Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Yeah, About That Gun Control...

Chicago Ties 2011 Total for Homicides
Chicago has reached a grim milestone city officials wanted to avoid but knew was coming.

On Sunday, the city recorded its 435th homicide — the same number of homicides in Chicago in all of last year.

Before the end of October, mind you. In Chicago, which until very recently banned all handguns, period. In a county that bans assault weapons. In the only state left that has no provisions for concealed carry. In this unlikeliest of places, we see more murders in 10 months than in the previous 12. This is going the wrong way, again, in the last state to deny its citizens the constitutionally enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Remind me, again, how gun control works? We pass laws that ban certain cosmetic features, or stipulate what kind of markings should be on a firearm, or which countries can and cannot export firearms to the US. This has done precisely squat to address the actual problems that result in people getting killed, because it's aimed at the tool rather than the person misusing the tool. Start punishing people for misusing the tool, rather than try to ban or otherwise restrict the tool, and you might see progress.

Oh, but there's the rub, you see. Going after criminals means admitting that the tool is irrelevant, that the person who is using the tool alone determines whether it is used for ill or not. I have firearms in my collection that will never do anything more than punch holes in paper; others that will only break clay pigeons; and some that will knock down steel targets during practice. I and I alone determine how my firearms will be used.

As a law-abiding person, I hope and pray that I never have to use a firearm against another person. I will not look for trouble, nor will I assume that simply because I have a firearm in my possession that I am immune from trouble finding me; rather I will be aware of my surroundings, cognizant of those in my immediate area, and ready to take any action necessary to avoid danger.

Running like a scared rabbit is the first action if possible and an entirely valid response.

But there are those that do not share my view; that have firearms solely for the purpose of harming others. They may only intimidate them by the display of the firearm; or they may use their firearm openly to frighten their victim into submission; or they may decide to use their firearm against their victim. Their choice depends not on the tool in their hand, but the intentions in their hearts - and try as we might, we cannot know what evil lurks in the hearts of men.

I know I've said this before, but we focus on the tool at our own peril. Nowhere in the entire United States have the dire predictions of "blood in the streets" from the forces against freedom come true. We didn't see it when concealed carry started becoming the norm; we didn't see it with Stand Your Ground legislation; we haven't seen it with more states adopting Constitutional (i.e. permitless) carry. It doesn't happen because the people that are committing crimes were already carrying guns regardless of whether or not they had a permit for them. Lunatics are not stopped by "No Guns Allowed" signs, only good, honest, law-abiding people are.

It's frightening how many people refuse to understand this.

That is all.

Another dispatch from...
(image courtesy of Robb Allen)


JD Rush said...

But if you actually go after the criminals, they (or their mommas) won't vote you back in.

Robert said...

Well said, sir. Especially that last paragraph.

Daniel in Brookline said...

Oh, come on, Jay! Focus on the person, not the tool? Really? Next thing you'll be saying that, at airport security, we should be looking for terrorists, not fluids in 4oz bottles and toenail clippers.

Oh, wait. That makes sense too. Never mind.