Guns exist. They exist in huge numbers – conservative estimates put the number of guns in the United States at around 200 million. Or as someone once put it – there’s already pee in the pool.
I get it, anti-gun nuts. Clearly no one would be able to shoot anyone if guns didn’t exist or weren’t available to anyone. But to argue that inevitably futile efforts should be made towards that end is to reject objective reality on the assumption that such a goal is not only possible, but logistically feasible. It demonstrably and irrefutably isn’t, but that is not the point of this article. The point is that whatever your position is on the private ownership of firearms, everyone benefits from widespread proliferation of firearms.
Study after study has shown that areas where responsible citizens are prohibited from possessing firearms inevitably become the targets for crime facilitated by illicit gun use. Washington D.C. for example has some of the most draconian handgun regulations requiring permits, registration, background checks, fingerprinting, mandatory safety courses, spent shell cataloging, and requires that residents explain where the firearm will be kept and what it will be used for. This is actually a small step forward from the landmark Hellar case in 2008, prior to which no person could legally own a handgun within the District of Columbia. However, as of the writing of this article open carry is prohibited and concealed carry permits are not being issued.
This sounds great, right? No guns, no gun violence? Well I am sad to report that the criminals didn’t get (or don’t give two shits about) the memo.
Robberies in D.C. are up 55%, with a more than 100% increase in robberies involving a firearm at the time of this writing.
The reason is simple: By having such prohibitions on firearm ownership and carry, D.C. has basically put up a huge sign saying “Unarmed Victims Zone” at its borders.
More than guns actually protect people, it is the uncertainty of a mark being armed that deters criminals. Criminals know this – the majority of robberies take place with the implicit threat of violence. Violence itself is actually a rather poor motivational tool. Fear of violence, on the other hand, is historically the greatest motivational tool ever employed.
This, my “guns-are-bad-there-should-be-law” friends is why you fucks need fucks like me and mine, sprinkled randomly and anonymously in your neighborhoods. We create the uncertainty of armament that keeps people from invading your houses with the certainty of armament that keeps people from invading ours.
And so I pose some questions to all those who oppose private ownership of firearms:
Would you be willing to post a sign in front of your house declaring that there are no guns in your home?
Would you be willing to list your address in a searchable database declaring the same?
If not, then why would you be willing to de facto force your neighbors to do exactly that by prohibiting firearm ownership in a particular area?
Whether or not you keep firearms in your house is your business. Whether or not I keep firearms in my house is my business, but furthermore, the possibility that any of us have firearms in our houses keeps both of us safe. When you remove that uncertainty through gun control laws, you enact a certainty that violent criminals, who by their very nature have no respect for such laws, may maraud and plunder with near impunity, secure in the knowledge that they are the only ones who are armed.
The guns are out there – there is already pee in the pool – and legislation prohibiting or restricting firearm owership, open carry and concealed carry can only serve to disarm, by definition, those who choose to abide by the law. Such measures serve only to empower criminals and to make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens who refuse to forfeit their right to defend by any means necessary their lives, their liberty, and their property.