MARK STEYN: This is what happens when governments try to ban guns

The Daily Telegraph ^ | January 5, 2003 | Mark Steyn

[MadIvan]

You would think if "gun control" was going to work anywhere it would be on a small island. Particularly a small island at whose ports of entry the zealots of HM Customs like nothing better than performing intimate cavity searches on the off-chance you've got an extra bottle of duty-free Beaujolais tucked away up there. Surely, if you also had a Walther PPK parked out of sight, these exhaustive inspectors would be the first to notice.

But apparently not. Since the Government's "total ban" five years ago, there are more and more guns being used by more and more criminals in more and more crimes. Now, in the wake of Birmingham's New Year bloodbath, there are calls for the total ban to be made even more total: if the gangs refuse to obey the existing laws, we'll just pass more laws for them not to obey. According to a UN survey from last month, England and Wales now have the highest crime rate of the world's 20 leading nations. One can query the methodology of the survey while still recognising the peculiar genius by which British crime policy has wound up with every indicator going haywire - draconian gun control plus vastly increased gun violence plus stratospheric property crime.

What happened at that party in Aston? I don't mean "what happened?" in the sense of the piercing analysis of Chief Superintendent Dave Shaw, who concluded: "There has clearly been some sort of dispute which has resulted in people coming to the premises with guns, discharging their weapons and causing this incident." You can't put anything over on these coppers, can you? But my question is directed at the broader meaning of the event. Chief Supt Shaw went on: "We have never had to deal with anything like this. In terms of the nature of the incident, it's almost unprecedented in Birmingham." He didn't quite say Birmingham is one of those bucolic tightly-knit communities where everyone in the village knows everyone else and no one locks their doors, but you get the drift: this is some sort of bizarre aberration.

I think not. When those young men decided to open fire in Birchfield Road, they were making an entirely rational decision. One reason why Chief Supt Shaw has "never had to deal with anything like this" is because Aston was long ago ceded to the gangs. And, if you can deal drugs with impunity and burgle with impunity and assault with impunity and use guns with impunity, who's to say you can't murder with impunity? The West Midlands Police have offered a reward of £1,000 for information leading to the arrest of those involved. Think about that: would you name a known gang member for a thousand quid? Once the funerals have been held and the media's moved on, the constabulary will go back to forgetting about Aston. But you'll still have to live there.

When Dunblane occurred, all of us - even, if they're honest with themselves, the shrieking hysterics baying for pointless legislation - understood it was a freak event: a nut went nuts. It happens, and, when it does, the event has no broader implications. But what happened in Birchfield Road is of wider relevance: it's a glimpse of the day after tomorrow - not just in Aston, but in Edgbaston and Solihull and Leamington Spa.

After Dunblane, the police and politicians lapsed into their default position: it's your fault. We couldn't do anything about him, so we'll do something about you. You had your mobile nicked? You must be mad taking it out. Why not just keep it inside nice and safe on the telephone table? Had your car radio pinched? You shouldn't have left it in the car. House burgled? You should have had laser alarms and window bars installed. You did have laser alarms and window bars but they waited till you were home, kicked the door in and beat you up? You should have an armour-plated door and digital retinal-scan technology. It's your fault, always. The monumentally useless British police, with greater manpower per capita on higher rates of pay and with far more lavish resources than the Americans, haven't had an original idea in decades, so they cling ever more fiercely to their core ideology: the best way to deal with criminals is to impose ever greater restrictions and inconveniences on the law-abiding.

The gangs on Birmingham's streets instinctively understand this. They know, even if the Government doesn't, that the Blairite "total" ban, which sounds so butch and macho when you do your soundbite on the telly, is a cop-out: it makes the general population the target, not the criminals. And once that happens it's always easier to hassle the cranky farmer with the unlicensed shotgun than the Yardies with the Uzis. When you disarm the citizenry, when you prosecute them for being so foolish as to believe they have a right to self-defence, when you issue warnings that they should "walk on by" if they happen to see a burglary or rape in progress, the main beneficiaries will obviously be the criminals. Aston is the logical reductio of British policing: rival bad guys with state-of-the-art hardware, a cowed populace, and a remote constabulary tucked up in bed with the answering machine on.

I see I haven't yet mentioned the touchy social factor which even squeamish British Lefties have been forced to confront: Aston is yet more "black-on-black" violence. The reason I haven't mentioned it is because there hardly seems any point. What's new? Canada also had a Dunblane-like massacre, followed by Dunblane-like legislation, and, like Birmingham, boring, bland Toronto has lately been riven by gun violence from - wait for it - Jamaican gangs. But in neither Britain nor Canada is it politically feasible to suggest that perhaps Jamaicans should be subjected to special immigration scrutiny. As it happens, that Canadian massacre, of Montreal female students 12 years ago, was committed by the son of an Algerian Muslim wife-beater, but, although we all claim to be interested in the "root causes" of crime, they tend to involve awkward cultural judgments. It's easier, like Mr Blair, just to go "total": blame everyone, ban everything.

This basic approach of addressing any cultural factors apart from the ones that correlate was pioneered by American progressives. The corpulent provocateur Michael Moore, in his film Bowling for Columbine, currently delighting British audiences, spends an entire feature-length documentary investigating the "culture" of American gun violence without mentioning that blacks, who make up 13 per cent of the population, account for over half the murders (and murder victims, too). Once you factor them out, Americans kill at about the same rate as nancy-boy Canadians.

But, as I said, it's hardly worth mentioning in relation to Britain. In my part of New Hampshire, we're all armed to the hilt and any gangster who fancied holding up a gas station would be quickly ventilated by guys whose pick-ups are better equipped than most EU armies. The right of individual self-defence deters crime, constrains it, prevents it from spreading out of the drug-infested failed jurisdictions. In post-Dunblane, post-Tony Martin Britain, that constraint doesn't exist: that's why the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea now has a higher crime rate than Harlem.

Meanwhile, America's traditionally high and England and Wales's traditionally low murder rates are remorselessly converging. In 1981, the US rate was nine times higher than the English. By 1995, it was six times. Last year, it was down to 3.5. Given that US statistics, unlike the British ones, include manslaughter and other lesser charges, the real rate is much closer. New York has just recorded the lowest murder rate since the 19th century. I'll bet that in the next two years London's murder rate overtakes it.

[Jonathon Spectre]

blacks, who make up 13 per cent of the population, account for over half the murders

"Racism" ping, that is to say, "Sweet, sweet truth" ping.

It's just the legacy of slavery, that's all. Someone should have to pay.

[David Hunter]

I was just watching the ITV national news; they had a report on this issue and mentioned two more murders committed with guns since new year's day. Apparently, Blunkett is meeting with Police chiefs to discuss "new, tougher gun laws". The CPS are saying there's more gun crime than ever - even after the 1997 handgun ban which they pushed for. How can you make something that's already illegal, more illegal?

What pisses me off is the way the Beeb and ITN don't question the logic of bringing in more gun laws. The ITN report I just saw showed a reporter dry-firing an imitation blank-firing replica beretta, with a voice-over saying that the government is considering banning replicas and airguns. The reason they gave for banning replicas is that they can be modified to fire real bullets. But that's extremely difficult to do and its very rare to find modified replicas being used by criminals. We have some of the toughest firearm deactivation legislation in the world. Reactivation is not something that Joe Bloggs could do in their garage.

The idea that banning airguns will stop gun crime is just ridiculous too. I don't know if you saw the recent Police and BBC lead smear campaign against the airgun manufacturer Brocock; but they libelled them in the national media by suggesting that Brocock air pistols are extremely easy to convert to functioning firearms and that this is often done by criminals. That was shown to be a blatant lie which was not picked up on by the media, or reported by them, and especially not by the BBC, who made such a big deal about it in the first place. When will the lamestream electronic media stop banging the government's drum? What a bunch of bedwetting pansies!

[facedown]

When will the lamestream electronic media stop banging the government's drum?

When one or the other changes ideology.

[David Hunter]

The BBC shouldn't let its ideology come through in its reporting; its paid for by a compulsory "license fee". This is why I've signed up to the Stop the BBC Bias Campaign. Let's see how long the Beeb last on a level playing field.

[TigersEye]

When will the lamestream electronic media stop banging the government's drum?

Perhaps when enough people snap to the fact that there are far more reliable sources of information, far more information than they've been recieving and plenty of ways to cross check information. Look for the government to find (or make) reason to crack down on the internet before long.

[gcruse]

I watched a documentary about 2 Jamaicans who raped and murdered a Canadian tourist in Bermuda a couple of years ago. They do get around, these wogs.

Heh.  Wog means westernized oriental gentleman.  Just how oriental are Jamaicans, anyway?

[doosee]

Heh. Wog means westernized oriental gentleman. Just how oriental are Jamaicans, anyway?

Give me time, I am sure I can find an anthropologist who claims that the Jamaicans descended from the East. :}

[Timesink]

For years, I've been arguing with European acquaintances that their much-vaunted low crime rates had nothing to do with their socialist governments and gun control laws and everything to do with their homogeneous populations.

There's also the little-known fact that the FBI goes out of its way to lump as many crimes into the "gun-related" column as possible (to justify their yearly budgets), while the British government goes out of its way to get as many crimes and deaths OUT of the "gun-related" column as possible (so that they can continue to proclaim that crime is low even as it spirals out of control to new heights every day). In other words, US gun-crime statistics are inflated, and UK gun-crime statistics are deflated. It's entirely possible that the UK has already surpassed us in violent crime.

[Avoiding_Sulla]

I've seen that elsewhere recently. Was it you who posted it? Wasn't there considerably more. If you know, could you please provide a link?

Murders used to be tracked in one way in the USA, and then it was altered, apparently beginning in 1976. The underlying data in the following chart should demonstrate that there has been some offical fiddling with the numbers. Proof of this is how all three numbers in that chart just happen to coincide at the same number in 1976. I don't know why that is. It's as if some scheme was used to standardize the three different data tracking methods until one was finally chosen to be the "official" statistic to be disseminated.

As I recall, non-negligent homicide includes killings in self defense. About the only time any American institutions are willing to acknowledge that decent people actually succeed in preventing murders is when they can make it seem that murders are still high by lumping self-defense with murder. Naturally that coincides with typical liberal "thought" that no "one" is to blame, but "everybody" is.

[RamingtonStall]

Ref: <<"I hope you're being sarcastic but I'll take the opportunity to plug Free dominion for ya.">>

Thanks for the Promo of "Free Dominion". IT is nice to see that there actually is a Conservative View-Point in Canada. I guess I have been so brainwashed by the USA Press as to believe that it had been exterminated along with the right to own guns.

Anyway, till they allow me to take my "Protective Devices" with me I will continue to avoid visiting our neighbor to the north.

RamS

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping, and yes, he does nail it...

[facedown]

IT is nice to see that there actually is a Conservative View-Point in Canada.

Free Dominion is a well kept secret in the (US/CAN) media.

An even deeper kept secret is that there are actually some conservatives in Britian Free Britannia!

Please visit them both, register and at least say hello. They're good people.

[Joan912]

Thanks for the links; I'll visit Free Britannia today. I was about to ask if there are any vocal conservative activists in Great Britain or if everyone has been cowed into silence.

[dd5339]

Ping

[John Jorsett]

What's the definition of a "Yardie"?

[45Auto]

drug-infested failed jurisdictions."

Oakland, California is the prototypic "drug infested failed jurisdiction". In a city of nearly a half million people, 113 murders were recorded in 2002, about 99% of them involving those who make a living in the drug trade. The armed criminal controls the streets of Oakland, no matter what the local law enforcement agencies claim. Oakland elected the prototypic "liberal" as Mayor five years ago: None other than the former California governor, Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown.

This in a city controlled by blacks who elected the liberal, quilty white guy instead of the more qualified (conservative) black candidate, the head of the local NAACP, Shannon Reeves, whose election slogan was "No More Excuses". Apparently, they didn't want to give up the excuses for their own failure: Liberal Socialist Policies. Oakland refuses to issue CCW permits, except for ONE: The Mayor's bodyguard. Oakland and London have a lot in common, and for the same stupid, assinine reason: Liberal Politics

[45Auto]

Meanwhile in black, minority, and immigrant communities the violent crime rages on with daily shootings and guns are as available as crack cocaine. There are thousands of these incidents every day in the U.S. inner cities, where is the media on this ?

The media carefully, methodically, and purposefully ignores these things. Oakland, California, a city of 400,000 people, mostly black, recorded 113 murders in 2002, 99% involved those who work in the drug trade. The media accounts of this focussed almost entirely on the tools used to carry out these murders, mostly "THE GUN". The media is so shamlessly left-biased, that they have become the stooges of tyranny. So California, like England (and elsewhere) works even harder to disarm the law-abiding citizenry, clinging to the wrong-headed idea, that somehow, by (attempting) to reduce the number of guns "out there", that they will eventually reduce the rate of violent crime.

The average moron voter sucks up this nonsense year after year, passing more and more worthless "gun control" legislation. At the core of this victim-disarmament cadre lies the sinister would-be tyrant/politicians and their sycophants. The end-game for these evil men and women is to turn the US and eventually the whole world into a Utopian workers paradise, with them as the "leaders". Gun Control is about controlling the citzenry. Its slavery by any other name.

[Avoiding_Sulla]

I'm sorry. On further consideration, this commentary reveals another, even more pressing, problem.

After reading the first two paragraphs, who could fault the average, non-forum reader, from legitimately shrugging:

"Ah, just another story about failed government policy. So what else is new?"

Exactly. It is not new. And despite public awareness and dissatifaction with these outrageous failures, public officials don't still continue their errant policies, they press them further.

How can this be?

Well, few on this forum are going to be surprised. The problem remains how are we going to get our off-forum friends to take notice? Well, maybe combining two stories can help.

Mr. Steyn mocks the thinking behind anti-self defense laws. Yet those laws are merely the grim consequences of an overall process, long unabated, that in this instance is running rampant in Britain.

Please peruse this piece published by Professor Robert Higgs in January 1995, titled

The Myth of "Failed" Policies (and subsequently popularized in a Walter Williams column)

Key excerpts:

• Government policies as a rule simply are not what they pretend to be.
• When we take a realistic view of the political process, we see that so-called failed polices are nearly always spectacular successes.

What he demonstrates, and why you should bother to acquaint yourself with his work, was "if you think a government policy has failed, you are not seeing it from the perspective of the policy maker" who invariably benefits from public dissatisfaction.

The criminal justice system, for whatever reason, was not one of the examples either Doctors Higgs or Williams hightlighted. Isn't it about time it was?

In this particular instance, it is in denying you the human right of self defense that channels benefits to policy makers, policy enforcers, and their patrons.

[vannrox]

.



Yao Zhongyu, 1974
Always keep the gun firmly in hand


.