| 113th Year, 31st Issue | Thursday, March 14, 2002 | Sparta, North Carolina |
Once upon a time, a young man, armed with a rifle, proceeded to kill 16 schoolchildren and then himself.
In the aftermath the usual suspects, including gun control groups, the leading liberal press, TV pundits and the ever-ready-to-capitalize politicians, rushed to the fore with the "obvious" solution to this outrage — ban handguns outright and intensify police oversight of sporting weapons. The supporting legislation passed easily and, within a year, a program of handgun collection relieved the citizenry of their now illegal items, police oversight of sporting guns effectively criminalized their use and the "progressive" groups behind it all breathed a sigh of relief, confident in the purity of their cause. We pause for a brief intermission as time moves forward, say, four years.
An 80-year-old man, finding his home being burglarized by a group of young thugs armed with baseball bats and knives, defends himself with a shotgun in his bedroom. During the event he shoots one member of the gang, killing him in the house. The gang members have, between them, more than 100 previous convictions. The 80-year-old is sentenced to life imprisonment for illegal gun use. In the surrounding community, murders by firearms are up by 85 percent over last year; street crime is up over 50 percent; carjackings have become regular incidents; home invasions, during daylight hours, conducted by groups wielding knives and guns, are increasing. The number of illegal guns on the street is guessed to be between 200,000 and one million. It seems the only people without guns are the ones who obey the law. Imagine that!
And where are the self-described saviors in all this? They've already washed their hands of the issue, being more involved with the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo.
The incident was in England, in 1996. The legislation followed in 1997. The statistics are for late 2001. The liberals are the usual crowd. If you want a picture of the post-Feinstein-Brady world, take a hard look.
Another "progressive" solution tramples on freedom and makes the problem worse with the meddling. In the past few years we've seen "assault" weapons attacked and banned, although I've yet to hear exactly what constitutes an assault weapon and Federal crime records show long guns involved in less than 1 percent of gun related crimes; implementation of background checks and cries for registration, although all of my criminal friends tell me they've never registered and their backgrounds wouldn't pass muster, so why bother; wild claims about "children" being killed by guns, although the critics classification of "children" encompasses everyone from birth to 25 years of age. More children under the age of five drown in five-gallon buckets each year than are injured by firearms. Don't believe it? Look up the Consumer Product Safety Commission records. And now, in the spirit of contemporary environmental "science," we have historian Michael Bellesiles' book, "Arming America" conclusively proving that the American firearm ownership myth, perpetrated by the NRA, is in fact a myth. How? By diligently examining probate records going back to the 1700s. Widely hailed by the liberal lobby as conclusive proof that the Second Amendment doesn't mean what it says, there have recently been a few bumps in the road. Like, the probate records for California cited by Bellesiles haven't existed since the 1906 earthquake; most of the records he quotes, on closer examination, were partially quoted, quoted out of context, or made up. That's a polite way of saying he lied and manufactured his data. But then, like environmental science, what's a bit of prevarication in the pursuit of the greater good.
In the mean time, real-world evidence indicates exactly what we common folk already knew — insure that the public and private spaces are unarmed and all those suffering from low self esteem, fear of actual work, or a hundred other pseudo-pathologies are guaranteed free sailing in the pursuit of other people's property.
If that sounds strong, consider that, within 6 months of Australia enacting stringent gun controls, the most popular theft was breaking into homes that were occupied and terrorizing the residents — why not? Everybody knew there was no danger.
Couple that with the overweening concern for the "rights" of the perpetrator, disregard for the victims, plea bargaining and light sentencing and you end up with Washington DC, Chicago and, now, London. On a rate-per 100,000, London's experience of robbery, assault, auto theft, burglary, and rape exceed New York City by factors ranging from 50 to 350 percent — all increases after gun control was enacted to "fix" the problem.
Two parting thoughts before I start cleaning my 9mm: 1) It is a fundamental right of a man to defend his life and property against those who would claim either. 2) Vermont and New Hampshire have the highest per-capita gun ownership rates in the nation; they also have the lowest crime rates. God save me from my "saviors."
Back to the Mushroom Chronicles Archive
Email: allnews@ls.net