Mailvox: why criminals should have guns

TimF encounters an unfamiliar mindset:


I guess I’m also confused when the far right nuts are against things like the Brady bill…which is just trying to make sure criminals don’t have gun access. How could anyone be against that?

I am absolutely against that. Why? Because it is an absolute impossibility. Consider the following: a few years ago, the Chinese government decided to crack down on illegal firearms. By using the full power of the totalitarian state, they managed to seize 120,000 illegal guns in one month.

Now, the significant thing is that all guns had been illegal for fifty years, fifty years of totalitarian government where 38 million people were murdered by the government in the Great Leap Forward. If you cannot manage to prevent criminals from obtaining firearms in 50 years of murderous totalitarian government, you have absolutely no hope of doing it in a society with even a modicum of freedom.

Israeli soldiers have sold their rifles to Palestinian terrorists. How hard would it be to arrange for a pot-smoking National Guardsman to “lose” his M-16? It might cost less than buying one at the gun store. Police weapons are stolen from parked police cars; manage an effective gun ban and you’ll have policemen being jumped simply to steal their Glocks. And miniature stamping presses allow those who are reasonably handy to manufacture their own – the Chinese found more than one in their massive investigation.

One might as reasonably rely on the Gun Fairy taking the guns away. The only thing gun control ensures is that the bad guys outgun the good guys. It’s only considered an option for those who haven’t thought the issue through.