Canadian Gun Control Fails

TSRA ^ | 06/15/2004 | John R. Lott Jr.

[Gun142]

Canadian Gun Control Fails

National Post (Canada)
June 15, 2004 Tuesday National Edition

BYLINE: John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer

BODY: Gun control has not worked in Canada. Since the new gun registration program started in 1998, the U.S. homicide rate has fallen, but the Canadian rate has increased. The net cost of Canada's gun registry has surged beyond $1-billion -- more than 500 times the amount originally estimated. Despite this, the Canadian government recently admitted it could not identify a single violent crime that had been solved through registration. Public confidence in the government's ability to fight crime has also eroded, with one recent survey showing only 17% of voters support the registration program.

So, if this hasn't worked, what's the solution? The NDP, which polls indicate may hold the balance of power in Parliament after June 28, has proposed a radical solution: "going across the border to the U.S. and actively engaging in lobbying to have gun -control laws in the U.S. strengthened."

This is part of an ironic pattern: When gun control laws fail -- as they consistently do, whether in Canada, the United States or other countries -- politicians seek to pass new laws rather than eliminate the old ones. In the United States, gun -control groups now claim that the 1994 Brady Act implementing background checks and assault-weapon bans failed to reduce crime only because they didn't go far enough; and that city bans on handguns in Chicago and Washington, D.C., failed only because other jurisdictions didn't follow suit.

The same logic applies overseas: With violent crime and gun crime soaring in the United Kingdom, where handguns are already banned, the British government is banning imitation guns. And in Australia, state governments are banning ceremonial swords.

Yet, the laws in Australia, Britain and Canada were adopted under what gun control advocates would argue were ideal conditions. All three countries adopted laws that applied to the entire country. Australia and Britain are surrounded by water, and thus do not have the easy smuggling problem that Canada claims with regard to the United States. The new attempts to ban toys or cast blame on the United States, reek of desperation.

Crime did not fall in England after handguns were banned in 1997. Quite the contrary, crime rose sharply. In May, the British government reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the last four years. Serious violent crime rates from 1997 to 2002 averaged 29% higher than 1996; robbery was 24% higher; murders 27% higher. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned, the armed robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels. The violent crime rate in England is now double that in the United States.

Australia saw its violent crime rates soar after its 1996 gun control measures banned most firearms. Violent crime rates averaged 32% higher in the six years after the law was passed than they did the year before the law went into effect. Murder and manslaughter rates remained unchanged, but armed robbery rates increased 74%, aggravated assaults by 32%. Australia's violent crime rate is also now double America's. In contrast, the United States took the opposite approach and made it easier for individuals to carry guns. Thirty-seven of the 50 states now have right-to-carry laws that let law-abiding adults carry concealed handguns once they pass a criminal background check. Violent crime in the United States has fallen much faster than in Canada, and violent crime has fallen even faster inright-to-carry states than for the nation as a whole. The states with the fastest growth in gun ownership have also experienced the biggest drops in violent crime rates.

It is understandable that Canadians are focusing on crime as the election nears. Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that law-abiding citizens obey the laws and criminals don't. Even in the unlikely event that a Canadian government were to convince the United States to ban guns, that would provide no more of a magic solution to Canadian crime than its own failed gun registry.

[TXnMA]

Where can I join?

My private range is almost completed and ready to go operational...

[TXnMA]

We have nothing to fear from Canadians. They subcontract all their defense work to the US.

Not quite so. IIRC, the superb fire control system for the main gun in our M1 Abrams tank is/was Canadian...

[Old Professer]

Adjusted for demographics?

[Old Professer]

Tolerance is not a conditioned response.

Or, as the Cryptoqoute had it:

"The object of punishment is prevention from evil; it never can be made impulsive to good." Horace Mann.

[Old Professer]

Cryptquote; I need a voiceboard.

[Old Professer]

Cryptoquote; I need a voiceboard-make that a voiceboard with an auto spell check.

[Never2baCrat]

If you heard the first shot, and it's not the last thing you ever heard, a reasonable person should consider it a tracer round. ;^) This is a great tag line!

[Billthedrill]

Tolerance is not a conditioned response.

Good heavens, what a lovely idea. Perhaps it isn't. I'm going to have to give that proposition some serious thought. Because it undermines a very good deal of modern pedagogy, doesn't it? Then what is being taught in the stifling atmosphere of political correctness isn't tolerance at all, it is merely fear of punishment. And that's about right, isn't it?

And if tolerance is really the respect given by a free man to another's freedom, then depriving him of freedom is hardly likely to advance the cause of tolerance. Is it?

At least a three-beer problem, Dr. Watson...

[B4Ranch]

>>a Constitution that actually restrains their government from messing them over. <<

Where did you get this idea? Not here in the US that's for sure. The Constitution is ignored by the legislators and the courts.

[Old Professer]

Six, if I've counted correctly, but then, I started at 7:45 A.M. as usual.

[ExSoldier]

"The Constitution is ignored by the legislators and the courts."

I'm not talking about the harsh reality, I'm talking of the original purpose of the Bill of Rights, not the way in which it has been misapplied. The 2nd Amendment should give us Vermont style concealed carry rights. Does it? For that matter, the 4th Amendment has been whittled away to almost nothing over the years, especially as it is applied to modes of transportation. But without doubt, the original intent as noted in the Federalist papers as well as the Anti-Federalist Papers was to act as a restraint against government interference in God given rights.

[B4Ranch]

The problem is we live in the world of reality and the bastards in Washington have canceled out everything the Founders intended for our Nation.

Old Glory is just a nuisance to them, not something they respect. The cute blue flag is the one they want to see above the Federal buildings now. Too soon for me, it will be there!

[ExSoldier]

Okay, you get NO arguments from me on that score. Except I think the UN is nearly ready to implode from it's own inefficiency and corruption. As an organization, it's dying. What rises from it's ashes WILL rule the world. It's almost time to start looking for the "Leader" who will come forward and offer the "hope" that will tie everything together. Get my drift?

[Larry Lucido]

Where can I join? "

TSRA had a Dallas office when I lived there. Looks like they are in Addison now.

[Designer]

RE: Post 19;

The question of questions is, how much more evidence do these gun-control people need, before they give up and say, "Oops, we were wrong!" ???

FYI to you and seemingly everyone else on this thread;

It should have been obvious by now that the real adgenda of gun grabbers is not to deter "gun crime", but to disarm us citizens. And it matters not that we have good arguments against gun registration, because they will keep at it until we (law abiding) are completely disarmed. They will not give up.

[Rytwyng]

It should have been obvious by now that the real adgenda of gun grabbers is not to deter "gun crime", but to disarm us citizens

Sadly, all available evidence suggests that you are correct. Molon Labe!

[Freemeorkillme]

"I think these guys are not talking about a literal invasion, just politics as usual"

Sir, I did gather that from the article. However, an intrusion into our domestic affairs, as the NDP threatens, is meddling with our sovereignty, wouldn't you say?

Also, nobody is talking about an invasion of Canada, I'm glad to hear.

FReeRegards

[ExSoldier]

" an intrusion into our domestic affairs, as the NDP threatens, is meddling with our sovereignty...."

Absolutely correct. But it's nothing the UN hasn't been trying for years (ever since it's creation in fact) and they're getting plenty of encouragement from our very own RATS. Deal with the threat from within, first. Then the outside threat won't matter a damn anyway.

[Freemeorkillme]

agreed. We keep the one eye open.