Take ALL firearms off ALL law abiding citizens = = no more firearm crimes.
ONE EXAMPLE......THE UK..... Quote:Almost 10,000 gun crimes were committed in a single recent year in the UK,
despite the country being known as “gun free” due to its “strictest gun control laws in the world.”
Britain has seen gun crimes rise by “27 per cent in five years and the number of firearms seized has quadrupled.”
And there’s an illegal arms trade going on between France and the UK.
Weapons traffickers routinely pick up guns from.....Calais and ship them back to the UK......
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/02/france-120-knife-attacks-reported-per-day-lin...Take ALL firearms off ALL law abiding citizens = = no more firearm crimes.
And places like the UK and Jamaica, are shining examples of how outlawing legitimate firearm ownership, can prevent [almost] ALL crimes of violence involving firearms.Well, those two statements [above] are, FALSE. .....unless you live in the faerie-land of HUMANISTS and LEFTISTS.
All pertinent evidence shows, that - EVEN IN THOSE LOCATIONS WHERE [lawful] OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS IS TOTALLY PROHIBITED,
BY LAW,
violent criminals, will continue to seek to acquire, and
will acquire firearms.
We need another way !!! [.....to seek to reduce
criminal, societal violence.]
Whats next ?
In an effort to reduce the use of small knives in violent crimes, is the government going to prohibit, the ownership, of small, 'concealable' kitchen paring knives ???
Because, of course, such a government policy, would be bound to have the effect of preventing large numbers of crimes involving small knives! ...
NOT.
.
I am not arguing, that firearms are not dangerous [tools].
They are.
But that fact, is not a good reason, for any government [of men] to enact laws, preventing peaceful, careful, law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms.
ARGUMENT;It follows, logically, that if any government [anywhere in the world] chooses to increasingly remove the ability of its own,
peaceful,
law-abiding citizens, to protect himself/herself/themselves from criminal assaults,
then that government policy will [increasingly] cause all peaceful law-abiding citizens to be more likely to become victims of violent criminal assaults,
committed by
VIOLENT CRIMINALS [who have almost no fear of those 'victims'].
Why so ?
Because
THE PUBLIC PEACE and the law [the law of the land], can only ever, ever, ever be protected and defended,
by persons who have the means and willingness, to protect those laws, and that PEACE.
And, atm, within many Western nations, that 'arc of protection' [which is, perhaps, a 5 meter radius],
only 'follows' and surrounds,
THE IMMEDIATE LOCATION of individual police officers [being persons, who are armed, to protect themselves and other citizens].
All other locations within a society/nation [within many Western nations], are increasingly, becoming unsafe areas [i.e. potential violent-crime-scenes], within our societies.
Q.Why so ?
A.Because it follows, that [in the absence of the immediate area, of an armed police officer]
violent criminals, have little, or no fear, of the defenseless 'sheep' who surround them.
.
The citizen of [unreasonably, being constrained by] 'the nanny state', is going to get mugged and raped !
And it is apparent to many, that their government, increasingly,
has little care to that circumstance.
But, they [the government]
SHOULD HAVE A CARE, about such a circumstance.
Because in locations where there is NO PUBLIC PEACE [safety] [because, there is no effective law], the people will [often] rise up [to remove that government],
in order to change their circumstances.
Silly, reckless, ...of any government, to 'fertilize' such ground, through their own utter incompetence and inaction.