A “congressional aide” insists that we should debate gun control. I and then we tried.
The last person to attempt to debate gun control against the official violence and crime numbers resulting gave up after three or four attempts. The gun control fable just does not hold up under examination.
Here is a chart taken from “Our World In Numbers” showing the homicide rates from a time when guns were toys of the rich, through the time almost everyone had a gun, to the period when rulers afraid for their lives disarmed their subjects. LOOK AT THE SCALE FIRST, it is not linear::
That chart is typical of every restrictive gun law, or set of such laws, since the first in 1495. When there were no guns, murders were common. As guns became more common, murders became less common, to the point wide areas hat homicide rates below 1 per 100,000 population. When guns were “controlled, the crime rates soared. Here is the American experiments in gun control, in 1905-06, and again beginning in 163, and then again in 20113:
That chart shows something else critically important. The decline in crime when enforcement of strict gun laws relaxed beginning in 1944, and the rush to institute “must issue” Licenses to Carry Concealed” beginning in 1993. *The red line at the right side of the U.S. chart is the first results of the present gun control drive.)
Soo fare, we have found 57,763 restrictive gun laws without finding a law that anyone would consider “a good law.” Each of those laws has resulted in sharply higher crime rates, instead of the promised low rates or no crime at all.
We have also uncovered a huge amount of fraud. “Gun free and crime free” England has virtually disarmed her majesty’s subjects, and has a violent crime rate 714 percent higher than the United States. Yet gun control advocates often cite England, which has the highest violent crime rate in the industrialized world, as a model of American gun controls.
You simply cannot have a rational debate when one side has the facts, and the other has only faith.