Control Vrs. Non-Control
This article was originally posted by Jamie over at Critter’s Musings (see link in my sidebar under the Honor Roll), and is reprinted here with his permission. He has also stated a desire to see this information become as widspread as possible, so please feel free to post this article on your own blogs as well. Read on, I couldn’t have said it better myself.
nedreck milhunky over at milhunky posed me an interesting question regarding the relationship between areas with strict gun control vs areas of freer control. Excellent question. There is of course a correllation, but just what is it? Well, here are some facts. I will start with Canada first. In the year 2000, the Gun Registry became law in this country. This law was in regards for long guns only(i.e. rifles and shotguns). In Canada, we have had a law for control of pistols and revolvers since 1934. In the year 2000, there was a total of 184 gun related deaths in Canada. In 2004, there was a total of 172 (source). This is a reduction of 4.3%.
Now this figure is a little mis-leading, because nowhere does Stats Canada differentiate between type of gun used. So we will just use the 4.3%.In the United States, they are a little more open with their studies and statistics that are available. They actually breakdown crime rates by type of gun used, i.e. handguns, long-guns, assault weapons. The U.S. has a different way of controling guns. They have "Right-to-Carry" laws. In 1986, nine states had this law (source). In 1998, thirty-one states comprising 50% of the U.S. population had this law. The stats are broken down into two categories using the previous 10 states, and then one state (Florida) which is representative of the remaining 21 states that have adopted this law. Between 1977 and 1982, in the 10 states that had existing right-to-carry laws, the following was found; no change in suicide rates, a .5% rise in accidental firearm deaths, a 5% decline in rapes, a 7% decline in aggravated assaults, and an 8% decline in murder. In numbers, these figures are; 1 more accidental gun death, 316 less murders, 939 less rapes, and 14,702 less aggravated assaults, in these 10 states ANNUALLY. Pretty damm impressive figures. Remember, this is with a right-to-carry law, i.e. the common citizen, after undergoing a criminal and psychological check, and taking gun use courses, can carry concealed handguns with them. From the figures, apparently this is a pretty good deterrent to thugs in the States that have this law. Now on to the specific case of Florida.
In 1987, Florida adopted it's right-to-carry law. Between 1987 and 1996, the following things happened; the firearm homocide rate DROPPED 37% and the homocide rate with handguns DROPPED 41%. This was compared to the remaining 19 States that had no right-to-carry laws. In these States for the same 9 year period, the following was found; the firearm homocide rate INCREASED 15% and the homocide rate with handguns INCREASED 24%. Now I am no rocket scientist, but comparing these 2 sets of figures tells me a startling fact. Contrary to the rhetoric of anti-gun lobby groups, anti-guns laws DO NOT control guns. In fact, in Dade county, the record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them. Now just to be fair, I will include some figures for Washington, D.C. In 1976, this jurisdiction enacted a virtual ban on all handguns. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington,D.C's homicide rate from handguns INCREASED 200%, while in the rest of the States, handgun homocides INCREASED only 12%. It appears pretty obvious to me that bans on handguns produce the EXACT OPPOSITE effect from what anti-handgun lobbyists proport they do. Here's another example. On September 14, 1994, the "Assault Weapons Ban" was enacted. Before 1994, LESS THAN 1% of gun related homocides involved assault weapons. In 1998, LESS THAN 1% of gun related homocides involved assault weapons. So much for bans having any effect.
The above sourced study also has facts on armor piercing(cop killer) ammunition and school killings. The same trend is noted in all cases as above. More information can also be found from another source.
There is a couple of important facts to keep in mind when going over these figures. Number one, they deal with the RIGHT-TO-CARRY arms, not bans or restrictions, which do not work. Number two, they do not have anything to do with REGISTRATION, which is what Canada attempts to do versus legal control.
From the above figures, several things jump out at me. Number one is that in Canada, we have it completely backwards on what we should be doing to rein in gun-related homocides in this country! In the States, they do not worry about criminals registering their guns, because they KNOW criminals don't obey the law. Instead, they attempt to control criminals from getting guns at all, and it is working. Of course, no one can completely control the flow of street-level, illegal guns, but at least in the States their approach is working.
Number two, allowing law-abiding, properly vetted and trained citizens to carry concealed weapons DOES NOT lead to rampant anarchy on the streets. This is just socialist gobbledy-gook voisted on an un-informed population.
Criminals ACTUALLY do fear an armed population that they know will retaliate against them when they threaten said populace.From the two above studies sourced, other facts are apparent. Accidental deaths DO NOT increase within a population that is allowed to carry legally obtained firearms. Criminals using the victims own firearms on them DOES NOT increase. Vigilanty use of firearms DOES NOT increase. In other words, all the reasons given to NOT allow a population to carry firearms only leads to an increase in one thing; criminal activity against an un-armed citizentry! This fact holds true for ALL gun-related crimes, not just homicides. I have only included deaths here, as that seems to the corner stone upon which anti-gun people state all their cases and reasons for gun bans. It appears, however, that this corner stone is in fact just sand.
Will we start getting it right in this country? Not for a long time. Canadians have had it shoved down their obliging throats for to long that the only way to stop firearm deaths is to make criminals out of ordinary citizens. They believe, as do most socialists, that the solution to any problem is to try to control it and spend more money on it. Workable solutions are vilified by lobbyists and politicians for just that reason. They know, in the case of lobbyists, that once a WORKABLE solution is put in place, they will lose their power and money flow because the problem no longer exists. This is true whether for firearms deaths, the homeless, or a host of other problems. Politicians also know that once a problem is under control, there goes their pet "cause" for gaining more votes by throwing money at said cause and appearing to be actually doing something about it, and really caring about the problem, instead of the votes.
We have a long row to hoe in this country to get it back from the very people who proport to defend it, when in fact they are destroying it and slowly subjugating us to more state control.
Per Ardua Ad Astra
nedreck milhunky over at milhunky posed me an interesting question regarding the relationship between areas with strict gun control vs areas of freer control. Excellent question. There is of course a correllation, but just what is it? Well, here are some facts. I will start with Canada first. In the year 2000, the Gun Registry became law in this country. This law was in regards for long guns only(i.e. rifles and shotguns). In Canada, we have had a law for control of pistols and revolvers since 1934. In the year 2000, there was a total of 184 gun related deaths in Canada. In 2004, there was a total of 172 (source). This is a reduction of 4.3%.
Now this figure is a little mis-leading, because nowhere does Stats Canada differentiate between type of gun used. So we will just use the 4.3%.In the United States, they are a little more open with their studies and statistics that are available. They actually breakdown crime rates by type of gun used, i.e. handguns, long-guns, assault weapons. The U.S. has a different way of controling guns. They have "Right-to-Carry" laws. In 1986, nine states had this law (source). In 1998, thirty-one states comprising 50% of the U.S. population had this law. The stats are broken down into two categories using the previous 10 states, and then one state (Florida) which is representative of the remaining 21 states that have adopted this law. Between 1977 and 1982, in the 10 states that had existing right-to-carry laws, the following was found; no change in suicide rates, a .5% rise in accidental firearm deaths, a 5% decline in rapes, a 7% decline in aggravated assaults, and an 8% decline in murder. In numbers, these figures are; 1 more accidental gun death, 316 less murders, 939 less rapes, and 14,702 less aggravated assaults, in these 10 states ANNUALLY. Pretty damm impressive figures. Remember, this is with a right-to-carry law, i.e. the common citizen, after undergoing a criminal and psychological check, and taking gun use courses, can carry concealed handguns with them. From the figures, apparently this is a pretty good deterrent to thugs in the States that have this law. Now on to the specific case of Florida.
In 1987, Florida adopted it's right-to-carry law. Between 1987 and 1996, the following things happened; the firearm homocide rate DROPPED 37% and the homocide rate with handguns DROPPED 41%. This was compared to the remaining 19 States that had no right-to-carry laws. In these States for the same 9 year period, the following was found; the firearm homocide rate INCREASED 15% and the homocide rate with handguns INCREASED 24%. Now I am no rocket scientist, but comparing these 2 sets of figures tells me a startling fact. Contrary to the rhetoric of anti-gun lobby groups, anti-guns laws DO NOT control guns. In fact, in Dade county, the record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them. Now just to be fair, I will include some figures for Washington, D.C. In 1976, this jurisdiction enacted a virtual ban on all handguns. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington,D.C's homicide rate from handguns INCREASED 200%, while in the rest of the States, handgun homocides INCREASED only 12%. It appears pretty obvious to me that bans on handguns produce the EXACT OPPOSITE effect from what anti-handgun lobbyists proport they do. Here's another example. On September 14, 1994, the "Assault Weapons Ban" was enacted. Before 1994, LESS THAN 1% of gun related homocides involved assault weapons. In 1998, LESS THAN 1% of gun related homocides involved assault weapons. So much for bans having any effect.
The above sourced study also has facts on armor piercing(cop killer) ammunition and school killings. The same trend is noted in all cases as above. More information can also be found from another source.
There is a couple of important facts to keep in mind when going over these figures. Number one, they deal with the RIGHT-TO-CARRY arms, not bans or restrictions, which do not work. Number two, they do not have anything to do with REGISTRATION, which is what Canada attempts to do versus legal control.
From the above figures, several things jump out at me. Number one is that in Canada, we have it completely backwards on what we should be doing to rein in gun-related homocides in this country! In the States, they do not worry about criminals registering their guns, because they KNOW criminals don't obey the law. Instead, they attempt to control criminals from getting guns at all, and it is working. Of course, no one can completely control the flow of street-level, illegal guns, but at least in the States their approach is working.
Number two, allowing law-abiding, properly vetted and trained citizens to carry concealed weapons DOES NOT lead to rampant anarchy on the streets. This is just socialist gobbledy-gook voisted on an un-informed population.
Criminals ACTUALLY do fear an armed population that they know will retaliate against them when they threaten said populace.From the two above studies sourced, other facts are apparent. Accidental deaths DO NOT increase within a population that is allowed to carry legally obtained firearms. Criminals using the victims own firearms on them DOES NOT increase. Vigilanty use of firearms DOES NOT increase. In other words, all the reasons given to NOT allow a population to carry firearms only leads to an increase in one thing; criminal activity against an un-armed citizentry! This fact holds true for ALL gun-related crimes, not just homicides. I have only included deaths here, as that seems to the corner stone upon which anti-gun people state all their cases and reasons for gun bans. It appears, however, that this corner stone is in fact just sand.
Will we start getting it right in this country? Not for a long time. Canadians have had it shoved down their obliging throats for to long that the only way to stop firearm deaths is to make criminals out of ordinary citizens. They believe, as do most socialists, that the solution to any problem is to try to control it and spend more money on it. Workable solutions are vilified by lobbyists and politicians for just that reason. They know, in the case of lobbyists, that once a WORKABLE solution is put in place, they will lose their power and money flow because the problem no longer exists. This is true whether for firearms deaths, the homeless, or a host of other problems. Politicians also know that once a problem is under control, there goes their pet "cause" for gaining more votes by throwing money at said cause and appearing to be actually doing something about it, and really caring about the problem, instead of the votes.
We have a long row to hoe in this country to get it back from the very people who proport to defend it, when in fact they are destroying it and slowly subjugating us to more state control.
Per Ardua Ad Astra
posted by Daniel Levesque at
10:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home