It seems obvious.
There are devices capable of launching metal slugs at high, often deadly velocities from a portable, easy-to-operate, handheld unit. They’re cheap, easy to obtain and even easier to use. We should obviously ban or strictly regulate them, right?
If only it were so simple.
In the wake of Sandy Hook and Aurora, Democratic legislators the country over are trying to get stricter gun control regulations in place, including reduced-capacity magazines and banning civilian use of assault-grade or fully automatic weapons. Though well intentioned, such regulations only serve to harm their cause of mitigating violence.
Surface-level statistics seem to speak to the role of guns in high homicide rates seen in the United States — which are admittedly much higher than any other developed country, according to the Washington Post. I don’t think gun ownership is the issue, though.
Compare two cities in the United States, both with ultra-strict gun control laws — by American standards, at least: New York and Chicago. Their laws are similar, but the number of homicides isn’t. Last year Chicago saw 513 murders, according to the Christian Science Monitor. That same year, the much-larger New York had 414, an all-time low. Meanwhile, Chicago has been cracking down even harder on guns, seizing thousands of weapons and continuing to increase regulations. The result? January saw 42 homicides in the city — the worst month in a decade.
New York City, however, has seen homicide rates continue a steady decline, according to the Christian Science Monitor. What have they done there that hasn’t happened in Chicago? The NYPD increased its gang warfare unit by 200 percent in a move called “Operation Crew Cut,” which has been a resounding success.
Political factors in Western Europe have contributed to a society less economically stratified and less conducive to gang activity than we see at home. Guns are simply a scapegoat for a more systemic problem we’re having in the United States with urban decay, mental illness diagnosis, gentrification and income inequality, just to name a few. Guns alone do not cause violent crime.
Still not convinced? Did you know that from 1979 until 2008 Washington, D.C. law prohibited that city’s residents from keeping a handgun in working condition in their homes? During those years, Washington D.C.’s murder rate averaged 73 percent higher than it was before the law was put into place. The first full year after the Supreme Court found the law unconstitutional and repealed it, murder rates plummeted — by 25 percent. That data was compiled by the FBI and the Washington Post.
To ban firearms altogether would ignore the tremendous good they do for self-defense. A study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology in 2000 estimates just shy of 1,000,000 defensive uses of guns annually— and other studies more than double this estimate. This means, whether it was fired or not, the presentation, threat or use of a gun has deterred a would-be criminal every single day, thousands of times.
Guns have been called “the great equalizer.” Their ability to level the playing field in a physical conflict means that a woman with a .22 strapped to her leg can walk to and from work anywhere in the country without fear. A small, old or weak man can deter muggers and thieves with a mere flash of a firearm.
Even reducing magazine capacities is a dangerous thought. Mass shooters at Aurora and Sandy Hook brought multiple magazines with them, and were expert in changing them quickly. Ordinary citizens rarely carry or even own additional clips. Limiting magazine capacities to n just means that when being attacked by a group of n+1 people, a gun is rendered useless.
Gun control is a nice thought. And we, as Christians, are called to be peacemakers, spreading understanding and not violence. Politically, though, gun control is simply a useless maneuver.
