By Paul Craig Roberts CREATORS SYNDICATE

The last vestige of civilized Britain has fallen away – the unarmed British
“Bobbie.” For 170 years, British police functioned without guns. Sincetheir
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 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 Rodham 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
New York Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer and Clinton 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.”