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.

Hope that's a feather in our hat.

You would think, huh?

[i]one more post![/i]