The main problem with any prohibition, including a gun prohibition, are criminals don't obey law in the same way the law abiding do. Criminals are more likely to engage in the prohibition activity, with a large supply of guns made possible due to a lucrative black market that is always created after a prohibition.
In terms of guns, criminals will still have guns, even if all the law abiding citizens go along with the prohibition. The guns will still be needed for protection, security and offensive measures, to help maintain all the other tax free black markets created by other prohibitions, like drug laws.
For example, there are many recreational drugs that are currently prohibited, from marijuana to heroin. The most law abiding citizens will avoid these and follow the law, even if irrational. This may be out of fear or good citizenship. All those people who are not law abiding, due to their own justification, are able to get all these drugs, due the tax free black market. When all is said and done, after all the prohibitions, it is mostly the liberal criminals that will have all the drugs and guns.
The math in the last line may be the real motivation, since street criminals are more likely to side with the democrats, since the democrat supports criminal rights. This is only half of the equation.
Defense lawyers tend to give the majority of their campaign donations to democrat candidates. Defense lawyers benefit by having more laws on the books, especially law that can create new victims and more criminals they can defend. I can see the push to prohibit guns as also being part of a political money laundering scam, where lawyers get more business, due to laws that favor the black market and criminals. The extra business results in more donations to democrats who support such laws.
If there is no law, there is no crime and therefore there is no need for a lawyer. If we had a world full of only liberal criminals with guns, defense lawyer stock would be at an all time high. The extra money will be kicked back to democrats for more laws=more criminals. This why democrats love to regulate; more laws=more criminals due to new violations. This adds to the need for more lawyers.
Criminals have the highest rate of gun violence, with 90% of the homicides in Chicago, gang related. If the real goal was to reduce gun violence, it would address the 90% and not the random who own guns. Saving lives is not the goal. The real goal is to achieve 100% violence for liberals, with the honest citizens not having guns. This maximizes lawyers.
In terms of guns, criminals will still have guns, even if all the law abiding citizens go along with the prohibition. The guns will still be needed for protection, security and offensive measures, to help maintain all the other tax free black markets created by other prohibitions, like drug laws.
For example, there are many recreational drugs that are currently prohibited, from marijuana to heroin. The most law abiding citizens will avoid these and follow the law, even if irrational. This may be out of fear or good citizenship. All those people who are not law abiding, due to their own justification, are able to get all these drugs, due the tax free black market. When all is said and done, after all the prohibitions, it is mostly the liberal criminals that will have all the drugs and guns.
The math in the last line may be the real motivation, since street criminals are more likely to side with the democrats, since the democrat supports criminal rights. This is only half of the equation.
Defense lawyers tend to give the majority of their campaign donations to democrat candidates. Defense lawyers benefit by having more laws on the books, especially law that can create new victims and more criminals they can defend. I can see the push to prohibit guns as also being part of a political money laundering scam, where lawyers get more business, due to laws that favor the black market and criminals. The extra business results in more donations to democrats who support such laws.
If there is no law, there is no crime and therefore there is no need for a lawyer. If we had a world full of only liberal criminals with guns, defense lawyer stock would be at an all time high. The extra money will be kicked back to democrats for more laws=more criminals. This why democrats love to regulate; more laws=more criminals due to new violations. This adds to the need for more lawyers.
Criminals have the highest rate of gun violence, with 90% of the homicides in Chicago, gang related. If the real goal was to reduce gun violence, it would address the 90% and not the random who own guns. Saving lives is not the goal. The real goal is to achieve 100% violence for liberals, with the honest citizens not having guns. This maximizes lawyers.