I see the the Christian Science Monitor, which is neither Christian, Scientifc, or much of a monitor, suggests a “return to local laws” might “solve our gun violence problem.
Well, for starters, we have much less of a gun violence problem than we did before we gained enough political power to get local gun control ordinances preempted. While the chart below does not include gun murder, it would make less than a one peercent difference, 9,000 out of 290,000, it would make only a tiny difference if it did:
Obviously then, the Christian Science Monitor’s basic thesis, that we need to do something about our soaring violent crime rates is absurd on the face of it.
Equally obviously, softening gun laws has made a dramatic improvement in violent crime rates. something a Christian organization would cheer, not “bear false witness” about.
That brings up the question of the results of Bloomberg’s attempts to spend big money on State gun laws. Whw has that worked? Not at all well here, in red, is the results of one of the Bloomberg funded “Everytown aganst guns campaigns:”
Murder is the smalles component of the violent crime rate, which comprsses the total of murder, rape, robbery, and “aggravated assault,” the old “Assault with intent” to kill. As a result murder tends to be the first to show results of gun control campaigns, but you can see the effects of the current gun control campaigns in almost every State. As a result, our national murder rate has gone from from 4.5 murders per 100,000 population, 133rd in the world, to 5.3 per 100,000, a 14% increase in the murder rate, dripping the United States by 29 places, to 104th out of 195 in the world.
Clearly, we do not need more gun laws, nor do we need gun control campaigns. Something that is in line with Christianity, and science and with the “common sense” anti-gun rags are so found of citing.
No, we do not need more violence generating local gun laws. But what we really need is more honest media outlests that do their homework before they put it in print.