San Franciso Chronicles: A Factual, Anti-Gun Control Article

[Cali-Shooter]

Note: Mods, feel free to move this if appropriate for a different sub-forum.

This article is shocking in that it comes straight out of the heart of the anti-gun beast, SF.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/01/13/bloomberg1376-LEZ7AM0UQVI901-7QVO8KDJPRQTHMUJSDLJ6UEKO9.DTL

Snippets:

Gun controls like those being proposed may, on occasion, prevent horrific events like the Tucson shooting or at least reduce their harm, but in all likelihood only rarely. Avoiding a few such incidents is surely better than avoiding none, so these controls would make sense if they had no negatives of their own.

But gun controls, even mild ones, do have adverse consequences.

But mild controls don't always stay mild; more often, they evolve into strict limits on guns, bordering on outright prohibition. And this isn't just slippery-slope speculation; a century ago most countries had few gun controls, yet today many have virtual bans on private ownership. Some of these countries (the U.K. and Japan) have low violence rates that might seem to justify strict controls, yet others experience substantial or extreme violence (Brazil and Mexico).

More broadly, comparisons between states and countries --as well as social-science research -- provide no consistent support for the claim that gun controls lower violence.

Strict controls and prohibition, moreover, don't eliminate guns any more than drug prohibition stops drug trafficking and use. Prohibition might deter some potential gun owners, but mainly those who would own and use guns responsibly.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1DEP0fkkR

[thearmedrebel]

The author is an economist at Harvard and a Libertarian. His argument sounds a lot like the one I made with my coworkers after the shooting.

Still, a good read. Maybe the loons in San Francisco will read it. What am I saying, they can't read. If they could they'd read the FBI crime statistics that show people with guns are less likely to be victims.

Robert

[DaveInOroValley]

I'm still in shock, someone pinch me to be sure I am awake....WTH??? This can't be?

[trashman]

Great editorial! I am baffled as to how this slipped by the editorial board at the Chron, though...

--Neill

[Librarian]

1 certain Calgunner in the comments (jdberger) and I think 2 more.

[nick]

Check out what I just saw outside my window:

[Cali-Shooter]

Check out what I just saw outside my window:

You made my day with that captured Kodak moment, LOL!

[N6ATF]

Woot.

[Themandalorian]

Good article.

[ALSystems]

Great editorial! I am baffled as to how this slipped by the editorial board at the Chron, though...

--Neill

Good article.

I'm shocked this was printed in the San Francisco Chronicle.

The editor must have been on out of the office. I just can't believe this was approved if the editor actually read it.

[BigDogatPlay]

The age of miracles hasn't ended after all, the Chron is actually publishing divergent views that aren't the party line.

Bravo.

[jpigeon]

Better late than never

[Zimz]

Wow... very well written, and to exactly the audience we need! ... wow ...

[Blackhawk556]

Was this really in the chron? Is this an April fools joke??

[CCWFacts]

Some of these countries (the U.K. and Japan) have low violence rates that might seem to justify strict controls, yet others experience substantial or extreme violence (Brazil and Mexico).

International gun control law vs. crime stats comparisons tend to be absurd, distorted, or outright dishonest.

Japan: guns are uncommon, but hunting-type arms (shotguns) are not difficult to get. Street crime is almost non-existent. Organized crime (Yakuza) has access to guns and may be given a pass due to its interesting relationship with Japanese law enforcement.

UK: Violent crime in the UK is high and growing. It's out of control in some areas.

Brazil and Mexico: Mexico has only one legal gun shop. Their strict gun control hasn't helped; the government has lost control of certain cities and areas.

But the better example is Jamaica, which is an island, and has had an absolute gun ban for decades, and is a total war zone, with the police unable to enter certain areas of town, due to machine gun toting gangs.

If gun laws made the difference, you would expect the island of Jamaica, which has stricter laws than Japan, to have lower crime rate than Japan. Anyone who believes that should probably not risk finding out in Jamaica.