| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | '''Gun control''' is a term used by [[liberal]]s when advocating [[unconstitutional]] laws designed to disarm people by restricting the lawful purchase, ownership, or carrying of [[gun]]s, under the guise of "public safety." Studies show that increasing lawful access to guns results in less crime,<ref>''Shall issue: the new wave of concealed handgun permit laws'', Cramer C and Kopel D. Golden CO: Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994</ref> but, despite the fact that gun ownership is a Constitutional right, leftists and [[liberals]] alike push gun control because it increases the dependency of voters on government for protection while disarming citizens capable of fighting back against [[tyranny]] or criminal elements. The political effect of gun control is to shift voters leftward, and hence the primary supporters of gun control are the [[liberal media]] and [[leftist]] politicians.<ref>[http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/quotes/repeal.html Quotes of Leftists Demanding Gun Control]</ref> In the [[United Kingdom]], which already has the strictest gun control in Europe, [[leftists]] demand control over 120,000 ''deactivated'' guns, although their activation and use constitute only 0.04% of all gun offenses there. But leftists want gun control because fewer guns means greater dependency on government.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3168607.ece</ref> Gun control can be considered a form of [[doublespeak]]. | + | '''Gun control''' is a term used when advocating [[unconstitutional]] laws designed to restrict the lawful purchase, ownership, or carrying of [[gun]]s, under the guise of "public safety." Studies show that increasing lawful access to guns results in less crime,<ref>''Shall issue: the new wave of concealed handgun permit laws'', Cramer C and Kopel D. Golden CO: Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994</ref> but, despite the fact that gun ownership is a Constitutional right, leftists and [[liberals]] alike push gun control because it increases the dependency of voters on government for protection while disarming citizens capable of fighting back against [[tyranny]] or criminal elements. The political effect of gun control is to shift voters leftward, and hence the primary supporters of gun control are the [[liberal media]] and [[leftist]] politicians.<ref>[http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/quotes/repeal.html Quotes of Leftists Demanding Gun Control]</ref> In the [[United Kingdom]], which already has the strictest gun control in Europe, [[leftists]] demand control over 120,000 ''deactivated'' guns, although their activation and use constitute only 0.04% of all gun offenses there. But leftists want gun control because fewer guns means greater dependency on government.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3168607.ece</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Gun control is a denial or limitation by [[government]]s of the right to armed [[self-defense]],<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly">"In contrast to most other weaponry, firearms are preeminently defensive in effect." [http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref> as promised by the [[Second Amendment]] of the Constitution of the [[United States of America]]. Genocide has occurred only after gun control first disarmed the citizenry.<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/> | | Gun control is a denial or limitation by [[government]]s of the right to armed [[self-defense]],<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly">"In contrast to most other weaponry, firearms are preeminently defensive in effect." [http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref> as promised by the [[Second Amendment]] of the Constitution of the [[United States of America]]. Genocide has occurred only after gun control first disarmed the citizenry.<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/> |
| Line 32: |
Line 32: |
| | [[image:Robbery victims.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]] | | [[image:Robbery victims.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]] |
| | | | |
| − | In Australia, where gun ownership was less widespread and the gun control measures were less strict, there was an immediate increase in robbery and armed robbery after the gun control went into effect in 1996 (see chart at right).<ref> | + | In Australia, where gun ownership was less widespread and the gun control measures were less strict, there was an immediate increase in robbery and armed robbery after the gun control went into effect in 1996 (see chart at right).<ref>Gun control passed in Australia because "public was immediately whipped into a gun control frenzy by the press" after the "Port Arthur massacre" in Tasmania on April 28, 1996, in which 32 were shot dead and 19 injured. "Although polls done prior to the massacre indicated that the public was satisfied with the amount of 'gun control' they already had, a major newspaper did a poll just a few days after the massacre (while all minds were "clear") and, not surprisingly, found high levels of support for extreme gun control measures. This poll would be used forever by the commonwealth government and other gun controllers to claim that Australians supported the new gun laws to come." - [http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html Gun Control in Australia] (by gunsandcrime.org)</ref> |
| − | | |
| − | Gun control passed in Australia because "public was immediately whipped into a gun control frenzy by the press" after the "Port Arthur massacre" in Tasmania on April 28, 1996, in which 32 were shot dead and 19 injured. "Although polls done prior to the massacre indicated that the public was satisfied with the amount of 'gun control' they already had, a major newspaper did a poll just a few days after the massacre (while all minds were "clear") and, not surprisingly, found high levels of support for extreme gun control measures. This poll would be used forever by the commonwealth government and other gun controllers to claim that Australians supported the new gun laws to come." - [http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html Gun Control in Australia] (by gunsandcrime.org)</ref> | |
| | | | |
| | There is no clear evidence supporting a decrease in crime from gun control.<ref name="Results">[http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html Results of the Australian Gun "Buyback" & New Gun Laws], October 2001</ref><ref>[http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/azl084v1 Study showing lack of promised benefits from gun control]</ref> Although from 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University) <ref name="theage.com.au">http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> | | There is no clear evidence supporting a decrease in crime from gun control.<ref name="Results">[http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html Results of the Australian Gun "Buyback" & New Gun Laws], October 2001</ref><ref>[http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/azl084v1 Study showing lack of promised benefits from gun control]</ref> Although from 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University) <ref name="theage.com.au">http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> |
| Line 41: |
Line 39: |
| | [[File:Send_a_gun_to_a_British_home.jpg|thumb|right|[[Second Amendment]]-supporting [[American]] [[citizen]]s gifted their [[firearm]]s to [[gun free zone]]-gun control supporting [[British]] citizens during [[World War II]] via [[The American Committee for the Defense of British Homes]]]] | | [[File:Send_a_gun_to_a_British_home.jpg|thumb|right|[[Second Amendment]]-supporting [[American]] [[citizen]]s gifted their [[firearm]]s to [[gun free zone]]-gun control supporting [[British]] citizens during [[World War II]] via [[The American Committee for the Defense of British Homes]]]] |
| | | | |
| − | :"from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now [as of 2002] six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people."<ref>However this increase in recorded violent crime between 1997 and 2001 is explained by the Home Office as a result of changes in the definition of violent crime and new counting rules introduced in 1998. [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf Violent Crime in England and Wales] According to the British Crime Survey, which is considered a more reliable guide to trends in crime [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf], violent crime fell 24% between 1997 and 2001/02, and burglary fell 40% over the same period.[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hosb1105tab201.xls Trends in BCS incidents of crime]</ref>
| + | <blockquote>"from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now [as of 2002] six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people."<ref>However this increase in recorded violent crime between 1997 and 2001 is explained by the Home Office as a result of changes in the definition of violent crime and new counting rules introduced in 1998. [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf Violent Crime in England and Wales] According to the British Crime Survey, which is considered a more reliable guide to trends in crime [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf], violent crime fell 24% between 1997 and 2001/02, and burglary fell 40% over the same period.[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hosb1105tab201.xls Trends in BCS incidents of crime]</ref></blockquote> |
| − | | |
| − | Gun control in Britain and Australia has been followed by a predictable shift to the left politically by voters as they lost their instrument of self-defense and became more emotionally dependent on government. Contrast that with the [[United States]], where an effort to push gun control after the [[Columbine massacre]] failed in 2000 and the government has remained as [[conservative]]—if not more so—ever since.
| |
| | | | |
| | The emasculation of the citizenry by gun control also arguably reduces the resistance of a society to intimidation, and exacerbates fear of consequences from causing offense. Subsequent to the passage of strict gun control in [[England]] some teachers have avoided teaching controversial subjects such as the [[Holocaust]], the Arab-Israeli conflict and the [[Crusades]] during history classes.<ref>http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW100.pdf</ref> | | The emasculation of the citizenry by gun control also arguably reduces the resistance of a society to intimidation, and exacerbates fear of consequences from causing offense. Subsequent to the passage of strict gun control in [[England]] some teachers have avoided teaching controversial subjects such as the [[Holocaust]], the Arab-Israeli conflict and the [[Crusades]] during history classes.<ref>http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW100.pdf</ref> |
| Line 82: |
Line 78: |
| | "The only purpose of a gun is to kill people." | | "The only purpose of a gun is to kill people." |
| | | | |
| − | Advocates point to the number of accidental deaths caused by children gaining access to improperly-stored guns. According to the [[Brady Campaign]], a [[liberal]] organization that advocates for gun control, in the United States, " 1 out of 3 homes with kids have guns and nearly 1.7 million children live in a home with an unlocked, loaded gun."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bradycampaign.org/key-gun-violence-statistics|title=Key Gun Violence Statistics|accessdate=July 14, 2017}}</ref> | + | Advocates point to the number of accidental deaths caused by children gaining access to improperly-stored guns. According to the [[Brady Campaign]], an organization that advocates for gun control, in the United States, " 1 out of 3 homes with kids have guns and nearly 1.7 million children live in a home with an unlocked, loaded gun."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bradycampaign.org/key-gun-violence-statistics|title=Key Gun Violence Statistics|accessdate=July 14, 2017}}</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Another argument is that of suicide prevention. Guns are highly effective tools for committing suicide with a reported success rate of over 95%, whereas other common methods such as overdoses and cutting have a less than 10% success rate. People who attempt and fail to commit suicide do not usually try again. | | Another argument is that of suicide prevention. Guns are highly effective tools for committing suicide with a reported success rate of over 95%, whereas other common methods such as overdoses and cutting have a less than 10% success rate. People who attempt and fail to commit suicide do not usually try again. |