A society without guns sounds fantastic and in a perfect utopian world, it would be nice not to need a gun. But look around, we do not live in utopia, far from it.
As John Locke stated, self-defense is the first law of nature. Each person owns his or her own life and no other person has a right to take that life. Those who would attempt to stop you from defending yourself, are attacking the very right from which all other rights are derived, protection of one’s own life.
In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. “International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.
In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here:
Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. ranks seventh, not first as often claimed. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are totally banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research. Guns are just as available in nations where guns are banned, and the US does NOT have the highest murder rate.
Kates and Mauser “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”
The study goes on to say:
…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are absolutely not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.
“If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.
If gun control worked, we wouldn’t be seeing headlines like “Baltimore Breaks City Murder Record,” “29 Shot in Baltimore Over Memorial Day Weekend,” and “Crime Explodes In Baltimore.” After all, it was only two years ago that Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (the former mayor of Baltimore) signed into law the Firearm Safety Act of 2013—restrictive new gun-control legislation that bans many common semi-automatic rifles, outlaws the manufacture and sale of magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds, requires private transfers of firearms to take place at a Maryland State Police barracks, and institutes a ban on the purchase of more than one gun per month (with a 7-day waiting period). This is on top of the fact that concealed-carry license applications are rarely approved by the state police, and self-defense isn’t considered a valid reason to apply.
The city has all these new gun-control laws, and yet violent crime went way up in Baltimore in 2014 and it’s still climbing in 2015.
82 Shot, 15 Dead in City with the Strictest Gun Laws in the United States over July 4th, 2015
Inside the city limits of Chicago, not a single gun shop can be found — they’ve been outlawed. With is nearly 3 million residents, Chicago has the most stringent gun laws in the nation.
Gun laws were so strict, in fact, that in 2010, the US Supreme Court intervened saying the law was going to far. However, city lawmakers were able to keep the ban.
The ban on assault rifles, a high-capacity magazine ban, and nowhere to purchase ammo makes Chicago one of the toughest places in the country to obtain a serviceable and firing weapon, legally.
With these strict laws, how on earth are there still guns in Chicago? You would think it would be a liberal paradise.
Gun violence in Chicago over the July 4th 2015 weekend reached war zone proportions with 82 people being shot between 4 p.m. Thursday and 3:30 a.m. Monday morning. 15 of these shootings were fatal. Tragically, even a 7-year-old child’s life was taken by one of these “banned” bullets.
On Monday, Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy blamed the shootings on the fact that people were getting too many guns.
But how is this possible since guns are banned in Chicago? Is the law failing to stop criminals from breaking it? How could that be?
Gun rights advocates state the obvious when they say that restricting the possession of guns only keeps guns out of the hands of people who actually listen to the law.
“The gun laws in Chicago only restrict the law-abiding citizens and they’ve essentially made the citizens prey,” said Richard A. Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association.
On March 25, 1982 Kennesaw, Georgia went against the grain and signed into ordinance that all head of households were required to own and keep at least one firearm in the home. (With some exceptions). The city’s population grew from 5,000 in 1980 to 32,000 people in 2013. The crime rate since the inception of this ordinance has become almost nonexistent.
They have proven putting guns in the hands of law abiding citizens is a deterrent for any criminal. If a criminal knows a person has a weapon, they are going to move on to an easier target.
And the more guns are banned, the more a black market opens up. And the black market will have the added advantage (for criminals) of no serial numbers and no restrictions such as automatic weapons or magazine capacities. Just look at prohibition or the current drug trade for proof.
Look at all of the known meth labs in the US, and meth is illegal:
If guns were banned, I suspect the black market for guns would dwarf the drug market. Heck, you can make a gun on a 3D printer in a small apartment with no restrictions and no serial number. Just think of the possibilities.
The only people deterred by gun laws are people that obey laws.
Instead of attacking the hundred and fifty million people in America who legally own guns and who don’t go around shooting children, we should look at the reason that causes people to kill one another.
Contrary to the fear mongering, most murders are not committed by law-abiding gun owners. Studies show that the vast majority of murders committed are by those who already have a criminal record or a history of severe mental illness.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” ~ Benjamin Franklin
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
Jesus said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Luke 22:36