Gun Control's Twisted Outcome

Reason Magazine ^ | November 2002 issue, posted 10/21/02 | Joyce Lee Malcolm

[Ground0]

To quote Ted Nugent: "Gun control is putting two bullets in the same hole." Now that's gun control!

[thescourged1]

Your comments?

ping

[ibbryn]

Spinney,

Do you know the answer to SWake's questions?

Don't throw the Clinton red herring out. If you are not interested in a discussion, don't respond. If you are, do your research and come prepared with some logicial responses and intelligent comments.

[ibbryn]

What sort of research would you like me to do?

The type that would allow you to answer SWake's questions (posted above).

The author did research, came up with six 'miscarriages' of justice in thirty years and tried to pretend that this was a major problem.

...the English rate of violent crime has been soaring since 1991. Over the same period, America’s has been falling dramatically...American murder rate...was "in startling free-fall." ...nine consecutive years of sharply declining violent crime...English and American murder rates are converging.

Well, there is a major problem but apparently you didn't see it. You need to reread the article if the only thing that stood out was the 6 cases cited.

As I said, I'll leave you alone if you have your mind made up and don't want additional data/facts to conflict with what you believe to be true.

It's just that you sound somewhat sincere so I thought you'd appreciate additional data on the subject. As someone who formerly thought we'd all be better off if all weapons were banned, I feel like its my duty to keep you from making the same mistakes I did. :)

[dirtboy]

The author is working from a false premise- that without the gun laws Britain would have the same weapons culture as America.

Please show exactly where the author made such a premise. The author is examining outcomes - and the outcome of British gun confiscation is a crime rate that is spiraling out of control.

In all my life I've known only one person who kept handguns in his house, and they were in a locked gun box under the floor- not much use for defence.

You need to hang out with a better grade of people. :^)

We certainly have a crime problem and the laws on self defence do sound ludicrous (though if they're so awful how come he can only quote six instances in thirty years?)

He does have a column word limit.

but the line between that and gun control is very tenuous.

Not really. Lott has documented how crime goes down when the incidence of CCW goes up.

And the American murder rate halving in the nineties? In that time you've had the assault weapons ban and the Brady Law ( http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunlaws/index.asp ). Perhaps gun laws do work after all.

Then, according to your logic, violent crime should not have risen recently, despite the fact that gun laws have changed little during the first two years of the Bush Administration. Something else is a factor. For example, Maine has a high level of gun ownership. Vermont allows concealed carry with no permit. Both have low crime rates. DC has very strict gun laws and a high crime rate. NYC has strict gun laws, used to have a high crime rate, but it dropped with a change in law enforcement methods. So maybe it is a combination of cultural attitudes and law enforcement methods, and the right of self-protection that determine violent crime rates.

Is the Brady Law a compenent of good law enforcement? Possibly, but it carries serious danger to the rights of gun owners as well - the Clinton Administration, despite the law, kept background check data for 180 days, ostensibly for research purposes, but it would not surprise me one bit if a secret gun registration has been built. The leftists absolutely howled when Ashcroft proposed to drop the data retention period down to, I believe, three days, indicating they have their own agenda for that Brady data.

There is a significant disconnect between what the gun grabbers say they want and what they really want - and that is made clear in the subsequent gap between their response to a gun crime and the ineffectiveness of their proposed remedy. That is why us on the right distrust them so much.

[ibbryn]

Clinton Administration, despite the law, kept background check data for 180 days...but it would not surprise me one bit if a secret gun registration has been built

Hey dirtboy, Spinney's from the UK. He not only is used to this kind of monitoring of subjects, he thinks its the govt's duty to do so.

All rights are given, and taken away, at the whime of Her Majesty.

[unixfox]

London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.

LOL !!! What, tell em they need more gun laws?

Maybe they should call the Texas Rangers for advice. They would tell them that an armed populace is a safer populace.

[dirtboy]

Then it went on about how America's murder rate had fallen, without putting forward any explanations. I happen to think this is because one of them was that gun laws- albeit very minor ones- were introduced during that period which restricted access to weapons.

Then, once again, why has the crime rate risen recently if the gun laws are unchanged? Other factors are at work here, and it's a far more complex subject than you are willing to examine, or so it seems.

The piece was spin. And it was spin that was as offensive to me as something like Bowling for Columbine would be to you.

We are offended for different reasons. You seem to be offended by facts that offend your preconceptions, whereas we are offended by gun-grabbers who cannot be bothered with inconvenient facts.

[Chemist_Geek]

Another M.P. pointed out that while "society ought to undertake the defense of its members, nevertheless one has to remember that there are many places where society cannot get, or cannot get there in time. On those occasions a man has to defend himself and those whom he is escorting. It is not very much consolation that society will come forward a great deal later, pick up the bits, and punish the violent offender."

Hear, hear!

[ibbryn]

I happen to think this is because one of them was that gun laws- albeit very minor ones- were introduced during that period which restricted access to weapons.

How do you answer SWake's questions?

[dirtboy]

Exactly the point I was trying to make. The premise that Britain's gun laws have caused the crime problem is entirely false. So few people were disarmed that they were statistically insignificant.

The point is, keeping crime down has three factors - cultural factors, law enforcement methods and the ability of private citizens to defend themselves. As Lott has proven repeatedly, crime goes down when CCW rates go up - so even in the absense of cultural factors and law enforcement methods changing, crime can be affected in a singular manner by increasing the number of armed citizens. Not everyone has to carry - instead, criminals are more hesitant if they know their victim may have the ability to respond with force. And Britain has completely taken that concept away, not just by removing guns, but by providing legal sanction for self-defense - so criminals can act with impunity. I would say the problem with Britain goes far deeper than just guns - they have completely outlawed the fundamental human right of self-defense, and are paying dearly for it now.

[semaj]

"All rights are given, and taken away, at the whime of Her Majesty."

The difference between subjects and citizens.