Get PJ Media on your Apple

Giffords Shot: Now, A Word from Our Gun Control Sponsors…

The evidence shows that more regulations aren't the answer.

by
Howard Nemerov

Bio

January 11, 2011 - 12:00 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

Does the Giffords shooting highlight a need for gun control?

The shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords provided an opportunity for Brady Campaign president Paul Helmke to promote more gun control. “[W]e can and should do more,” he said, “to address the easy access to high-powered guns that make it too easy for dangerous and irresponsible people to disrupt and destroy the lives of innocent Americans [...].”

But the full story is somewhat broader.

The Washington Post noted the shooter “listed Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels’s The Communist Manifesto and Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf among his favorite books.” Giffords is Jewish.

Here’s how the Marxists measure up on gun control:

  • The Soviet Union enforced strict gun control, which enabled leaders to murder about 62 million of their own people.
  • The People’s Republic of China enforces strict gun control, enabling leaders to murder about 80 million.

By comparison, Hitler, another gun control proponent, murdered “only” 21 million civilians. But perhaps had the Nazis had as many years as the Marxists, they would have been more “successful.”

If one deranged murderer killed six people a day, as happened in Tucson, it would take mass murderers 74,441 years to match what the acolytes of Marx and Hitler did in decades.

The FBI reported 15,241 murders for 2009. The murder rate has declined 46.8% since 1990, and the number of murders declined by 35%. Ignoring this and assuming that murders stabilize, it would still take over 10,696 years to match the socialists. (Remember that “Nazi” stands for “National Socialist German Workers’ Party.”)

The argument is made that if only we had banned guns like Britain and Australia, this wouldn’t have happened.

In 2009, 12 years after their gun ban, Australia experienced its worst mass murder in history, and no guns were involved:

The Australian prime minister accused arsonists of “mass murder” …. Officials in Victoria believe some of the 400 fires that reduced towns to blackened ruins may have been deliberately set, or have been helped to jump containment lines. The incinerated towns have been officially declared as crime scenes.

The 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission concluded that 173 people were murdered and some communities were “physically destroyed.” Property damage was estimated to be $1.2 billion; the government valued the deaths and injuries at another $645 million.

British doctor and serial killer Harold Shipman used no firearms in murdering what police estimate may be “between 215 and 260 people over a 23-year period.” Officials believe Shipman “enjoyed viewing the process of dying and enjoyed the feeling of control over life and death.” He treated the criminal investigation “as some sort of game, a competition, pitting his, what he considered to be his superior intellect, to those of the officers who were interviewing him.”

In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) acknowledged there was no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in murder, but that “the percentage of homicides committed with a firearm continued its declining trend since 1969.”

Another AIC publication shows that rape, robbery, and assault increased after Australia’s 1997 gun ban. While Australia’s murder rate decreased 31.9% between 1995 and 2007, America’s dropped similarly at 30.5%.

During the same time period, Australian assault and robbery rates rose 49.2% and 6.2%, respectively. Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9%. Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2%. At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31%: rape dropped 17.8%; robbery decreased 32.8%; aggravated assault dropped 31.3%.

Click here to view the 88 legacy comments

Comments are closed.