We keep saying this, but the prohibitionists don’t get it — no matter where they’re from!
Every time a new gun control law (or any other law, really) is proposed it’s always predicated on the notion that criminals will magically obey the laws. Pass a law against any act and those who pass the laws present them as a solution to whatever problem they’ve identified.
Gun-free school zones are an excellent example: I don’t see where those laws have impacted any of the murderers who chose to commit their acts inside of a school. The Gun Free School Act of 1994 does not seem to have stopped any of the attacks which have happened in the last 21 years, and may have even emboldened those mass murderers who knew that they’d be handed a resistance-free target area.
Yet gun control laws continue to be passed, and the people who pass them continue to be amazed that the crimes continue.
This is not limited to the United States. The United Kingdom’s Telegraph newspaper, for instance, seems to be very surprised that the recent attacks in Paris were committed with full-auto guns purchased in Belgium — guns which are, in fact, completely illegal in that country. (“Illegal” as in “you can’t have one under any circumstances” – not our kind of “illegal” where we just tax them at ridiculous levels.)
As Kevin over at the Misfires and Light Strikes blog put it, “Why, it’s almost as if criminals are, by definition, law-breakers, or something.” For some reason the Telegraph is quite surprised by that little revelation.
Is there a lesson in this? Yes, there is, but unfortunately it will sail right over the heads of the people who most need to learn it. Making something illegal doesn’t necessarily make it stop happening; it just gives you an extra charge to bring during arraignment. If a law is designed to prevent an act which is already illegal and carries a greater penalty than the proposed law, then that law will only be followed by the kind of people who wouldn’t commit the act in the first place. The person who isn’t deterred by the greater penalty isn’t going to be at all inconvenienced by the lesser charge.
It’s not rocket science, folks. Except for the people working at the Telegraph.
-=[ Grant Cunningham ]=-