when going the wrong way, go faster
Via the Telegraph.co.uk:
We have, post-Dunblane, what are said to be the toughest gun control laws in the world. They have actually proved strikingly ineffectual.Gun crime has doubled since they were introduced. Young hoodlums are able to acquire handguns - either replica weapons that have been converted, or imports from eastern Europe - with ease. With no dedicated frontier police, our borders remain hopelessly porous. The only people currently incommoded by the firearms laws are legitimate holders of shotgun licences, who are subjected to the most onerous police checks.
The author seems surprised by the obvious. Of course guns are easy to obtain. They are relatively small objects with infinite shelf life and high value. Guns are a smuggler’s dream. Making guns illegal makes the gun trade more profitable on a per weapon basis.
Nor is there any reason to expect that anyone planning to commit a serious crime would be deterred by anti-gun laws. If the penalties for the intended crime do not deter, why should the penalties for using a gun do so? On the other hand, an unarmed population increases the advantage to the predator of having a gun. He need not fear effective resistance. The rational criminal’s response to draconian gun laws is to obtain and use guns.
So what conclusions does the author draw?
The truth is that the laws relating to possession of guns are nowhere near tough enough.… the ludicrous inhibitions placed on the police when it comes to exercising powers of stop and search have to be lifted.
Absolutely. Take away more freedoms, stick more people in jail, make damn sure only criminals have guns. That’s the ticket. It’s worked well so far.
Posted on February 17th, 2007 by pwyll
Filed under: nanny state
Entries RSS
Economist Steve Levitt, in Freakonomics, states; “…regulation of a legal market is bound to fail when a healthy black market exists for the same product. … A study of imprisoned felons showed that even before the Brady Act, only about one-fifth of of the criminals had bought their guns through a licensed dealer” Disarming law abiding citizens only emboldens criminals. Gun control advocates are fond of citing England’s much lower rate of handgun homicide when compared to that of the US. You never hear that the rate of burglary and home invasion in England is nine times that of the US. Criminals love it when you disarm their victims. It makes the risk of their criminal behavior much lower, and therefore much more appealling.
I do believe, and according to Levitt studies have shown, however, that harsher penalties for gun crimes Do serve as a deterrent. And these laws put the focus where it belongs: On the criminal and his crimes, and Not on the law abiding citizen and his diminishing freedoms.