A Brief and Bloody History of Gun Control
by Anthony Gucciardi
StoryLeak
You or someone
you know may see guns as deadly killing machines that are simply
to blame for a large volume of homicides across the nation, but
a brief look at the history of gun control actually
offers a new perspective into the application of guns on an entirely
new level. While normalcy bias (a thinking pattern that
causes an individual to underestimate the potential of any event
or situation due to currently enjoying a normal and cushy lifestyle)
can oftentimes lead individuals away from the reality of history,
countless citizens around the world have been highlighting the repetitive
history that follows gun control.
In this breakdown,
we will be examining a lot of numbers and extracting them to get
some real answers. Then, we’ll see the source of these numbers
and whether or not gun control regulations are reducing or increasing
overall crime rates in heavily controlled areas.
The first thing
to touch upon, and perhaps most relevant to our modern society,
is how deadly firearms really are. First of all, let us examine
the factors that are responsible for deaths within the United States.
This will put death counts into perspective and allow us to go deeper
into the firearm-related deaths themselves later. Examining data
from the CDC for the leading causes of death and including death
statistics from
the FBI regarding homicides, we find the following numbers:
Leading
US Killers
- Annual deaths
from heart disease based on CDC data: 597,689
- Cancer deaths
from CDC data: 574,743
- Chronic
lower respiratory diseases (CDC): 138,080
- Stroke deaths
(CDC): 129,476
- Deaths from
accidents, unintentional injuries (CDC): 120,859
- Alzheimer’s
disease deaths per year (CDC): 83,494
- Diabetes
(CDC): 69,071
- Influenza
deaths each year (CDC): 50,097
- Suicide
deaths (CDC): 38,364
- Overall
weapons deaths (2009 FBI): 13,636
- Overall
firearm deaths (2009 FBI): 9,146
So there we
have the overall death data that comes compiled from the CDC website
mixed with the FBI website table that goes as far as 2009. As you
can see, the overall firearm deaths are 9,000 per year. If you’ve
been following some of the mainstream media rhetoric surrounding
guns, you might have thought the number would be at least over 100,000
— perhaps even higher than diabetes or suicide. The reality
is that it is quite low overall, despite what you may have been
told. But it’s still 9,146, so let’s now break
down this figure to get the specific factors.
Of the 9,146
firearm deaths:
- 6,452 were
from hanguns
- 348
from rifles
- 418 from
shotguns
- 94 from
other guns
- 1,834 from
unknown guns
This is where
the numbers cut through even more false information sent forth by
the mainstream media. Rifles have been demonized as powerful tools
of homicide that are to blame for a large number of yearly deaths,
but as it turns out only 348 per year are actually killed
using rifles. Now of that number we must ask “how
many are using legal weapons and non-gang related?” And
furthermore, how many of these murders occur in ‘gun free’
cities? We’ll get to what we know on that shortly.
First, I want
to utilize some further statistics from the overall weapons deaths
provided by the FBI for 2009. The number, which totals 13,636, also
breaks down into several components that will likely be highly shocking
when compared to the broken down gun data. Especially when considering
that the apparent ‘epidemic’ levels of rifle deaths
actually don’t even compare to stabbings, blunt objects like
hammers, or even bare hands and feet.
Knives,
Hammers, Hands Kill More than Rifles & Shotguns
These FBI statistics
really deflate the argument that rifles are ultimate killing machines
when you look at how human hands are actually much more dangerous
in terms of the sheer numbers. In fact, the digits really deflate
the entire movement to ban rifles by realizing that by the same
logic bats, hammers, knives, and even hands should therefore be
heavily regulated. Going by the numbers alone, all hands should
be considered lethal weapons. Of course we know that all
hands are not used to kill innocents, just as all guns
are not used to kill innocents.
Let’s
take a look at the FBI data for the homicides committed via non-firearm
sources to get an idea of how it compares to the death toll of key
firearms like rifles and shotguns:
- Knives and
cutting tools accounted for 1,825 deaths in 2009, 1,477 more than
rifles
- Clubs, hammers,
and other blunt objects totaled 611 in 2009, 263 more than rifles
- Hands, fists,
and feet killed 801 in 2009, 453 more than rifles
At this point
one must ask why banning clubs, hammers, and knives is any different
than gun control. Beyond that, it would actually be statistically
more reasonable when considering the death toll. Even hands and
feet would be considered lethal weapons that would require regulation
when examining the 801 death count each year. Instead of enacting
extreme legislation to regulate these items, however, we generally
discount them as irregular incidents that are more to be blamed
on the wielder rather than the item itself.
A hammer is
usually seen as a tool used in construction, home improvement, or
other constructive tasks. A knife is seen mainly as a kitchen instrument.
A gun, on the other hand, is oftentimes portrayed as a weapon of
non-defense murder as a opposed to a weapon used in the defense
of self, family, and innocents. Notice that both purposes are utilized
with all of these ‘tools’, it is simply in the perception
of what they are that changes. The perception that is created
through hysterical mainstream media reports that highlight isolated
cases of mass shootings and other events.
Many such shootings
are also occurring in ‘gun-free’ areas or strict gun
control regions, where access to a gun is supposed to be extremely
challenging or impossible. Nevertheless, law abiding citizens are
the ones affected while unscrupulous shooters and criminals can
access illegal guns with ease.
The
Reality Behind ‘Gun Free Zones’ and Gun Bans
Yet another
example of rhetoric verses reality, gun free zones and city-wide
gun bans actually do not deflate violent crime as you will see below.
Notice that below we are examining the statistics, not the emotional
ties or opinions relating to gun control. The media uses shooting
sprees to prop up the concept that gun bans and gun free zones will
somehow stop a deranged killer who has zero regard for the law,
when in reality we know this is not a real solution.
Painted signs
reading ‘gun free zone’ and gun control legislation
that really only affects law-abiding citizens does not prevent mass
shootings, as we have seen evidenced by more than one shooting incident.
Both the Aurora shooting at the Colorado movie theater dubbed the
‘Batman shooting’ and the most recent Sandy Hook incident
in Connecticut both occurred in areas with heavy gun regulation.
Amazingly, the Batman shooter actually traveled to the one movie
theater in the area that actually did not permit lawful citizens
to carry a concealed weapon. According to Dr. John R. Lott
in an interview with Newsmax,
”…the
one he picked was the only one of those movie theaters
that banned people taking permit-concealed handguns into that
theater.”
In both of
these incidents law-abiding citizens were not properly armed to
protect themselves against a criminal with a gun, and law enforcement
(which actually is being shorted on ammunition and weapons themselves
due to heavy demand among looming gun bans) can only respond so
quickly.
Perhaps one
of the most saddening examples of a gun free zone turned bloody,
however, is the Fort Hood massacre. Covered extensively years ago,
Islamic extremist Major Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 12 United States
soldiers, 1 Army civilian employee, and wounded
around 30-38 others in a ‘gun free zone’. This was,
of course, inside a United States military base — where guns
are not allowed to be carried by soldiers. These soldiers,
who could at any instant be shipped off to another nation to wage
war against other troops with automatic weapons, tanks, and aircraft,
were gunned down by a single lunatic amid a failed unarmed defense.
More soldiers
would have died if it were not for an armed security guard.
But what about
the overall national implications of gun free zones and heavily
regulated areas? Also what about the international implications,
as some countries have installed large scale gun bans that are similar
to many US cities on a grand scale. Well, first it’s important
for us to establish the general trend of US crime to begin
with. This includes the overall number of violent crime offenses
that we can observe using violent crime data supplied by the FBI
statistics available on the FBI
website.
Let us take
a look at the graph below which shows the general trend of overall
violent crime offense figures from 2007 to 2011 (the years in which
such stats are available):

What these
stats tell us is that violent crime has been in rapid decline over
the past several years by a considerable amount. In other words,
despite much of a fuss being made over the apparent necessity to
ban guns due to violent crime, the statistics show that it has actually
been on the massive decline.
Read
the rest of the article
February
23, 2013
Copyright
© 2013 StoryLeak
|