lives and have become a controversial symbol in contemporary society. The issue on guns is a polarizing subject; on one hand, there are those who believe that guns should be banned or strictly regulated to avoid fatal disasters and on the other hand, there are those who believe that the second amendment should not be tampered with because the right to own a gun is rightfully given to the people to use as protection. The arguments have spanned across other varying subjects such as social effects, mental health, political issues, and most importantly, moral disputes. Although there are many arguements from both sides that have complex and often unsolvable answers, the simplest way to construct the issues present in the disagreements is by asking the question: “are guns good or bad?”
The Euthyphro Dilemma
In the subject of philosophy, morality is an important discussion because questions are raised that challenge the norm and what many people think about when it comes to the true nature of morality. Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma is one of the most important discussions of morality because of the contradictory statements that are made. The dilemma states: “If we say that acts are holy because the gods command them, then this makes holiness appear arbitrary, as if the gods had loved other acts then it would be these that are holy. However, if we say that the gods love these acts because they are holy then it seems that the god has no role to play in determining which acts are holy”. The dilemma essentially calls into question what is good and what is bad; is something good because an omnipotent god, who declares what is good and what is bad, says it is good or is something good because it, itself, is defined as good and is not proclaimed by the omnipotent god. The question of morality becomes obscured because the concept of good will vary depending on the individual or group as well as alter due to circumstances, which can affect the moral spectrum.
The Good
If a god has nothing to do with determining what is considered good, then what are the specifications of something that is good? This question has many answers from various standpoints, however the most prominent answer involves not only the subject in question but also the means. Samuel Baker of the philosophy department of the University of South Alabama dissects Aristotle's notion of good, stating “...Aristotle would seem to be noting that craft, inquiry, action and decision all inherently aim at goods, and in light of this observation he endorses the view (perhaps of the wise) that the good is that which is aimed at. From what follows it is clear that Aristotle. understands this more precisely as: to be a good is to have the character of an end.” Good is not what is achieved at the end, but the intention that ultimately results in such good. If someone tried helping someone, whether they succeed or they fail, they, their actions, and arguably the result of their actions, are considered righteous. From the standpoint of American history, the intention of liberation was noble and the tool for their liberation was considered good, but the actions taken using these tools aren't considered ethical, at least not by today’s standards. A war was waged for an idea that only benefitted one side, and while the one side had a strong desire, the methods were costly and arguably did more harm than good, even though a free nation was established. But were the guns truly bad?
The Bad
Aristotle's philosophy of good can also apply to the immoral. An act can be considered bad if done with malicious intent, no matter if the result is good or bad. In the case of the colonist against the British occupants, the intention for combat is unknown, but one may assume that they rebelled out of spite and anguish because of their oppression and for a cause that was relatively out of reach. However, since the rebellion was against an oppressive government, one may also assume that they took arms to protect themselves from a government that will continue to treat them like a lesser people. The war on the colonists’ front was a war that was fought out of necessity; the killing and violence were considered a necessary evil for an end that was good for the colonist. According to author Vinit Haksar’s analysis of the concept of necessary evil, “Violence may sometimes be necessary and excusable or pardonable and even honorable and the best that we can do in the circumstances, but it is always wrong and can never be permissible or justified.” The revolutionary war was a violent effort to escape the clutches of tyranny, an immoral form of authority. However, the violence itself was also immoral, albeit for a good cause. Even though the outcome of the war was a new country that practices a virtuous philosophy, the means to the end were unethical however the intentions of the colonist remain to defend themselves from tyranny.
The Second Amendment
Circumstances are what made the second amendment become a valued national ideology. During the revolution, guns are what helped the colonist rebel against the armed British troops stationed in the colonies and guns helped them gain their independence. Their idea and lust for freedom is what drove them to use firearms to defend the freedom they sought. Without the use of firearms, colonist would have not been able to successfully rebel against British control and they wouldn't have attained liberty. According to psychology author Dennis L Merritt “The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to be the mythic foundation of America as a nation of laws. Archetypically, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are in the realm of the Bible: they are like the Ten Commandments for Americans”. The significance of firearms in the foundation of America is the reason why firearms can be considered something that is good not by divine declaration, but because it fulfilled a purpose to the colonist. Firearms gave the colonist a chance at liberty and because they attained liberty after the revolution, the colonist proclaimed that owning a gun was good because a gun would protect what they have acquired. Since the revolution however, as the history of America progressed, guns increasingly became more controversial. Events such as mass shootings, assassinations and gang violence make people question whether the second amendment should still be applied.
Gun Control
Gun control is a controversial movement with the main goal of restricting gun use in order to prevent tragedies related to firearms from occurring. Restricting firearms, however, is a violation of the second amendment, which many people are trying to defend. While gun control can be a solution to the issue of gun violence, gun control not only obstructs gun use, it also obstructs what the second amendment stood for. According to American legal scholar Robert J Cottrol: “The movement wasn't simply about the control of weapons, it was an effort to truncate the right of self-defense, it agitated for a culture of nonresistance as a survival strategy tactically and morally superior to preparing and acting to defend oneself.” Gun control can be a necessary countermeasure to the contraband of guns, but for people who have licenses and who own a gun legally and who value the gun as a tool for protection would disagree with gun control because it restricts the right to bear arms.
Morality of a Gun
The issue with gun violence is that once there is damage, the damage is certainly done. A gun is capable of seriously injuring or killing someone very quickly and can have long term effects on people. Since guns now are being used for acts other than its intended purpose, does it mean that guns have become bad? Although the connotations are evident, that is not entirely the case. The second amendment still stands as an important law in the American constitution; guns are kept in homes to protect families and homes from intruders. Guns have also been used for hunting and other sports. The purpose of a gun has definitely changed for the contemporary world, however the debate on guns becomes more heated as guns are pushed more into the spotlight with tragedies occurring more often. The topic of morality resides much deeper than just the firearm. It is important to not only consider the gun itself, but also the people involved with firearms, both the victims and perpetrators of gun violence and the ones for and against gun ownership. J Michael Hogan, Director of the Center for Democratic Deliberation at Penn State University, states “Fortunately, the vast majority of Americans are neither “gun nuts” nor “gun haters,” and therein lies a glimmer of hope that something might be done about the epidemic of gun violence in America. For that to happen, however, we need an honest, open, and robust debate over guns and gun violence—the sort of debate that empowers the American people to make informed judgments and take political action.” Instead of arguing about which perspective is correct, political progress on the issue can be achieved through understanding each perspective. Once both sides are understood, a way to prevent firearm related tragedies can be enacted where both sides do not lose. Perhaps settling the issue domestically can translate to other countries where the problem of gun violence persists.
Cited Sources
Archer, A. (2015). Divine moral goodness, supererogation and The Euthyphro Dilemma. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 79(2), 147-160. doi:10.1007/s11153-015-9510-9
Baker, S. (2017). The metaphysics of goodness in the ethics of Aristotle. Philosophical Studies, 174(7), 1839–1856. https://doi org.lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu/10.1007/s11098-016-0824-y
Cottrol, R. J. (1955, undefined ). “The Morality behind the Second Amendment.” American Enterprise, vol. Retrieved December 11, 2018,
Haksar, V. (2011). Necessary Evil: Justification, Excuse, or Pardon? Criminal Law and Philosophy: An International Journal for Philosophy of Crime, Criminal Law and Punishment, 5(3), 333–347. Retrieved from http://lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=phl&AN=PHL2176460&site=ehost-live
HOGAN, J. M., & ROOD, C. (2015). Rhetorical Studies and the Gun Debate: A Public Policy Perspective. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 18(2), 359–371. Retrieved from http://lehman.ezproxy.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=103156607&site=ehost-live
Merritt, D. L. (2018). Guns and the American Psyche. Anthropology of Consciousness, 29(2), 168-174. doi:10.1111/anoc.12098