So I just learned that today (Jan 19) is National Gun
Appreciation Day here in the USA. Well
that is nice – after all there is a lot to appreciate on that subject here in
the US. Now I know a lot of folk out
rallying today for what they believe (I would suggest incorrectly) is an
inalienable right are good law abiding people, the simple fact of the matter
is, a lot of them will legally have a CCW (that’s Concealed Carry Weapon – I had
to look it up to be certain) on their person.
Now given the arguments by a lot of the extreme and even not
so extreme gun lobby that if only someone in the theater here in Colorado had
been armed, that tragedy would have been averted, the chances for a good old
shoot out at the OK corral are much increased today. On the theater tragedy I’ve expressed my
opinion on how well that might have worked before – but for those who may not
have heard my take – imagine now the bad guy and at least one (maybe more)
people blazing away at each other in a dark, crowded, panic filled room. Yes - crossfire – that likely could have been
an even bigger tragedy. Yes Virginia,
there is a Santa Claus, but sadly Dirty Harry and all the other good guys in
the movies and on television are not real – chances are high they will NOT hit
the bad guy with a single well aimed shot.
Now I have carried such a weapon once outside of a firing
range – I was out hunting bear with a friend - using bow and arrow, so yes,
there are some non-murder related purposes other than target shooting, but
fundamentally, you (as a private citizen) own a CCW, i.e. a handgun for one
reason and one reason only, to shoot and most likely kill another person. Frankly, if you own it for any other reason,
you really shouldn’t be carrying it in the first place. A hand gun is not a threat for self-protection
if you are not actually prepared to use it – more than likely, it will end up
getting used on you if that is the case.
I will probably get misunderstood for this, and I am NOT suggesting this
at all but simply making a point: if everybody who has rushed out to buy a
handgun since Newtown was made to shoot a puppy to see what a handgun actually
does and is 100% convinced they will do that to another person before
completing the purchase, one wonders how many sales would go through…
Now I didn’t set out to write a long piece today so let’s
stick with that. The article I was reading
led me to an interesting page which is shown on the image should you want to go
there. I can’t tell you for sure whether
the Annenberg Public Policy Center is right or left leaning – or as some rare
think tanks are, centrist, but I do like that they actually document the
sources for what they claim are the facts so you can drill deeper should you
choose.
The point I wanted to make was this:
Many I’ve had reasoned discussions with (and many more who
simply spout off things they see other people post and have no idea) believe that
the widespread elimination of gun ownership in Australia (and a few other
countries) has been an abject failure.
I can’t speak as well to the other countries but I do know a
little about Australia. And I was a gun
owner in that country, although not living there at the time the “gun ban” was
instituted. The facts are clear despite
NRA and the like memes say that crime in general, crime with guns, murder rates
overall and murder with guns involved have decreased steadily since the gun ban
became effective in 1998. If you want to
check that out, I refer you to base data at the Australian Bureau of Statistics
- I hope we can agree, a non-interested party and probably bout as unbiased as
you could hope to get.
(Past and Future Releases tab has all the data you could
possibly want if you are so inclined)
A report sponsored by gun rights folk in Australia argues
that these trends would have happened anyway.
I have not made a study to determine if that is true or not, but what I
did learn is that following the tragedy of Port Arthur (1996) and the gun ban
that becoming effective in 1998, there have been almost no mass shootings,
whereas they had been quite prevalent in the ten or so years before Port
Arthur. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_mass_murders)
So what would suggest we do know from this is that while it
is not reasonable to pretend all the guns are gone in Australia, clearly
significantly reducing gun ownership and placing very strict requirements on
gun ownership (yes you can still own a gun in Australia) has made it a lot
safer. I’ve even had folk sure (because
they have been told it is so) that non gun crime has increased in
Australia. In part, I assumed this was
possibly correct as you were hearing a lot about the rise in home invasions and
such as of course there was no longer any fear of an armed home owner. Turns out that is not the case either.
In short, not having guns readily available makes it a lot
harder to have these tragic mass murders.
It also seems to have a positive impact on crime in general. But that is not a discussion many in this
country are willing to even start having.
The answer according to the extreme gun lobby (and many people who
probably are not really that extreme seem to be voting with their feet if gun
and ammunition sales which are through the roof are any indicator) is MORE guns.
What absolute nonsense.
Closing then by going back to the information above, because having
reviewed the Aussie data a few weeks ago, these numbers really stood out. The 2010 US gun murder rate is 3.6 (per
100,000 people). The comparable figure
for Australia in 0.2. Yes, there
probably is something to the lame excuse “why get rid of guns, people will just
use something else”, as for sure the total Australian murder rate is 1.0
compared to the US total rate of 4.8 (or 20% of Australian murders involve guns
compared to 75% in the US). But let’s
get real – yes you can kill one person with a knife, maybe even 2 or three, but
twelve, or worse yet, over twenty at Newtown?
Now I know better than most that you can’t simply translate what
was done in Australia or other places to the USA. But what is so frustrating is the head in the
sand attitude that says it won’t change anything, so why bother. Which is tantamount to saying, we are OK if
another shooting in a school or other public place resulted in the deaths of
multiple children and teachers. As an
organization that wants my wife, a teacher, to carry a gun proudly says on its
web site, NO COMPROMISE.
No comments:
Post a Comment