Illinois, California, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Ohio.
Five school shootings in just a little over a week. Ten people dead.
“Gun-free zones”, all of them.
How are those working out for you?
Of course, we’ll have the usual debate between pro-and anti-gun folks. The pro-gun position will be that gun-free zones are really victim disarmament zones, and that declaring any place a “gun-free zone” is just as good as sticking a sign out into the front yard that says, “CRIMINALS/PSYCHOS, COME AS YOU ARE”.
The anti-gun folks will point to the body count and use it as evidence that “guns are too easy to obtain”, despite the fact that guns are more difficult to obtain now than at any point in our history. A mere fifty years ago, you could order firearms through the catalog by mail–and eighty years ago, you could walk into Woolworth’s and buy a Thompson submachine gun, without having to fill out any forms or submit to any background checks. Nowadays, firearms are the only consumer product that requires federal background checks for every purchase.
But that’s the thing about gun control–if the crime rate goes up after enacting it, they say, “See? This only proves we need more gun control. Imagine where the crime rate would be without it!” If the crime rate goes down, they say, “See? Gun control is working!” And if you ban guns in urban hellholes like Chicago and D.C., and the crime rate is much higher than that of the surrounding areas, you can always blame the failure of your policies on those areas. “D.C. has so much crime because the criminals have easy access to guns in neighboring Virginia!” (So why is Virginia’s crime rate a twentieth of that of D.C.?)
But remember, folks: you don’t need guns. That’s why we have cops. Because when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. (Two minutes, in the case of the NIU shooting. Great response time, statistically speaking, but when someone is shooting at a room full of people, it might as well be two weeks.)
I’ve said it before, on a similar occasion: the only thing that will effectively and quickly stop a rampage shooter is a gun. The final victim count is solely determined by whether that gun is already at the scene of the shooting, or whether it needs to be carried there in the holster of a cop.
And for those who are just itching to start typing a scathing rebuttal in favor of banning all guns, do this first:
Look up “Prohibition, History of”, and see how that worked out. Then consider that a handgun is more durable, more profitable, easier to smuggle and transport, and much smaller than a case of whisky or a cask of beer.