Graham 1

Daniel Graham
Rebecca Elena James
English 2010
28 February 2016
Why I Chose a Gun
In this TED discussion called, Why I Chose a Gun, given by Peter Van Uhm in
November of 2011 at the TEDxAmsterdam, he discusses how there are different instruments that
can be used to make the world a better place. Van Uhm explains why he chose a gun to make the
world a better place. His audience is comprised of people who, in his words, want to make a
contribution (Minute 1). This audience included people who are in favor of guns, as well as
people who are not. His main emphasis in this discussion is to convey to the audience the
importance of the gun to promote and establish peace among people and nations. As the highest
military commander in the Netherlands, Peter Van Uhm has had many experiences to support the
argument that he presents in this TED conference using ethos. With troops stationed all around
the world, Van Uhm has a very deep and convincing argument as to why the gun is such an
important and crucial tool in a military setting.
He begins his discussion describing the many different instruments that people have used
to create a better world. Some people use art, some use dance, and some write books to promote
a better world. Van Uhm then explains that the instrument of choice for him is a gun. Why is
this? How can a gun promote peace? Peter Van Uhm utilizes many different rhetorical appeals
to help the audience understand the somewhat strange argument that he has presented.
If individuals in the Netherlands are not around guns it is understandable that they can
make them feel uncomfortable. He explains that this is because the Netherlands are not at war,

Graham 2

and the people as a whole have not been exposed to guns. This is a good thing; it means that the
Netherlands is at peace. It is a natural reaction to be scared of something that one has not been
exposed to. Especially something that has a negative connotation, like a gun. Van Uhm then
goes on to state that this is not the case in other countries. He states, In many countries people
are confronted with guns. They are oppressed. They are intimidated by warlords, by terrorists,
by criminals. Weapons can do a lot of harm. They are the cause of much distress (Minute 3).
In this statement Peter Van Uhm acknowledges the fact that guns can be used for negative things.
This is no secret to anyone, but something that is important to understand and realize. That is
why there are two different sides to the argument surrounding guns.
Peter Van Uhm then begins to tell his story starting when he was a young boy in
Hijmegen, a city in the east of the Netherlands. His father was a hard working baker who grew
up on a farm with his father. Living on a farm, Van Uhms father learned to shoot guns to hunt
for the family. He became a very good marksman in doing so, and when he aimed, he never
missed (Minute 5). Somedays, when Van Uhms father would finish working, he would tell
stories to Peter and his brothers. There is one story in particular that he would tell often. In this
story, Van Uhms father was a:
Conscripted soldier in the Dutch armed forces at the beginning of the Second World War.
The Nazis invaded the Netherlands. Their grim plans were evident. They meant to rule
by means of repression. Diplomacy had failed to stop the Germans. Only brute force
remained. It was our last resort. My father was there to prove it. (Minute 4-5)
In this story Peters continues, his father was positioned on the bank of the Waal River which is
near the city of Nijmegen:

Graham 3

He had a clear shot at the German soldiers who came to occupy a free country, his
country, our country. He fired. Nothing happened. He fired again. No German soldier
fell to the ground. My father had been given an old gun that could not reach the opposite
riverbank. Hitlers troops marched on, and there was nothing my father could do about it.
(Minute 5-6)
Those missed shots by Peters father frustrated him until the day that he died because, He could
have done something. But with an old gun, not even the best marksman in the armed forces
could have hit the mark (Minute 6).
This story, along with stories of Allied soldiers who have left the safety of their homes
and risked their lives to fight for and liberate their country, are those that inspired Peter Van Uhm
to take a gun as his instrument to preserve peace. He also emphasizes that he does not take the
gun as a means to kill or destroy, but to stop those who seek to do evil and protect those who
cannot protect themselves. In this manner, Peter Van Uhm makes the world a better place.
Immediately after stating his reasoning for taking a gun as his instrument, Peter Van Uhm
says that:
I do not like guns. And once you have been under fire yourself, it brings home even more
clearly that a gun is not some macho instrument to brag about. I stand here today to tell
you about the use of guns as an instrument of peace and stability. The gun may be one of
the most important instruments of peace and stability that we have in this world. (Minute
8)
This may seem contradictory to everything that Van Uhm has said, but by using logos he then
supports his arguments with his own experience and undeniable facts. Although he may not like
guns, he has seen their effects during deployments in Lebanon, and Sarajevo. He then says:

Graham 4

Violence has declined dramatically over the last 500 years. Despite the pictures we are
shown daily on the news, wars between developing countries are no longer
commonplace. The murder rate in Europe has dropped by a factor of 30 since the Middle
Ages. And occurrences of civil war and repression have declined since the end of the
Cold War. Statistics show that we are living in a relatively peaceful era.
(Minute 8-9)
With these statistics Peter then asks the question Why? Why has violence decreased?
(Minute 9). He then, using ethos, refers to the latest book by Harvard Professor Steven Pinker.
In Pinkers book he writes, in short, that the reason that violence has decreased so dramatically is
because of the institution of governments who have issued consequences for violent behavior,
therefore deterring people from using violence because the consequences of that act outweigh the
benefit of using violence. Violence is simply not the best option anymore. For that reason,
violence has decreased (Minute 9).
Guns are one way of enforcing this institution of government. This is exactly why we
have them. Van Uhm touched on regions that have these institutions of government, but he also
talks about the grim reality that there are regions that have failed in this regard. These states are
very dangerous. For this reason, guns are necessary to protect against theses violent people.
Peter Van Uhm also emphasized that bringing order and correct governments to regions where
there was not one prior is a mission that needs to be pursued. If these states were able to
establish these kinds of institutions, the hope is that violence would decrease there as well.
Peter Van Uhm states, Ladies and Gentlemen, looking at this gun, we are confronted
with the ugly side of the human mind (Minute 14). It is very interesting that Peter Van Uhm
takes his gun as an instrument of peace, but then also realizes that this same gun can mean

Graham 5

something else. He knows that this tool can and is used in a negative way just as easily as it can
be used in a positive way. Fortunately, he uses it in a good way and hopes that others will see
and respect that. He continues:
I hope that one day armies can be disbanded and humans will find a way of living
together without violence and oppression. But until that day comes I will stand for my
men and women who are prepared to risk their lives for a less violent world for all of us.
(Minute 14-15)
Peter Van Uhm makes it known that he will do what it takes to ensure peace continues in
his country. He ends with a very powerful statement. He states:
Until the day comes when we can do away with the gun, I hope we all agree that peace
and stability do not come free of charge. It takes hard work, often behind the scenes. It
takes good equipment and well-trained, dedicated soldiers. (Minute 15)
Peter Van Uhm shares a very strong argument as to why guns are necessary in todays world,
understanding the good and the bad that can come from them. Fortunately, he sees the good that
comes from them. His opinion does not come from a News story and by something that he has
heard. Being the highest ranking commander, he has gained this knowledge from his own
personal experiences. Let us see the good that can come from a gun and the peace that it can
provide when used in a proper manner. This is the message that Peter Van Uhm would like
everyone to hear.

Graham 6

Works Cited
Van Uhm, Peter. Why I Chose a Gun. TEDxAmsterdam. Amsterdam. November 2011.