|
Saturday, May 22, 2004
By John R. Lott,
Jr.
What is happening to the gun
control (search) movement?
This month, the Million Mom
March (search) in Washington drew
an anemic showing of only 2,000 people, while this year,
all of the Democratic presidential candidates— however
unenthusiastically— spoke of Americans’ Second
Amendment (search) right to own guns. These are
just a few of the signs that the facts finally seem to be
catching up to the movement. The future for the movement
looks even worse.
Whether the subject
is concealed handgun laws (search) or bans on semi-automatic
so-called “assault weapons,” (search) gun control debates have been
filled with apocalyptic claims about what will happen if gun
control is not adopted. One common prediction is
that laws allowing the carrying of a concealed weapon
will result in crime waves, or permit holders shooting
others. However, with 37 states now
having right-to-carry laws (search), and another nine states
letting some citizens carry, permit holders have
continually shown themselves to be extremely law-abiding. It
is becoming more and more difficult to attack those laws.
Disarray among gun controllers is becoming
common, even on one cornerstone of the gun control
movement — the semi-automatic gun ban. Take the statements
made on National Public Radio by a representative of
the Violence Policy Center (search) just one week after the assault
weapon extension was defeated in the Senate this March.
NPR described the VPC as "one of the more
aggressive gun groups in Washington." Yet the VPC's
representative claimed: “If the existing assault-weapons ban
expires, I personally do not believe it will make one whit of
difference one way or another in terms of our objective, which
is reducing death and injury and getting a particularly lethal
class of firearms off the streets. So if it doesn’t pass, it
doesn’t pass.”
The NPR reporter noted: "[the Violence
Policy Center's representative] says that's all the
[assault-weapons ban] brought about, minor changes in
appearance that didn't alter the function of these weapons.”
Yet, before the Senate vote the VPC had
long claimed that it was a "myth" that "assault weapons merely
look different. The NRA and the gun industry today portray
assault weapons as misunderstood ugly ducklings, no different
from other semi-automatic guns. But while the actions, or
internal mechanisms, of all semi-automatic guns are similar,
the actions of assault weapons are part of a broader design
package. The 'ugly' looks of the TEC-9, AR-15, AK-47 and
similar guns reflect this package of features designed to kill
people efficiently."
So why the sudden disarray after the Senate
defeat? Simply, gun-control groups' credibility is on the
line and they are getting cold feet. With no academic research
showing the assault weapons ban reduces crime, gun control groups realize
that soon it will be obvious to everyone that their predicted
horror stories about "assault weapons" were completely wrong.
Internationally, dramatic gun control
victories in countries such as England, Australia, and Canada
are also unraveling.
— Crime did not fall in England after
handguns were banned in January 1997. Quite the contrary,
crime rose sharply. Yet, serious violent crime rates from 1997
to 2002 averaged 29 percent higher than 1996; robbery was 24
percent higher; murders 27 percent higher. Before the law,
armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent from 1993 to 1997,
but as soon as handguns were banned, the robbery rate shot
back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.
— Australia has also seen its violent crime
rates soar after its Port Arthur gun control
measures (search) in late 1996. Violent crime
rates averaged 32 per cent higher in the six years after the
law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did the year
before the law in 1996. The same comparisons for armed robbery
rates showed increases of 45 percent.
— The 2000 International Crime
Victimization Survey, the most recent survey done, shows that
the violent crime rate in England and Australia was twice the
rate in the US.
— Canada has not gone anywhere near as far
as the United Kingdom or Australia. Nevertheless, their gun
registration system is costing roughly a thousand times more
than promised and has grown to be extremely unpopular, with
only 17 percent of Canadians in a poll release this week
supporting the system. Nor does the system seem to be
providing any protection. The Canadian government recently
admitted that they could not identify even a single violent
crime that had been solved by registration.
Everyone wants to take guns away from
criminals. The problem is that if the law-abiding citizens
obey the laws and the criminals don’t, the rules create
sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. While the debate
is hardly over, gun control is just another example of
government planning that hasn’t lived up to its billing. And
like other types of government planning, eventually its
failures become too overwhelming to ignore.
John Lott, Jr., is a resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and is the
author of The Bias Against Guns (Regnery
2004). |