The Parliament passed new amendments to the Arms Act of 1959 reducing the number of guns that one person can own, these developments in gun control law in India raise the question whether stricter gun control policy is the way to curb crimes and violence in our country and if guns ensure self-defence when they are encumbered by strict rules for possession, storage, and transport. Taking examples from different countries with polarized views on the issue of gun control, we try to scrutinize the issues caused by civilian ownership of firearms and the reasons why the same is considered important in some countries. Also, the political and ethical ideologies which cause the polarised opinions on guns in different countries are discussed. The United States of America stands as an extreme example with a vast pro-gun lobby and the highest per capita gun ownership. Taiwan serves as the perfect model where gun control measures are minimal, yet the per capita gun ownership is one of the lowest. Japan and Indonesia serve as contrasting examples with strict gun control measures in place, yet Japan is more successful in enforcing those measures than the Indonesian authorities. From each of these models, India has something to learn and implement in its gun control measures.

Keywords – Firearms, Violent crimes, policy, law enforcement, comparative law

DOI: http://doi.one/10.1732/IJLMH.25141