There are almost 400 million civilian-owned guns in the United States. And not one of those weapons has ever killed anyone on their own.
By contrast, here are a few examples of what people do to each other on a regular basis:
According to the FBI, in 2019 (2020 was an anomalous year) there were just over 1.2 million violent crimes in the U.S. That number includes 16,425 murders, 821,997 aggravated assaults, 268,449 robberies (225,501 involved a weapon) and 139,815 rapes.
Short story, bad people are doing a lot of nasty things. Sometimes they do them to other bad people, but more often than not, they’re doing those nasty things to good people.
A gun has never hurt anyone on its own. But, a bad person with a gun is a dangerous combination. To reduce the number of gun-related deaths (which is already a really small number), you can reduce the number of guns or reduce the number of bad people. Seems simple enough. But that won’t do anything to reduce the number of non-gun-related crimes, which is actually a much bigger problem.
Anyone with half a brain knows that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens isn’t going to materially impact the number of guns in the hands of people who break the law on a regular basis. It’s not like making guns illegal is going to be the one law they decide to obey. No, the only thing eliminating guns is going to do is make it more likely that an innocent person will become a victim.
A survey of convicted felons found that 60 percent admitted they avoided committing crimes when they knew the intended victim was armed. 40 percent said they’d skip doing the crime if they merely thought the person was armed.
It’s estimated that 2.5 million crimes a year are prevented by lawful gun owners. In fact, a study ordered by President Obama back in 2012 reported that the number may actually be closer to 3 million. And that was nearly 10 years ago. But let’s stick with the smaller number. In other words, 2.5 million rapes, assaults and robberies are prevented each year because the good guys might have guns.
Even the people who don’t have guns are safer because some of us do. It’s not crazy to think that disarming good people would result in a huge (potentially 3x) increase in all types of criminal activity.
So, if taking guns away from good people isn’t going to make them safer, the only option remaining is to reduce the number of bad people.
How would we do that?
Well, we could simply appeal to the criminals’ soft and sensitive side and ask them nicely not to commit crimes. Chance of success: zilch.
We could use the carrot approach and pay them not to commit crimes. But, to make it fair, there would need to be some sliding scale where the more violent you are, the more money you can make for not being as violent as you were. To maximize their profits, criminals would commit more crimes before their baseline is determined so that their potential payout is as big as possible. Chance of success: nada.
That leaves using a stick. Which means tougher penalties for violent crimes and a fast track through the criminal justice system.
Prison should be hard. It should be a place people don’t want to be, and don’t want to return to. It doesn’t matter if a gun is used or not, if you hurt someone, then you should be punished in a way that makes you never want to hurt anyone else. I’m on board with providing education, counseling and other programs to reduce recidivism, but it can’t come at the expense of actual punishment.
And, if a criminal is unable to become a better person, then he or she should be kept locked away so they can’t hurt any more good people.
If you want to protect good people, the solution isn’t fewer guns. It’s better people. Or, perhaps more accurately, fewer bad people on the streets.
