Fewer guns do not equal less crime

The gun homicide rate is down an astonishing 49 percent since its peak in 1993 (www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware).

During this same time period, the numbers of firearms in civilian hands reached an all-time high.

It has become demonstrably clear that fewer guns does not equal less crime. Yet cynical politicians persist in using isolated events like the Orlando terrorist attack to push their extremist anti-gun agenda (www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/17/fact-checking-three-democratic-claims-on-assault-rifles-and-guns).

There are so many lies that these politicians persist in telling that space prohibits me from listing all of them here.

First of all, “assault weapon” is a political term created by California anti-gun legislators to ban some semi-automatic rifles there in the 1980s. An assault rifle is fully automatic or select fire gun. They have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934.

AR-15-style rifles look superficially like military rifles but function like other semi-automatic sporting firearms, firing only one round with each pull of the trigger.

There’s also no Internet loophole. Since 1968, any gun sent by common carrier (USPS, UPS, etc.) needs to be sent to an FFL dealer and since 1993 all FFL dealers have been required to run a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The same background requirements apply to gun shows.

Congress never prohibited the CDC from studying violence with guns; the Dickey Amendment only prohibits advocating or promoting gun control.

Lastly, no one wants terrorists to get guns. The objection regarding the no-fly list was to removing someone’s right without due process of law (www.factcheck.org/2016/06/not-just-the-no-fly-list).

Charles Ely
Bremerton