Monday, March 26, 2018

Thoughts on Gun control


I have a moral and ethical issue with most proposals for "gun control". The primary reason is the hypocrisy that dominates any "debate" on this issue. Those who promote stronger gun control legislation do so as they believe every person killed by a gun is a tragic loss and we need to stop  this senseless loss of life any way possible. At first blush it seems like the right thing to do but then we need to consider that people lose their lives for a variety of reasons. Were the lives of those killed by any other method less valuable to society? For example people also die from automobile accidents. In 2004, the year I was able to get reliable statistics there were 743 people killed through the use of firearms and 2,875 from motor vehicle accidents. So a person is almost 4 times more likely to die from a motor vehicle accident but you don't hear of more motor vehicle control, just gun control. Is a life lost from the use a gun more valuable than one lost through the use of an automobile? This is the moral and ethical issue that is never addressed; is an untimely death from one method more of a loss that one by another? Of course not.

So why is it then that if a gun is involved it makes the lead news story? Is it because we do not have tight enough legislation? Being a former gun owner I can attest to the fact that is not the case, especially in Canada. Having and using a firearm has a lot of responsibility attached to it as does operating an automobile. In Canada you have to take and pass a gun safety course before you can even apply for a Possession Acquisition License (PAL) and that document is only issued after a careful background check, plus you need to be at least 18 years of age. I do not recall ever hearing of anyone having to get a background check before they could either operate or acquire an automobile plus you only have to be 16.

But you say that is like comparing apples and oranges, they are not the same! Or are they different? Both are manufactured tools. Sure, one is designed to kill and the other not but because of its mass and momentum can and does kill. The one common feature is that both are operated by human beings. As is said so often when it makes the news it is not guns that kill, it is people. Take for example the recent mass shooting at that school in Florida. A person was repeatedly reported to the authorities as being mentally disturbed. Did those authorities do anything? No, they did not. So what was the real reason that it happened? Was it because of the type of firearm he had? Maybe, as another type may have been less lethal, or maybe more would have been killed. The key fact though is that the authorities were made aware that this person was a danger yet did nothing. People lost their lives because of their inaction and not because the current legislation wasn't tight enough.

We have available to us many different means at our disposal for doing harm to others. Banning certain types just encourages the determined person to find another way. What is the most dangerous weapon? We are. We are our own worst enemy as many examples illustrate such as 9/11. At that time 2,996 people were killed and the perpetrators used box cutters to commandeer airplanes. Was there an outcry to ban box cutters? How about plane's?  Of course not because that is silly because it wasn't the cutters or the planes that were at fault, it was the terrorists who controlled both.

But the real issue here is that no attempt is being made to consider whether or not tighter gun control will have the desired effect. Thomas Sowell delved into that subject with his essay "The Gun Control Farce". For example he cites a study done by Professor Joyce Malcolm titled "Guns and Violence: The English Experience". She noted that during the latter stages of the 20th century in England gun control laws became ever more severe yet armed robberies in London soared to 1,400 in 1974 when there had only been 12 in 1954! She noted that "as the numbers of legal firearms have dwindled, the numbers of armed crimes have risen".

I strongly suspect that one reason gun control is an issue at all is because of political smoke and mirrors. The politicians use it as a misdirection technique to avoid the populace concerning ourselves with the real issues, such as health, and jobs. And they are aided and abetted by the main stream media who look for anything sensational that can be leveraged to sell their product regardless of the moral, ethical and logical aspects.

Update: The very next day after uploading this post I came across this interesting video. Please note the parallels. 



No comments:

Post a Comment

I don't want to live in a bubble so if you have a different take or can suggest a different source of information go for it!