Gun Control: What Is the Agenda?

[philw]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts269.html

Some years or decades ago I researched and reported on the Sullivan Act, one of America’s first gun control laws.

New York state senator Timothy Sullivan, a corrupt Tammany Hall politician, represented New York’s Red Hook district. Commercial travelers passing through the district would be relieved of their valuables by armed robbers. In order to protect themselves and their property, travelers armed themselves. This raised the risk of, and reduced the profit from, robbery. Sullivan’s outlaw constituents demanded that Sullivan introduce a law that would prohibit concealed carry of pistols, blackjacks, and daggers, thus reducing the risk to robbers from armed victims.

The criminals, of course, were already breaking the law and had no intention of being deterred by the Sullivan Act from their business activity of armed robbery. Thus, the effect of the Sullivan Act was precisely what the criminals intended. It made their life of crime easier.

As the first successful gun control advocates were criminals, I have often wondered what agenda lies behind the well-organized and propagandistic gun control organizations and their donors and sponsors in the US today. The propaganda issued by these organizations consists of transparent lies.

Consider the propagandistic term, "gun violence," popularized by gun control advocates. This is a form of reification by which inanimate objects are imbued with the ability to act and to commit violence. Guns, of course, cannot be violent in themselves. Violence comes from people who use guns and a variety of other weapons, including fists, to commit violence.

Nevertheless, we hear incessantly the Orwellian Newspeak term, "gun violence."

Very few children are killed by firearm accidents compared to other causes of child deaths. Yet, gun control advocates have created the false impression that there is a national epidemic in accidental firearm deaths of children. In fact, the National MCH Center for Child Death Review, an organization that monitors causes of child deaths, reports that seven times more children die from drowning and five times more from suffocation than from firearm accidents. Yet we don’t hear of "drowning violence," "swimming pool violence," "bathtub violence," or "suffocation violence."

The National MCH Center for Child Death Review reports that 174 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2000. The National Center for Injury Prevention and Control reports that 125 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2006. In 2006 there were 77,845,285 youths in that age bracket.

In 2006 violence-related firearm deaths of eighteen year olds and under totaled 2,191. A large percentage of these deaths appear to be teenagers fighting over drug turf.

According to the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, drugs are "one of the main factors leading to the total number of all homicides. . . . murders related to narcotics still rank as the fourth most documented murder circumstance out of 24 possible categories."

According to the National Drug Control Policy, trafficking in illicit drugs is associated with the commission of violent crimes for the following reasons: "competition for drug markets and customers, disputes and rip-offs among individuals involved in the illegal drug market, [and] the tendency toward violence of individuals who participate in drug trafficking." Another dimension of drug-related crime is "committing an offense to obtain money (or goods to sell to get money) to support drug use."

Obviously, decriminalizing drugs would be the greatest single factor in reducing incarceration rates, the crime rate, and the homicide rate. Yet, gun control advocates do not support this obvious solution to "gun violence."

Those who want to outlaw guns have not explained why it would be any more effective than outlawing drugs, alcohol, robbery, rape, and murder. All the crimes for which guns are used are already illegal, and they keep on occurring, just as they did before guns existed.

So what is the real agenda? Why do gun control advocates want to override the Second Amendment. Why do they not acknowledge that if the Second Amendment can be over-ridden, so can every other protection of civil liberty?

There are careful studies that conclude that armed citizens prevent one to two million crimes every year. Other studies show that in-home robberies, rapes, and assaults occur more frequently in jurisdictions that suffer from gun control ordinances. Other studies show that most states with right-to-carry laws have experienced a drop in crimes against persons.

Why do gun control advocates want to increase the crime rate in the US?

Why is the gun control agenda a propagandistic one draped in lies?

The NRA is the largest and best-known organization among the defenders of the Second Amendment. Yet, a case might be made that manufacturers’ gun advertisements in the NRA’s magazines stoke the hysteria of gun control advocates.

Full page ads offering civilian versions of weapons used by "America’s elite warriors" in US Special Operations Command, SWAT, and by covert agents "who work in a dark world most of us can’t even understand," are likely to scare the pants off people who are afraid of guns.

Many of the modern weapons are ugly as sin. Their appearance is threatening, unlike the beautiful lines of a Winchester lever action or single shot rifle, or a Colt single action revolver, or the WW II 45 caliber semi-automatic pistol, guns that do not have menacing appearances. Everyone knows that they are guns, but they are also works of art.

A little advertising discretion might go a long way in quieting fears that are manipulated by gun control advocates.

The same goes for hunters. Recent news reports of "hunters" slaughtering wolves from airplanes in Alaska and of a hunter, indeed, a poacher, who shot a protected rare wolf in the US Southwest and left the dead animal in the road, enrage people who have empathy with animals and wildlife. Many Americans have had such bad experiences with their fellow citizens that they regard their dogs and cats, and wildlife, as more intelligent and noble life forms than humans. Wild animals can be dangerous, but they are not evil.

Americans with empathy for animals are horrified by the television program that depicts hunters killing beautiful animals and the joy hunters experience in "harvesting" their prey. Many believe that a person who enjoys killing a deer because he has a marvelous rack of antlers might enjoy killing a person.

This is not a screed against hunters. There are many families with the tradition of bringing in the venison once or twice a year. With the near extermination by man of deer predators, deer are so abundant in many localities as to have become a nuisance and a danger to motorists. Nevertheless, the defense of gun rights has little to gain from TV programs depicting the fun of killing Bambi’s mother.

In the US, shooting is a hand-eye coordination sport. It is likely that 99% of all ammunition is fired at paper targets, metal silhouettes, or clay and plastic discs. It is a sport for amateur physicists who are interested in ballistics and who experiment with different combinations of powder and bullet seeking the most accurate for their rifle or pistol. Few of these shooters hunt as their interest in shooting is unrelated to killing.

Shooting is a sport that offers comradeship and competition in which even old people can participate, people who do not or cannot play golf or tennis or bowl. There is a vast variety of events from black powder muskets to antique military and frontier weapons to distance shooting.

Sports shooters punching holes in paper targets comprise the vast majority of active gun owners. They are a threat to no one. Accidents are extremely rare at gun clubs. A large network of small businesses provide the parts and supplies necessary for shooting. There is no reason to strip gun owners of their hobby and possessions and family businesses of their livelihood, as has been done in Great Britain and as the gun control lobby intends to do in the US.

The NRA is correct to insist that "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." We have known this since the Sullivan Act.
June 26, 2009
Paul Craig Roberts

[fightingquaker13]

Phil,
While I take issue with the implied anti-hunter (and ironically Fuddesque) anti black rifle points, the article makes a certain amount of sense. The solution to "gun violence" isn't to tighten laws, but loosen them. Gang bangers are easy to demonize (hell, I do it), but the fact is that they are poor teenage kids who join gangs to get money. Where does the money come from? Mostly drug sales. Decrimialize drugs and the profit goes out of gang membership. Why carry a gun over nothing? How many crimes could be avoided here, and Coloumbia and Mexico, if we just ended prohibition and its very rational reliance on violence as part of doing business? Option one: ban all guns. Option two: legalize drugs. Guess which one will bring the crime rate down faster. Reagan had it right when he said government is the problem, not the solution. Too bad he wasn't smart enough, or brave enough, to apply that to his "war on drugs".
FQ13

[twyacht]

"Gun Control - A theory espoused by some monumentally stupid people; who claim to believe, against all logic and common sense, that a violent predator who ignores the laws prohibiting them from robbing, raping, kidnapping, torturing and killing their fellow human beings will obey a law telling them that they cannot own a gun."
OldNoob

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed -- where the government refuses to stand for re-election and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once."
Justice Alex Kozinski, US 9th Circuit Court, 2003 ( minority dissent in which the majority has "lost the courage to oppose")
(Reference Iran)

"The Second Amendment does not exist to protect the guns you like. It exists to protect the guns you hate."

"How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual... as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of."
Suzanna Gratia Hupp, Texas State Rep.

"The gun... insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed."
Ronald Reagan



It's hard to get one's head around the "Gun Control Agenda". Reagan was smart enough, FQ, but define what a "Victory" on the War on Drugs would look like? It is unattainable.

[fightingquaker13]

"
It's hard to get one's head around the "Gun Control Agenda". Reagan was smart enough, FQ, but define what a "Victory" on the War on Drugs would look like? It is unattainable.

Exactly. If he was smart enough he wouldn't hve waged it in the first place.Before Reagan giving in to Falwell's moral majority, it looked like prohibition was coming to an end. Even Dan Quayle co-sponsored a bill to decriminalize pot in 1979. Everybody screws up, and Reagan did more good than harm, but this screwup has one hell of a body count, the destabilization of Columbia, and a multi billion dollar price tag to it.
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

Phil,
While I take issue with the implied anti-hunter (and ironically Fuddesque) anti black rifle points, the article makes a certain amount of sense. The solution to "gun violence" isn't to tighten laws, but loosen them. Gang bangers are easy to demonize (hell, I do it), but the fact is that they are poor teenage kids who join gangs to get money. Where does the money come from? Mostly drug sales. Decrimialize drugs and the profit goes out of gang membership. Why carry a gun over nothing? How many crimes could be avoided here, and Coloumbia and Mexico, if we just ended prohibition and its very rational reliance on violence as part of doing business? Option one: ban all guns. Option two: legalize drugs. Guess which one will bring the crime rate down faster. Reagan had it right when he said government is the problem, not the solution. Too bad he wasn't smart enough, or brave enough, to apply that to his "war on drugs".
FQ13

It's hard to get one's head around the "Gun Control Agenda". Reagan was smart enough, FQ, but define what a "Victory" on the War on Drugs would look like? It is unattainable.

While I seldom agree with ANYTHING FQ has to say, I will LOUDLY and FREQUENTLY restate my agreement on this subject.
To put his "options" comment even more bluntly and simply which makes more sense :
1) Continue to pour billions of dollars into an enforcement program that based on price and availability is not only useless but in fact RAISES the profits for criminals, a program that was NEVER anything more than a jobs program for former Prohibition agent.

2) Legalize and tax, just like tobacco and Booze, the number of users will not significantly change as those who will use drugs will ignore the law just like those who will speed, or drive drunk, dealers would have access to the legal system to settle disputes lowering the violent crime rate, the billions of dollars pissed away annually on ineffective enforcement and foreign aid that only lines the pockets of corrupt foreign officials would be replaced by a large PROFIT from tax revenues.

I have not gone into great detail here of the minus's of Prohibition of SOME drugs, nor have I gone into great detail on the pluses of legalization as I have done so a couple times here in the past and on my blog. (see link below) only enough to illustrate my point.

What is the TRUE agenda of the anti gunners ? Total civilian disarmament so the sheep can be used as the totalitarian globalists wish with out ANY means of resistance. Think Nazi Germany with forced labor, breeding programs, and "Camps" for those who disagree.

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

Legalize drugs, disarm the citizenry, and have a society modeled after Europe version 2.0, while Muslim demographics will continue to increase as the non-Muslim population continues to decrease.

Oh, and BTW, a Nanny state will ensure there are clean needles, and pure crystal-meth, crack that is not stepped on with who knows what, and hey, why not start out the "drug education" indoctrination to elementary kids...

Sorry, no thanks...

I have a hard enough time dealing with the stoned hippies that work at my local Blockbuster, asking them about war movies....

P.S. joints can be handed out right next to the free condoms during school lunches...

1/2 of this is already occurring....

[tombogan03884]

Legalize drugs, disarm the citizenry, and have a society modeled after Europe version 2.0, while Muslim demographics will continue to increase as the non-Muslim population continues to decrease.

Oh, and BTW, a Nanny state will ensure there are clean needles, and pure crystal-meth, crack that is not stepped on with who knows what, and hey, why not start out the "drug education" indoctrination to elementary kids...

Sorry, no thanks...

I have a hard enough time dealing with the stoned hippies that work at my local Blockbuster, asking them about war movies....

P.S. joints can be handed out right next to the free condoms during school lunches...

1/2 of this is already occurring....

You mean like they do with cigars and whiskey ? You have been fed propaganda all your life that "Drugs are BAD", except for the ones that the nanny state approves of. The Govt. position on SOME DRUGS is similar to it's position on "Climate change"
The reason that no US studies have reflected favorably on them is that if they do the Govt will withdraw their funding, and blackball the researchers. This is a subject where you REALLY have to think for yourself, there are some studies that show that Alcohol causes more crime than drugs, and that people deprived of TOBACCO become more violent than than heroin users do.
A GOOD book that covers the subject is "10 things you can't say in America" by Larry Elder

[fightingquaker13]

Legalize drugs, disarm the citizenry, and have a society modeled after Europe version 2.0, while Muslim demographics will continue to increase as the non-Muslim population continues to decrease.

Oh, and BTW, a Nanny state will ensure there are clean needles, and pure crystal-meth, crack that is not stepped on with who knows what, and hey, why not start out the "drug education" indoctrination to elementary kids...

Sorry, no thanks...

I have a hard enough time dealing with the stoned hippies that work at my local Blockbuster, asking them about war movies....

P.S. joints can be handed out right next to the free condoms during school lunches...

1/2 of this is already occurring....

Exactly. And how many billions of your tax dollars, the erosion of your fourth ammendment rights, and the latest excuse for the encroachment on  your 2A ones (Mexican cartels) have our current policies cost? And as you say, the drugs  are still here. If God were to kill everyone who ever used an illegal drug (including alchohol or tobacco underage) tommorow, you'd think the rapture had come, and you got left behind. That includes this board. A law that is so routinely violated that it only effects the powerless or the unlucky is not a wise law. Add that to the facts, not theories that Tom and I have posted here and elsewhere and think about whether the current system is remotely logical. Just my .02.
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

 This and ALICE packs are things where FQ and I are BOTH on the same page, How about the militarization of the Police, No knock search warrants, increased reliance on "informers",asset forfeiture, Zero tolerance policies, urine testing, These ALL violate the Constitution but were OKed by the SCOTUS for the "War on Drugs"
In the same time period that YOUR rights have been eroded this way demand like population has continued to rise. Demand and supply are what control price, over the last 30 years the price of Pot has stayed the same, the price of Cocaine has DROPPED by about 75% what does that tell you about "interdiction" ?

[tombogan03884]

http://cdn4.libsyn.com/guntalk/090628guntalkC.mp3?nvb=20090629024945&nva=20090630025945&t=02dd7c972dd43e1d3fd73

Even Tom Gresham was commenting on the failure of the war on SOME drugs this week, he recommended a book  "No more Waco's" by David Koppel