http://www.townhall.com/columnists/paulcraigroberts/printpcr20010228.shtml

Paul Craig Roberts

February 28, 2001

Unarmed and unsafe

The last vestige of civilized Britain has fallen away — the unarmed
British “Bobbie.” For 170 years, British police functioned without guns.
Since their founding by Sir Robert Peel in 1829, Bobbies walked their beats
armed only with their nightsticks. Until the last few years of these 17
decades, the British public was armed. Now it is the other way around. The
police have guns, and the law-abiding public doesn’t. What happened?
Britain has the most severe “gun control” laws in the world. Not even
members of the British Olympic Shooting Team are allowed pistols. The
British are reduced to registered single- and double-barreled shotguns, and
the maximum permitted shell load is birdshot.

According to the arguments of gun-control advocates, Britain should be safe
and crime free. But, alas, violent crime and robberies have skyrocketed.
Gunfights between rival immigrant gangs caused the revolution in British
policing. In Robin Hood’s Nottinghamshire, constables now patrol in pairs
armed with semi-automatic pistols. They are backed up by armed-response
vehicles (ARVs) stocked with submachine guns.

If gun control makes society safe, why was it necessary to overthrow
British police tradition, arm police with semiautomatic weapons and provide
machinegun backup? As a test case in gun control, Britain proves it to be
a total failure. The result is exactly the one predicted by the National
Rifle Association: “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

In Britain, a man’s home may be his castle where the king of England cannot
enter without a warrant, but robbers and rapists enter at will. It is
easier and less risky for a criminal to have his way with a victim in the
privacy of the victim’s home than in public. Gun control has made home
invasion safe for criminals.

In the United States, experts have proven time and again that widespread
gun ownership is a deterrent to crime and prevents between 1 million and 3
million criminal acts each year. Gun ownership saves numerous lives and
foils large numbers of rapes and robberies. Yet, gun controllers persist in
their attempts to disarm the public.

A person can’t help but wonder whether gun-control advocates are uninformed
fools or have a secret agenda. Once gun control enters politics, the lying
makes even Bill and Hillary Clinton blush. As the 20th century came
to a close, Canadian Justice Minister Allan Rock fended off criticisms of a
gun-registration bill his government was pushing by giving assurances that
“there is no reason to confiscate legally owned firearms.”

Within 10 months of the minister’s assurances, 553,000 legally registered
handguns were confiscated. Now, rifles and shotguns must be licensed and
registered. Having learned that the only purpose of registration is to tell
the government where the guns are, compliance has collapsed. Large numbers
of law-abiding Canadians prefer to risk five years in prison than to
register their guns.

Gun-control laws dramatically reduce public safety and turn law-abiding
citizens into law-breakers. Licensing and registration increase crime by
devoting police resources to paperwork. Gun registration databases cannot
prevent crimes or aid in their solving, because criminals do not register
their guns.

The people most dangerous to the public are not on the FBI’s “Most Wanted
List.” Far more dangerous to our safety than criminals are gun-control
extremists like Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.,
and Sarah Brady of Handgun Control.

These are the people who will leave us defenseless as they abrogate the
Constitution and destroy respect for law, while promising an end to “gun
violence.”

The American Rifleman reports that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms (BATF) — the guys who brought us Waco — are using intimidation
and threats to compile an illegal registry of gun owners. BATF thumbs its
nose at federal court decisions and continues to harass legitimate gun
dealers and purchasers as if they were criminals.

We need to ask ourselves why liberals have made gun confiscation such a
priority. I think it is to distract us from the disastrous results of
liberal social engineering. When high-school students shoot their
classmates and workers open fire on their co-workers, the fault lies not in
guns. It lies in the breakdown in self-control and moral integrity. The
irrational shootings are due to the success of liberals in achieving their
goals.

c2001 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

———————–
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
———————–