THE RAW data is in, and the picture is distressing.

When it comes to gun use in this country, not only do we have a problem with the proliferation of illegal firearms, but legal firearms, too, are clearly an issue.

According to data disclosed by National Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds on Tuesday, at least 108 guns have been involved in matters which have come to the attention of the police. Some have even featured in robberies, shootings and murders.

While the exact number and nature of these offences have been disputed, the fact is, for decades now, governments have lamented that the source of our crime is the proliferation of illegal guns.

Time and time again, we are informed that most murders involve contraband weapons. We are whispered to about such items slipping in through 'porous borders.'

But with sanctioned guns, too, being part of the problem, it seems the calls are coming from inside the house.

If our own official controls and approvals are subject to abuse or vulnerable to manipulation or exploitation, where does that leave us on the question of whether guns should be banned or not in this country?

We have, until now, not banned guns, but rather subjected them to regulation. The difference is, admittedly, a subtle one, but the symbolic implications are clear: guns are permissible so long as you have the relevant permit.

The breakdown of the licensing system and the sanctioned custody chain, however, makes a mockery of such subtle distinctions.

Mr Hinds's disclosure heaps even more pressure on the State to come up with solutions to help keep citizens safe by finding ways to stop criminals from getting their hands on firearms.

Clearly, officials do not have the capacity to prevent guns - whether legal or illegal - from coming through our borders.

So has the time come for another gun amnesty, perhaps one tied to stronger terms and conditions?

A question that also arises relates to the social factors that might be playing a role here.

Guns are clearly more than just tools used to guarantee someone's security or protect property. They are used to harm deliberately. And they are clearly objects which bestow status and power.

Is there an intersection between gun use and social factors such as the glorification of gang culture? Is there a link between the gun as a status symbol and toxic masculinity in our society?

If so, how can people be discouraged from carrying these weapons?

If the State cannot stop the flow of guns, if it cannot even get its own controls in order, it must at least address the factors that shape the attitudes of all gun users. Or else we are left with not just a flood of guns, but also a lot of gun talk.