Posted on 02/19/2010 12:26:19 AM PST by neverdem
In the weeks following the election of Barack Obama, gun and ammo sales across the nation surged. Interviews with the proprietors of gun shops and their customers revealed a concern that the new president would severely regulate firearms and ammo ownership.
A year later, it’s obvious that the worst fears of gun owners weren’t realized. Despite Obama’s troubling comments about bitter small-town residents who “cling to guns or religion” during his campaign, the president has not taken actions that could reasonably be construed as anti-gun.
When it comes to the emotions stirred by the Second Amendment, however, the paranoia of some conservatives is not a one-way street — although national media invariably contrive to portray it in those terms.
Meanwhile, liberal paranoia about gun ownership goes essentially unexamined.
According to liberals, the huge increase in gun purchases that came as a consequence of Obama’s election were certain to result in a commensurate spike in gun violence. Despite these repeated predictions, the frenzy of gun violence that was supposed to erupt never occurred. In fact, gun violence has decreased.
Indeed, the liberal mantra that more guns equals more crime has run headlong into some inconvenient facts.
According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2009, violent crime is down significantly this past year across the board in everything from car thefts — which have declined almost 20 percent — to homicides, which have dropped 10 percent. Coupled with the worst recession in a generation — which liberals also said would create more crime — the fall in violence is all the more stunning.
Some anti-gun groups have argued that firearms, like alcohol and drugs, are inherently dangerous and should be regulated as a health threat. But if the decline in violent crime this past year is any indication, it would seem that more guns equals less — not more — crime.
Anxious gun owners who compulsively stockpiled ammunition last year in the belief that President Obama would send out ATF agents to confiscate everyone’s firearms were obviously off the mark.
Gun control advocates who insist that the apocalypse is just around the corner because gun ownership rates continue to rise are no less paranoid.
As we have previously observed in this space, it’s increasingly obvious that guns aren’t the main cause of violence in society any more than windows are the reason that people sometimes jump out of them.
Nor is the problem a lack of gun laws. In almost every example of public gun violence the media has reported on in the last couple of decades, the shooter or shooters were usually in violation of several gun laws before they opened fire.
In the final analysis, it is society’s toleration of violence in all its forms that needs to be addressed. Neither arming ourselves to the teeth as individuals nor collectively retreating behind a wall of laws will move society positively in the direction we all seek, but have yet to find.
They are very much PRO-CRIMINAL and should be dealt with as if they are in every case.
How long until His Obamminess tried to claim credit for the drop in violent crime?
In a sense, he is rersponsible. If it wren’t for him millions of people now own guns they wonld not have purchased if it were not for Obama. As a result the crime rate has gone down.
It’s what you could call unintended consequences of liberal attempted gun control.
Thanks for the ping!
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.