The issue of gun control, more specifically whether people should be given leniency or be subject to strict laws, is one of modern times and has received a lot of attention. From one perspective, people want to have full control of their safety and their property but at the same time, easy access to firearms could create more problems than solve. Even though change is inevitable and people are starting to possess guns and push for allowances, it is better to slow the process down as much as possible, so that people can get used to and deal with more important issues at hand. Since the beginning of human history, people would always carry some sort of protective weapon. Spears, swords, projectile weapons and other devices would be used against the human enemy or to avoid animal attacks. Wars were commonplace in the older days, so it is understandable that people were more eager to fight and resort to violence. The modern days have seen a lot of evolution of the human mind and understanding of the surrounding world. The government has provided organized protection of citizens in the form of army, police services and other protective organizations. It is a fact that there are places in the world that are torn apart by wars and violent conflict where people are used to carrying weapons for protection. A much different case can be seen in the United States because peace is the end result of any civilization and human evolution. Only peace can allow for further development of people’s mind and soul whereas war, can only delay, set back or completely destroy life. It would be unwise to deny that people need protection even in the time of peace. Police and protective services cannot constantly and simultaneously be everywhere at once, so sometimes people have to fight for their life or avoidance of harm. Examples of this are robberies, assaults and other crimes that are dominant in the modern age. It is possible to assume that if people are allowed to carry guns for protection, the world will become safer but it also means that criminals will have guns as well. All gun possession today by the criminal world is illegal and prohibited, so it is somewhat harder to get, comparing to full permission by the government. Also, if both victims and criminals carry guns, it will almost certainly be unavoidable for a gun fight to break out. But, if there is a ban on carrying a concealed weapon, then people will have a higher chance to survive with non-fatal wounds. Of course, the extreme cases will always exist and there will always be people who will not need weapons to be violent but it is still better to have a higher chance of survival. As always, there are compromises, such as non-lethal weapons—tasers, pepper spray, martial arts, protective armor, batons and many other possible solutions. An article titled “Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control?” confirms the view that the more gun control there is, the less guns there will be available for usage. If the government applies strict laws and penalties, there will be limited access, availability and incline to use weapons. There is a rather valid point about not only the existence of laws and regulations but also the ability of the jurisdictions and services to enforce these policies. A question of whom and how the appropriate level of