Someone from a Boston exurb dropped a comment that is very close to the line between defining Billingsgate. But for one pertinent question, the comment would have made the trash without this mention.
The question is simple enough. “What makes me think gun control would not work if we tried it.”
Actually, our doubt that any restrictive gun law will do anything a person in possession of their facilities would doubt the utility of such laws is simple arithmetic.
Since the first restrictive gun law was enacted in 0162, following an accident that “sorely disfigured the Duke’s favorite courtesan.” That law was so successful that Eberhard I was deposed within just a few months, making way for Eberhard II.
Since then, there have been more than 60,000 restrictive gun laws have been put in place, and some effort to enforce those laws has been made, as of Halloween, 59,038 times.
So while almost 5,000 restrictive gun laws have failed to produce any result because of non-enforcement, the the 59,020 restrictive that have universally failed to reduce the violent crime rates, or to do much of anything other than fill up the jails.
Mathematics proves that a group of laws with that failure rate will only rarely produce a reduction in crime rates or improved safety for citizens.
In this case, it would take almost 4,000 sheets of typing paper to print out the probability that the next restrictive gun law will result in another failure.
Nor does that take the certainty that those who back those laws will do everything they can to add a ssecond Sure-to-Fail gun law to the stack of such laws already in effect.
Alley readers should have noticed that every claim we make is referenced to official government sources, from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, Canada’s StatsCanada, the UK’s Office of National Statistics; Germany’s BunesKriminalampt; and so on around the world.
If we come up short on an official governmental source for the crime numbers and rates, we will tell you where those numbers came from and if possible with hitting a pay-wall, provide a link.
Our numbers are not only official, they are reviewed for credibility, since many governments have good reason to bury the murder total and murder rates.
So, dear lady, you can swear all you want that Massachusetts restrictive gun law have cut private gun ownership by two thirds, are – by the crime numbers- a total who wish to confirm the FBI numbers will find the data at this link most convenient.
As you can see, the Bay State’s draconian gun laws kept the State from sharing in the 50% decline in violent crime rates enjoyed by most of the U.S. States.
Instead, tightening gun controls drove the violent crime rates up, at lest until the last three years of the chart when computerized editing resulted in an apparent decline.
A decline given the lie by the headline count we use to check official numbers for credibility.
Original Source -> Are The Gun Nuts Wrong About Gun Control??