|
In
November, voters in San Francisco approved a ballot measure to ban the sale
and manufacture of firearms in the city, and ownership of handguns.
Backers
of the measure claimed that San Francisco taxpayers spent at least $31.2
million responding to gun violence every year. Proponents often said they
"just didn't like guns around."
The
NRA has already filed a lawsuit to overturn the measure, but the vote
sends a message. San Francisco joins Chicago and Washington, DC, Great
Britain, Australia and Canada, in enacting draconian firearms regulations.
Such bans are being pushed by a large,
well-funded movement to restrict, license and ban firearms on the pretense
that such bans will somehow reduce violence. And they are likely to grow in
momentum, unless some drastic steps are taken.
No one, except criminals, wants crime and
mayhem. But however well-intentioned anti-gun folks may be, research shows
that gun bans are likely to get the opposite results of what they are intended
to achieve, because legal gun owners by and large are not criminally inclined.
And without self-defense, people become easy prey for human predators.
Simon
Fraser University professor Gary Mauser finds that a year after the
British obediently surrendered 160,000 legal handguns, London muggings were up
53 percent, gun murders up 90 percent and robbery up more than 100 percent. By
the year following, annual gun crimes overall had risen 39 percent.
This pattern has continued. The rate of
violent crime in England and Wales is more than double the United States. It
is now more dangerous to walk the streets of London than New York.
On top of that, British Olympic shooting
teams are now forced to practice their sport in another country! This is
doubly absurd, for it discourages establishing positive role models for how
firearms should be used.
In contrast, during the last decade, violent
crime has dropped 40 percent in the United States as the number of firearms
and states with concealed carry permits have increased.
Why the bans don't work
Studies by a number of solid researchers,
including Don Kates, Gary Mauser, and Dave Kopel, clearly show that legal gun
owners are generally mentally healthy and more law-abiding than non-owners,
and legal firearms are seldom used in crime.
There are some other reasons why firearms
bans don't reduce violence.
It is not hard to reload your own ammunition.
Many people do this as a hobby. Criminal elements are already doing this, and
making more than reloaded shells.
This country was won by cottage industries of
firearms makers. Modern weapons are more complicated to manufacture, but there
are numerous reports from abroad of illegal
arms-manufacturing operations sprouting up like mushrooms after a warm,
spring rain.
Only about 5 percent of the cargo containers
that come into the United States are opened for inspection. The odds of
shipping in a load of illegally made firearms and not getting caught are
pretty high.
And you ask why the illegal trade in firearms
is the third-largest illegal-trafficking element in the world after drugs and
smuggling plants and wildlife.
In Scotland, efforts
are afoot to ban kitchen knives and swords. Does that reduce violence?
Human nature
The word "arms" comes from the fact
that weapons are extensions and amplifications of intention. You can turn just
about anything into a weapon newspapers, magazines, and pencils.
Remember that box cutters were all that was
necessary to hijack jets on 9/11. If you ban one weapon, people with violent
tendencies will substitute.
The issue about weapons ownership and
violence is ultimately about community mental health.
Violence arises from a complex set of social
and personal forces, one of the most important being the perception that some
people are defenseless and can be easily victimized. The way out of being a
victim is self-assertion, including defending yourself.
Learning to use a weapon safely is part of
self-defense training. Numerous psychological studies show that martial-arts
training is good for kids, including at-risk kids who usually have low
self-esteem. Check out Chuck Norris' KickStart
program to see what I'm talking about.
What is the safest country in the world? As attorney and author Stephen
Halbrook has pointed out, it is Switzerland, where all able-bodied males
serve in the militia. And after proper training, they take home modern
military weapons ready to put into use at a moment's notice.
The well-armed Swiss militia dissuaded the
Nazis from invading in World War II. The peaceful Swiss have more shooting
ranges than golf courses and one of the lowest rates of violent crime of any
country in the world.
Shooting sports are lifelong activities that
teach self-respect, self-confidence and discipline. They level the playing
field for competition, in contrast to many other sports that favor size,
strength and sex. More shooting, not less, may be a path to peace.
Attitude building
The hunting and shooting sports community
does heroic work, but it tends to focus on fighting a seemingly endless stream
of defensive battles.
The time is long overdue to take some
pro-active steps to educate the general public about the truth surrounding
people who own guns, enjoy shooting them safely and hunt.
Schools are one force. If kids grow up
learning to respect weapons, they are less likely to be intimidated by the
fear of them.
The Archery
In The Schools program, which injects archery classes into physical
education programs, is one of the best things that has happened to teach
responsible weapons attitudes in a long time. The 4-H shooting program is
equally on target. We need more like this.
The media is a powerful force of shaping community attitudes, and its anti-gun
bias is well-documented. Outdoor channels tend to reach the choir. The
battle for public opinion about guns will be won in the general media.
Preachy documentaries tend to reach "the
saved." Despite the box office success of Michael Moore's
"Fahrenheit 9/11," his candidate did not win.
People want to be entertained. Consider what
the film "A River Runs Through It" did for the explosive growth of
flyfishing.
At the upcoming Safari Club convention in
Reno, Nev., I'll be chairing a panel of folks from Hollywood who shoot and
hunt and want to do something about the negative media spin on hunters and
guns. They will have proposals for movies, TV series, contests, promotional
ventures and more.
If you can't get to Reno, stay tuned, and in
February I'll tell you what kind of media magic the pros want to conjure up to
ban the bans.
| James
Swan who has appeared in more than a dozen feature films, including
"Murder in the First" and "Star Trek: First
Contact," as well as the television series "Nash
Bridges," "Midnight Caller" and "Modern
Marvels" is the author of the book "In Defense of
Hunting." To learn more about Swan, visit
his Web site. |
|