Gun laws compared: Why the US is easier than India for buyers

The killing of US political activist Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on September 11, 2025, underscores the persistent dangers of America’s pervasive gun culture. Kirk, a key ally of former President Donald Trump, was allegedly shot by a 22-year-old with a high-powered Winchester .30 caliber hunting rifle. The weapon, equipped with a telescopic mount, allowed the shooter to fire a single round at Kirk’s throat, ending the 31-year-old activist’s life instantly. This incident is part of a worrying trend in the United States, where high-profile political figures and civilians alike are increasingly at risk due to easy access to firearms.

In 2023 alone, 16.7 million firearms were sold in the US, reflecting both a surge in gun purchases and a sharpening political rhetoric that encourages gun ownership. Incidents like Kirk’s killing echo earlier attacks, including the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in July 2025, when a rooftop shooter fired at the former president, who narrowly escaped before his Secret Service detail could intervene. In September, another individual armed with an AK-47-style rifle was reported to have stalked Trump in Florida. These events highlight the reality that most Americans can obtain guns, including military-grade assault rifles, in less than an hour. The US currently has approximately 120 guns for every 100 people, making it one of the most heavily armed nations in the world.

The roots of American gun culture lie in its struggle for independence from Britain. George Washington and other founding figures relied on citizen militias armed with personal weapons to defeat British forces. Following victory in 1783, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution was ratified in 1791, granting citizens the right to bear arms. Originally intended to enable militias, this amendment has been widely interpreted as the individual right to own firearms. Today, it forms the bedrock of American political debates on guns. Anti-gun activists argue that the Second Amendment, written in an era of single-shot muskets, does not justify modern mass shootings involving assault rifles. Yet, even many victims of gun violence, like Charlie Kirk, staunchly defend the amendment, viewing it as essential to protecting broader civil liberties. Former President Trump has similarly championed a pro-Second Amendment stance, rolling back federal gun control measures in 2025.

India’s strict gun laws and historical context

In contrast, India has one of the lowest civilian gun ownership rates globally, with only five guns per 100 people. Ownership is highly regulated, making firearms difficult for ordinary citizens to obtain. This restrictive approach stems from colonial history. The Indian Arms Act of 1878, enacted by the British nearly two decades after the 1857 Great Rebellion, sought to prevent armed uprisings by controlling access to firearms. The law was introduced to maintain colonial authority, limiting the ability of locals to challenge British rule.

The ethos of the Arms Act continued to influence Indian gun policy long after independence. Mahatma Gandhi, in 1918, described it as a “black act” because it deprived the population of the means to arm themselves. Today, the Arms Rules of 2016 enforce licensing requirements that demand applicants demonstrate a genuine need, such as protection of property or participation in shooting sports, rather than merely wishing to own a firearm. This approach ensures civilian guns are largely absent from political disputes, reducing the likelihood of violent confrontations.

India’s strict gun control has social and political implications. Unlike the US, where political differences often escalate into armed conflict, India’s laws significantly limit the chances of such violence. Public safety is prioritized over individual gun rights, reflecting a fundamental divergence from American values. While the US considers the right to bear arms a cornerstone of personal liberty and a safeguard against potential tyranny, India prioritizes social order and collective security.

The stark differences between the two countries illustrate how history, culture, and politics shape gun laws. In America, the legacy of armed resistance against colonial rule has created a society where guns are entwined with identity and freedom. In India, the experience of colonial suppression and the memory of armed uprisings informed laws designed to control firearms and protect the population. These contrasting paths explain why firearms are abundant and easily accessible in the US, while Indian citizens face rigorous hurdles to legally obtain guns.

ALSO READ: Kejriwal targets Congress leadership in new political move

ALSO READ: Uttarakhand landslide buries family, heroic mother shields children

High-profile incidents like Kirk’s assassination highlight the ongoing challenges in the US, where gun availability combined with political polarization increases the likelihood of violence. Conversely, India’s strict gun policies, rooted in historical experience and reinforced by modern regulations, minimize similar risks. While Americans continue to debate the scope of Second Amendment rights, India remains focused on balancing security and legal ownership, demonstrating how two democracies can diverge dramatically on the issue of guns.

In conclusion, the ability to purchase firearms easily in the US and the difficulty of doing so in India is a result of deeply ingrained historical, legal, and cultural differences. The US enshrined the right to bear arms as a fundamental liberty, tied to its revolutionary past, while India inherited a legacy of strict colonial-era control that continues to shape modern gun laws. These differing approaches reflect broader societal priorities: the US prioritizes individual freedom and armed self-defense, whereas India emphasizes collective security and social stability.