Posted on 06/20/2016 10:07:58 AM PDT by jazusamo
Surely murder is a serious subject, which ought to be examined seriously. Instead, it is almost always examined politically in the context of gun control controversies, with stock arguments on both sides that have remained the same for decades. And most of those arguments are irrelevant to the central question: Do tighter gun control laws reduce the murder rate?
That is not an esoteric question, nor one for which no empirical evidence is available. Think about it. We have 50 states, each with its own gun control laws, and many of those laws have gotten either tighter or looser over the years. There must be tons of data that could indicate whether murder rates went up or down when either of these things happened.
But have you ever heard any gun control advocate cite any such data? Tragically, gun control has become one of those fact-free issues that spawn outbursts of emotional rhetoric and mutual recriminations about the National Rifle Association or the Second Amendment.
If restrictions on gun ownership do reduce murders, we can repeal the Second Amendment, as other Constitutional Amendments have been repealed. Laws exist to protect people. People do not exist to perpetuate laws.
But if tighter restrictions on gun ownership do not reduce murders, what is the point of tighter gun control laws — and what is the point of demonizing the National Rifle Association?
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
Sowell gets it. He is a treasure.
The facts are clear, which is why the left does not want to debate on the facts.
Great read.
Poor Thomas Sowell (and many of us here on places like FR)
We still labor under the misapprehension that logic has a place in making decisions about how we are to be governed.
Sigh.
There are other pressing questions. 1) Once all privately guns disappear into the government black hole, will there be no longer any need for law enforcement officers? 2) Once we’re all safe from private gun ownership, what will constitute our primary means of protection and defense, and what reason is there to believe it will be any more effective than the government protection industry today?
Man-made law (lex humana) and positive law (lex posita or ius positivum) versus natural law.
Common sense, for example, the human rights to defends oneself and others, should trump the first two.
As one example, Chicago has a ton of gun laws and restrictions, yet parts of it are shooting galleries.
“Gun free zones” and more lex humana make sense only to idiots like Democrats who see something, a govt. program that isn’t working, and decide that the best solution is to throw more money at it.
While all Amendments to the Constitution can be altered, I would hope tinkering with the Bill of Rights would never happen. If the Second Amendment were to be repealed, the First Amendment would be next on the block
Compare Chicago, IL murder rates to Montpellier, VT.
Without regard to their gun laws, one has a large number of available criminals, the other doesn’t.
300+ million people, 300+ million guns, 32,000(?) gun deaths= 0.0001% chance you’ll die from a gunshot. Unless you choose to become a “if I had a son” thug type. Chances go up.
Here are the truths that apply:
Will there be any need for law enforcement officers?
This applies to the masses and the party:
Of course! How can you doubt it? There will be many more crimes to enforce, not to mention thought crime and dedicated service to running re-education centers! Law enforcement does great service for the party!
This applies to the party leadership:
We will need many more loyal law enforcement to enforce these edicts. We also need to purge existing law enforcement of those who do not fully support the program without thought. Replacements should be from loyal party members only.
What will be our primary means of defense?
For the masses - The benevolent government has always been your primary means of defense. Now that evil gun owners have been disarmed, the government will defend you by making certain that all crime thinkers will be placed in re-education centers for the benefit of society. Any resistance to redistribution of wealth will be vigorously punished. If you do not possess any excess property, if you are not white and have been a loyal party member, you have nothing to fear.
For the Party - You will be protected. As a loyal party member you may be allowed to have weapons. Your party loves you.
For the Party leaders - Your security details will be increased. You now are at slight risk while the last bitter clingers show their true colors and are eliminated. Do not believe the false reports of assassinations. The situation is under complete control.
Will it be more effective than the government protection industry today?
For the Mass - Be careful. This is close to crime think. The government is always benevolent, always responsible, and always improving. There is no other truth.
For the Party - When you see this question, you know you are dealing with a latent crime think. Check their tax records very closely. Put them on one of the appropriate lists.
For the Party leadership - You already know that your security has been improved. The more guns that are removed from outside government hands, the more that you are secure. Pay no attention to rumors of bitter clingers in the area near you. The situation is completely under control.
That percentage goes down even more when you remove the suicides (60% of the total) and the justifiable homicides. Separate the gang-related criminal homicide and you are left with about 1700 homicides.
Strictest gun laws = Murder Capital of the country - and Obama’s home town.
How’s this working out for you, Chicago.
WHY does NO ONE ask him: “ How do you explain this?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxCcNhdsuKA
Well, if it’s that bad, we need to do something about it. :)
Yep, Chicago is a perfect example of gun control being worthless, law breakers pay no attention to laws.
“But if tighter restrictions on gun ownership do not reduce murders, what is the point of tighter gun control laws — and what is the point of demonizing the National Rifle Association?”
The point is that the Left needs guns to be banned in order to complete their hostile talkeover of the United States, and not get shot during the process.
Bump!
He has already said it it because of all the other states that do not have strict enough gun control.
The Marxists/Leftists/Socialists removed Rule of Law with Wilson-—completely. We made the State into god-—Rule of Man/Oligarchy and erased our Constitutional (Natural) Rights from God and allowed the State to indoctrinate our children (destroy Virtue Formation and fill them with Lies and emotional garbage to collapse culture)..
Positive Laws-—not based on Right Reason according to Natural Laws (Science/Logic/Truth (God) are “Null and Void” (Justice John Marshall).
No “just” law can promote evil, theft (welfare) and punish Virtue and reward Vice——it is a Evil System——not a Justice System (ours is based on Christian Ethics—the most brilliant, just, equal system of “Law” which recognizes Natural Law (Common Sense/design of Male/female and the family unit which is necessary for Common Sense/Virtue formation and Individualism/Free Will.
It’s not gun control we need..it’s MUSLIM control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.