The Colt Illusion: Why a Pistol in Your Pocket Doesn’t Guarantee Safety

Let’s be honest: most of us aren't ready to be action movie heroes. Even if the law allows the free carrying of handguns, are you truly prepared to lug a kilogram of steel with you every day?

And not just carry it—but remain in a state of constant combat readiness while standing in line for coffee or picking out groceries at the supermarket. A weapon in your bag is not a magic amulet.

In a critical moment, you have to pull it out, disengage the safety, chamber a round (since carrying a loaded weapon is prohibited even in the U.S.), and fire accurately. All of this must happen in seconds, under extreme stress, while terrified people are running all around you.

Try hitting a clay pigeon at a range first, and then imagine that the target is shooting back, and random bystanders are darting between you. There is a high probability that in such chaos, another "armed citizen" might mistake you for the terrorist. Instead of a rescue, we get crossfire and multiplied casualties.

The experience of countries with high levels of legal gun ownership only confirms these fears. I have studied the statistics. They are relentless: the number of mass shootings directly correlates with the availability of firearms.

The United States, with millions of legal guns in circulation, remains the world leader in tragedies at schools and shopping centers. In contrast, the examples of Australia and the United Kingdom show that strict control saves lives more effectively than any revolver.

Furthermore, guns are expensive. Training, regular practice, and licensing procedures require resources that most of the population simply doesn't have. Thus, "universal armament" is a myth for the wealthy or the fanatical.

We cannot ignore the political subtext either. For some reason, the loudest advocates for legalization are political forces balancing on the edge of electoral survival. In a fractured society facing information warfare, legal weapons in the hands of radicalized groups are the perfect tool for turning any protest into a bloodbath. When legal barrels replace protest signs, we are no longer talking about democracy, but about the physical elimination of opponents.

Once, in the late 90s, I was returning home in the evening through one of Kharkiv's dark residential districts. It wasn't even that late—around 10:00 PM (the trams were still running). On a dark path, some jerk silently approached from behind and put me in a chokehold with his elbow.

It was terrifying!

With one hand, I grabbed his arm, instinctively trying to free my throat, and with the other, which held my handbag, I began to pummel him with all my might. As soon as the man loosened his grip, I screamed at the top of my lungs. After striking me in the face one last time, he turned and ran.

I had reason to be proud: he fled in disgrace! The guys from the local criminal investigation unit tracked him down and arrested him a couple of days later.

It turned out this guy was a prior felon convicted of murdering his partner (he beat her to death) and had served seven years. His actions against me were qualified by the investigation and the court as... hooliganism resulting in bodily injury. He received another soft sentence—this time, a suspended one (his older sister happened to have "connections" in the judicial system).

Now, let’s imagine the scenario with a pistol—even a non-lethal one, or, God forbid, a real firearm (by the way, journalists in the 90s could legally obtain them). Suppose I free my hands, pull a gun from my pocket, and shoot over my shoulder, hitting him square in the face. It blows off half his head. And this is despite the fact that the attack itself is later qualified as... street hooliganism.

I believe I would have been the one in the defendant's dock—for exceeding the limits of necessary self-defense. In our reality, the law often protects not the one defending themselves, but the one who "suffered more" on paper. It would turn out that a handbag is self-defense, but a bullet in the attacker is "unlawful deprivation of the right to life" of a serial criminal.

No thanks, friends. I’d rather fight back with a handbag or pepper spray.

We are indeed moving toward regulating the arms market, and it is inevitable. But we shouldn't expect a pistol in every holster to be a panacea. Safety is created by a professional police force (that does its job instead of sitting it out or fleeing the scene) and a conscious society that knows how to save lives through first aid, rather than just dreaming of the right to take them.