WHY the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

It seems like not a day goes by that I don’t hear of yet another Constitutionally and common sense bereft individual pushing ear-tickling anti-gun agendas which have been proven the world over to result in MORE violent crimes of all kinds, including murder. These individuals are invariably aided into the spotlight by a similarly ignorant media.

The burning question is this: Does gun control work?

To that end, those who support gun control point to statistics involving the prevalence of gun control in various areas and the incidence of crime in those areas.

The problem is, that approach itself is severely flawed, mainly because there are a great many factors influencing crime, particularly on a regional or metropolitan area, including variations in the effectiveness of local law enforcement, how much rain the area has received, how many days the sun has been shining, the temperature, snowfall, whether or not the local Sears or Walmart has closed, other changes in business and economic factors, the psychological outlook among the general populace, the psychological outlook among the criminal elements, the influx and establishment of drug and human trafficking nodes of operation and logistical channels, and the overall makeup of the community and how resistant they are to crime in general.

That’s just for starters.

In fact, if you ask a few dozen competent and modern city police departments, they’ll deliver a litany of what works and what doesn’t work with respect to reducing crime. Chief among the measures which are absolutely know to not work involve various ways of disarming, in part or in whole, the general populace at large.

As a recent meme stated rather succinctly:

How many times must we see a crowd of defenseless people die before we realize being defenseless is not the answer?

Indeed, disarmed crowds of people are defenseless, rendered helpless targets by anyone who refuses to obey the pathetically inadequate, “no guns” sign — if any — at the border of supposed and so-called “gun-free zones.”

This brings to mind another succinct but rather well-known meme:

Criminals do not obey gun control laws.

In fact, one of our Founding Fathers said much the same thing, although his lengthy response included reasons as to why it was so:

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined or determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailant; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides; for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria) 1774-1776

Indeed, disarming the general public, in whole or even in part, results in more violent crime — including murders — than leaving them armed. Pier Morgan rendered himself infamous for incessantly claiming “zero murders by gun” while failing to mention the murder rate per capita in the United Kingdom was higher than it is here in the United States. In fact, when the United Kingdom banned the private ownership of handguns and rifles with very few exceptions, violent crime — including murders — tripled. The violent crime rate in the U.K remains 2.54 times greater than it was prior to the ban.

World Population Review reports the overall crime index for the United States is 46.73 while that of the United Kingdom is slightly lower, at 43.64. What they don’t tell you is that more than 80% of the US crime index is directly attributable to certain hotspots of crime in cities like St. Louis MO, Detroit MI, Baltimore MD, Memphis TN, Kansas City MO, Milwaukee WI, Cleveland OH, Stockton CA, Albuquerque, NM, and Indianapolis IN. St. Louis experiences 2,082 violent crimes per capita whereas Indianapolis experiences 1,334. That’s LOT, but the interesting fact about these cities is that all of them are predominantly Democrat.

So, if disarming doesn’t work, then what DOES work?

I’m going to let the FBI’s 2018 Active Shooter Crime Report speak for itself:

  1. Statistics predict roughly 31 active shooter events in 2020.
  2. Each active shooter event averages 3 deaths.
  3. Armed Citizens are present at roughly 15% of the events (averaging 11.7% over the last 17 years, but it’s increasing).
  4. Armed Citizens have been successful in stopping the active shooter 76% of the time and are successful in reducing lives lost an additional 18% of the time. The remaining 6% of the time, they’re not effect.
  5. At no time have Armed Citizens been detrimental.
  6. Active shooter events cover a wide range of venues, including college, federal buildings, houses of worship, offices and businesses, open spaces, homes, restaurants, schools, bars, and movie theaters.
  7. Declaring areas “gun-free zones” deters nothing. In fact, by disarming law-abiding citizens, it actually attracts active shooters to gun-free zones, with 37.8% of shootings occurring in gun-free zones.
  8. Furthermore, “gun-free zones” VASTLY increases the likelihood of a high body count. Of those events with 8+ deaths, 77.8% of them were gun-free zones.
  9. The number of events at which Armed Citizens injured or killed an innocent person: ZERO

Conclusion: If you REALLY want a massacre, establish a “gun-free zone” and disarm honest, law-abiding citizens, even a little bit (banning by type or magazine capacity).

That’s a perfect recipe for disaster.

But if you’d rather dissuade violent crime in your area, then simply follow the advice and wisdom of our Founding Fathers who saw fit to deny any and all infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Regardless of how the courts have whittled it down over the years, to no net good whatsoever, the Second Amendment, as written, remains indisputably clear:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now, if you’d like to debate the meaning on those words, I suggest you first review about thirty pages of the 1982 Congressional Report on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Theirs was a rather exhaustive study, one that resulted in a decade of reduced gun laws, along with three decades of dramatically lowered crime. U.S. Supreme Court decisions on McDonald and Heller echoed the 1982 report.

Bottom line, the actions of people like Virginia Governor Northam are not only directly violating the rights and freedoms of the citizens of Virginia, they’re causing serious harm to those citizens, as well.

My advice: Knock it off and follow the Constitution as it is written.

Then again…

One thought on “WHY the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Leave a Reply