The fatal fallacy of gun control laws in general is the assumption that such laws actually control guns. Criminals who disobey other laws are not likely to be stopped by gun-control laws. What such laws actually do is increase the number of disarmed and defenseless victims.
Thomas Sowell
Senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University
December 23, 2016
Sowell: Gun-control laws do not make us safer
[Via a Tweet by #2A Wisdom@2AWisdom.—Joe]
It’s not a fallacy, it is the entire point. The BS about crime is just a sop to obfuscate disarming political opponents.
I’m long past the meme that “criminals will just ignore the gun laws. Only upstanding citizens will obey them.” That’s patently false. In fact, it just creates more criminals, as Ayn Rand observed. Who actually complies with the Washington safe storage regs? How many otherwise fine-upstanding citizens have loaned a gun to a friend, or HORRORS, sold a gun to a buddy without a background check? How many AR15 owners in California, NY or other restrictive states have thumbed their noses at those bans?
Those that value freedom are not about to be disarmed and defenseless just because some plutocrat signs a sheet of paper in a state capitol.
Good points.
Not to mention that plenty of not so fine and not so upstanding leftists — as yet not convicted — also ignore gun laws. And, since the are of the “correct” political persuasion, they are allowed to do so.
Absolutely, were way passed intellectual arguments. As the lies already told, and actions taken, by the communist left have proven beyond doubt.
They will not be swayed by logic. As we have tried repeatedly.
Mr. Sowell should be the first to point that out?
And in the face of such. Whom would better fit the definition of insane? Trying the same things over and over, only to get the same result?
What I find incomprehensible is that none of the major organizations that are claiming to be fighting to protect our natural right to effective self defense have brought to visibility the history of gun control laws that this country has already experienced and their ethnic and racist roots as well as who it was that were promoting them! The Sullivan Act when implemented was for the intent of keeping Italian immigrants from owning firearms and controlling political rivals. As you can tell, it has been very effective in New York City. In the South, Blacks were not allowed to own pistols as the KKK did not want to be surprised by someone defending themselves when the Klan came calling. Let’s see, is there a common denominator in these two actions? Absolutely. The Democrat Party has been at the forefront of gun control since the conclusion of the Civil War. A deeper look will also show that there are many more examples than just these two.
Why are we not also looking at the similarities between the Jim Crow laws, poll taxes and literacy testing to exclude Blacks from voting; to the push for exorbitant taxes on ammunition, performance testing for carry permits and other barriers to free exercise of the 2nd Amendment? Who was the promoter of such laws? Again, the Democrat Party. Notice a trend here? As I recall, the strongest argument against the restrictive voting laws was that they infringed on what should be the unrestricted right of citizens to vote. Interestingly, I don’t recall any other wording in the Constitution as clear in this regard as the 2nd Amendment. “The right to keep and bear arms shall not be INFRINGED”. (Emphasis mine.)
What I find incomprehensible is how historical figures tenuously and tangentially connected to racist historical norms deserve to be “cancelled” and written out of history, but “gun control” laws — which have an intentionally and explicitly racist history and justification — are just fine.
And why, as you said, nobody has caught on to that double-standard.
(Actually, that’s not true: it’s all perfectly comprehensible. Removing our Founding Fathers removes American history and what makes our nation unique, which makes the masses easier to control; they have no historical basis by which to question the elites or demand independence. Pushing and maintaining “gun control” laws, despite their racist history, also makes the masses easier to control; they have no ability with which to resist the elites or uphold their independence.
It’s never about safety, or facts, or truth. It’s always — ALWAYS — about control. So the duality is not only perfectly comprehensible, it’s entirely predictable.)
The answer is very plainly contained in the rhetorical question “What do they plan to do to you that they can’t do so long as you still have your weapons?”
This was driven home to me a few days ago, reading an op-ed blasting Sen. Whitehouse (C-RI). He’s pushing the notion that any organization that submits an amicus curiae brief to SCOTUS should be required to disclose all its donors. He’s also the guy who earlier threatened SCOTUS to make them vote the way he wanted on the NYC gun rights case.
So what that told me is that (a) he wants the government to doxx anyone who has advocates “the wrong opinion”, so (b they can be attacked by Antifa hit squads, and (c) they won’t be able to defend themselves because he’s taken their weapons away.
You can’t use logic to get people out of a position that they didn’t use logic to get into. Love Sowell but he is irrelevant here.
It’s a fallacy to think that gun control is about anything less than disarming the population to subjugate us solely for the purpose of disarming the population to subjugate us.
The goal, the ONLY goal of the Democrats and anti gun zealous is the complete and total ban of all private gun ownership using the full force of the military to door to door to confiscate every single privately held firearm in the country by force and the mandated extermination of every single United States citizen that owns guns.
Not quite. Their aim is a total ban only among those who are not “our people”. If you’re one of them, of course you can be armed. That’s how people like the publisher of the NYT get a gun permit in NYC. Or why Dianne Feinstein has a carry permit. Or why criminals will still be armed.
It’s honest Americans who don’t support totalitarianism that have to be disarmed.
“Why are we not also looking at the similarities between the Jim Crow laws, poll taxes and literacy testing to exclude Blacks from voting;….”
As of November 3, 2020 all of the above is no longer necessary; when one controls elections through fraud anyone can be allowed to vote because the fraud pre-determines the outcome, so even requiring registering to vote is irrelevant – “come one, come all and cast your ballots, everyone’s welcome” (and, yes, “ballots” in the plural was deliberate).
As for “….to the push for exorbitant taxes on ammunition, performance testing for carry permits and other barriers to free exercise of the 2nd Amendment? “, that’s just one of the things that’s on the list for more corruption through fraud, along with a number of others. Get ready for the “Bill of Privileges” from our (supposed) masters.
Only a moron would make the assumption that “gun control” laws were about guns.
Anyone with the IQ of toast should long ago have realized that such laws have nothing to do with guns, crime or safety but are aimed at the ONLY thing the people pushing such laws care about…CONTROL. Control over the lives, welfare and freedom of EVERY honest person in America….they don’t give a rats ass about the criminals.