Guns and Statistics
I would like to recycle some numbers I found a couple years ago:
The US Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics notes that a 1997 survey of state prisons indicated that 80% of the guns used in crimes surveyed came from "family, friends, a street buy, or illegal source." (see BJS-1)
DoJ/BJS statistics are a little more specific than that, as well.
Of that 80% slightly over half of that result (39.6% overall) obtained their guns from "friends or family," while a slightly lower number (39.2% overall) obtained their guns from the "street" or other "illegal source." (see BJS-2)
Comparatively, the "friends and family" number for 1997 is up 5.8% compared to 1991, while the "street" number is down by 1.6% over the same period. Criminal gun supply also saw declines over that period in retail purchase, pawnshop purchase, and flea market purchases. The "gun show" difference is +0.1%, what I consider an insignificant number. (We can also, imho, set aside the -0.3% change in flea market acquisitions over the period, if others feel it necessary. From 1.3% to 1.0% ... I'll flip a coin.) ("
'Guns' and the Second Amendment")
It seems that during a period of "gun control" in the U.S., the criminals did, indeed, find their guns. They simply took them from people they knew who already had them. Should we impose penalties against crime victims, then? Cite someone whose gun is stolen for failing to secure a firearm?
I would propose four measures of "gun control":
(1) Licensing ownership of guns.
(2) Registering all firearms.
(3) Mandatory education for shooters.
(4) Absolute responsibility of registered and licensed owners.
Somebody breaks into your house while you're out, smashes into your storage, and steals your guns? Not your problem; just report it to the police. Your kid gets hold of your gun and takes it to school? Your problem. You put a bullet into your neighbor's lawn while shooting at a burglar? Your problem. Your kid shoots your brother while you're on a family hunting trip? It's going to be someone's problem, although I admit that one's stickier than other situations. Point being, no "accidents". None of this accidentally shooting a teacher because the manufacturer's representative made a mistake during a demo (happened 'round here several years ago); none of this cleaning the gun and accidentally putting a round into the neighbor's child; none of this leaving a loaded rifle around while your children are home alone with the result that your five year-old shot your three year-old to death for refusing to obey him. And, yes, that last one, as spectacular as it seems, did happen, and the prosecutors did not file any charges.
Quite simply, let's have some real accountability in using guns.
That's the whole of my "gun control" policy; and no, I don't think people should have automatic assault rifles or grenade launchers. I mean, grenade launchers are problematic in, I would hope, an obvious way. But as to assault rifles: as Stephen Weaver points out in his article against gun control, you don't need them:
Embattled Rhodesia, fighting for its very life and ostracized by virtually the entire world, quietly adopted a policy change for its armed forces. As a result, the selector switches on thousands of FN-FAL rifles were deliberately switched from the full-auto mode to semi-automatic as a matter of standard procedure. The reason was the shortage of ammunition brought about by international sanction efforts. The effects were startling in that nothing changed as far as battle outcome in spite of a better-armed and equipped enemy in increasingly superior numbers penetrating Rhodesia from three fronts. The communist-trained and supplied terrorists maintained the full auto mode with their AK-47s right up until the end. When the final battles came the outnumbered and outgunned Rhodesians had never lost a single encounter; rather, their demise came at the negotiation table-which is a point for deep reflection.
What this proves is that semi-auto fire is a match for full-auto in the hands of determined and committed personnel fighting for home and hearth. ("
Freedom's Last Stand")
Really, an automatic rifle will not make much of a difference against tanks and airplanes. But in the meantime, gun owners can continue to be as creepy and frightened as they want.
What? I don't think it's an unreasonable policy.