Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 8/20/2001 6:14:39 PM EDT
The Washington Times Published 8/20/2001 Guns and stiff upper lips House Editorial www.washtimes.com If a total, nationwide ban on the possession of firearms is supposed to curb gun crime, then why is it that the English are increasingly the victims of gun-wielding criminals? According to a study released about a month ago and which formed the basis of a recent article in USA Today, the criminal use of firearms in the United Kingdom has increased by "almost 40 percent in three years, to 3,685 incidents from 2,648." Now, what makes this fact especially interesting is that three years ago was precisely when England passed a comprehensive ban on the private possession of handguns. According to the logic of gun control advocates, there should have been less, not more (let alone much more) gun crime. Residents of the District are equally familiar with this curious relationship. A total, nationwide ban on the possession of firearms has not kept guns out of the hands of criminals. As the study by the Centre for Defence Studies at King's College reveals, all that has been accomplished by the British gun ban is the disarming of people who obey laws. "It is crystal clear," the study's authors concluded, "that legally held firearms are not the problem, and that the existing gun laws do not lead to crime reduction. . ." A British gun-control group, the Gun Control Network, emotionally responded with the predictable mantra that "It is clear to the vast majority of British citizens that any relaxation of gun controls, or the routine arming of the police, would lead to an increase in the use of guns in crime." But the time has come to insist on more than emotional, gratuitous assertions. It is, for example, historically incontrovertible that gun violence in this country only became a problem relatively recently, irrespective of the fact that firearms have been common items in American households since the colonial era. It was not so very long ago that most high schools had shooting clubs - yet school shootings were unknown. Teen-age Boy Scouts practiced marksmanship - on targets, and without harming themselves or anyone else. How do gun control groups account for all of this? They don't. Facts and evidence that contradict their sloganeering are simply ignored, dismissed, or swept under the rug. As, in all likelihood, will happen to the King's College study. The same has already happened repeatedly to the multiple, excellent and thoroughly researched works of Yale professor John R. Lott. Meanwhile, gun control groups both here and abroad will continue to push for the disarming of law-abiding citizens - with the practical effect that they are at the mercy of well-armed criminals. This is disgraceful and unconscionable - and can no longer go unchallenged.
Link Posted: 8/20/2001 6:22:11 PM EDT
Hope that's a feather in our hat.
Link Posted: 8/20/2001 6:23:04 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/20/2001 6:26:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By JLA: Now, why is that so difficult for the anti's to understand? It's pretty much common sense, right? Great Column! -JLA
View Quote
You would think, huh? [i]one more post![/i]
Top Top