The Editor, Sir:

Just as the saying goes, an eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind, so too a gun in most people's hands will leave us all dead or at least nursing gunshot wounds.

It is quite understandable the frustration that people feel because of the runaway crime rate and the inability of the authorities to take control of the situation and it is understandable too that the most logical solution seems to be to arm the citizenry to allow them to defend themselves against thugs and gunmen. But, the most logical solution is not always the smartest one and its consequences may actually turn out to be worse than the problem it was intended to treat.

Guns are dangerous machines because they have the potential to cause great harm to life, limb and property and as such, necessarily need to be handled by gun experts. Once the trigger is pulled, the sequence of events cannot be reversed or halted. Naturally, it would be easier to train a few people to use a gun correctly and safely than it would be to train most of the country.

Lethal means

Having a gun makes persons feel powerful and invincible and this quickly turns to abuse. Whereas persons would be forced to find other non-violent or less lethal means of settling their disputes, the lure of having a gun would be too irresistible to avoid. Think of the wife who shoots her husband (or vice versa) while in a heated argument or even in a case where there is an exchange of blows.

Last year, there was the incident of an eight- year-old child who accidentally shot his younger sibling with his father's gun that was left in what was thought to be a safe place. Imagine then the repercussions of guns left lying around carelessly. Imagine too, the temptation of children to show off their parent's gun to their friends or even take it to school.

Stringent procedures

Another argument put forward is that a gunman may think twice before perpetrating an act if he knows that the intended victim carries a gun. While this is true, it is not necessarily always a deterrent. It is a fact that some people die because they own a gun. The gunman was after the gun and not the victim per se. What's more, gangs are not necessarily going to give up their livelihood and start to cower in fear, they may actually want to strengthen their operations by obtaining as many weapons (and members) as possible.

The current stringent procedures that obtain for persons hoping to own a firearm should be maintained for our own safety.

Should the Government allow more people to bear arms would be akin to shooting ourselves in the foot. The Government has a duty to protect its citizens from harm and the focus and pressure on them to do so should not relent. However, in this case, one way of protecting us is by protecting us from ourselves.

I am, etc.,

JERMAINE BORELAND

jirmz@yahoo.co.uk