|
Can gun control
reduce crime?
By Vin Suprynowicz
web
posted September 27, 1999
One year ago, Australian gun owners were forced to surrender for destruction
640,381 personal firearms (including semi-automatic .22 rifles and shotguns.)
This program cost the Aussie government more than $500 million, and produced
heart-stopping photos as veritable boneyards full of Browning A-5 shotguns
and other beloved collectors' items were surrendered up to be crushed
by steamshovels in a kind of steel-and-walnut charnel field. Now, Keith
Tidswell of Australia's Sporting Shooters Association reports the results
are in.
(The entire interview with Mr. Tidswell, conducted by Ginny Simone,
is available as "Surprise, Surprise" in the "Archive News"
section of the web site http://www.nralive.com)
Drum roll, please. Mr. Tidswell reports, based on a full 12 months of
data: Australia-wide, homicides up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed-robberies up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent.)
In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300 percent.
(Up until the government gun grab, figures for the previous 25
years had shown a steady decrease in homicides with firearms, as well
as armed robberies, Mr. Tidswell notes.)
Although at the time of the victim disarmament order, the Aussie prime
minister decreed "Self-defense is not a reason for owning a firearm,"
there has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
elderly, now left with no means to protect themselves. (One wonders whether
the prime minister's personal bodyguards gave up their military-style
weapons.)
Mr. Tidswell reports: "Australian politicians are on the spot and
at a loss to explain how no improvement in 'safety' has been observed
after such monumental effort and expense to successfully 'rid society
of guns.'"
* * *
Meantime, efforts to systematically remove such weapons from the hands
of the unruly, untrustworthy commoners of England have been underway at
least as far back as the end of World War II. (By 1946, most of the valuable
private rifles donated by American NRA members in response to an emergency
call after the 1940 military disaster at Dunkirk had been rounded up from
the British "home defense" auxiliaries and either dumped at
sea or else poured into new concrete foundations, where -- Londoners confided
to me on my last visit, in 1998 -- their steel outlines still occasionally
surface out of well-traveled concrete walkways.)
Thus, the recent effective outlawing of handguns for civilian Britons
after some nut shot some schoolchildren in Dunblane, Scotland (the government
teacher charged with their safety was, needless to say, unarmed and thus
useless), was only the last straw.
Given that the English peasant populace has thus been unarmed somewhat
longer, are there any trends developing there, to which the Australians
can themselves now look forward?
In an article by Helen Searls, titled "Trial by Fury" and
scheduled for release in the October issue of Reason magazine, we learn:
"In recent months the British government has unveiled an array
of measures that promise to change the legal system profoundly. This spring,
British citizens learned that Tack Straw, the home secretary (the rough
equivalent of the American attorney general, though with more political
power), plans to abolish trial by jury for all but the most serious crimes.
He is also considering lifting the rule against double jeopardy, which
prevents a defendant from being tried more than once for the same crime,
and is thinking of criminalizing offensive language even when it is spoken
in the privacy of one's home. ...
"These days, defendants' rights are under attack. The right to
silence is now severely qualified, trial by jury is under review, legal
aid is being wiped out, defendants now have to disclose their defense
strategy to the prosecution well in advance of trial, and in rape cases
the cross-examination rights of defendants have been drastically restricted...."
But here in America, we're assured that those who would cling to the
right to bear arms are nothing but psychiatrically disturbed Neanderthal
throwbacks, clutching at the last talisman of 19th century male privilege
and power, a kind of combination surrogate penis and security blanket
which they hope will magically protect them from the stresses of a changing
world.
Yeah, that must be it. There's no practical reason to cling to
such an outmoded, violent, and dangerous technology. It's not as though,
were we to give up our guns, armed criminals would take advantage of the
situation to commit more violent crimes against us, or the ever-beneficent
government that brought us Ruby Ridge and Waco would take the opportunity
to start eroding any of our other rights.
Unless you're some kind of paranoid, black helicopter conspiracy nut,
where on earth would you get ideas like those? 
Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las
Vegas Review-Journal. His new book, "Send in the Waco Killers"
is available at $21.95 plus $3 shipping through Mountain Media, P.O. Box
271122, Las Vegas, Nev. 89127 or via 1-800-244-2224.
|