San Fran gun ban removes citizenry from natural rights By: James Mack, Jr.
All eyes were on the big elections Nov. 8. N.J. and Va. chose their new governors, and even some ballot initiatives got big press (Texas banning gay marriage constitutionally, Arnold Schwarzenegger losing all of his ballot questions). Stuck underneath all of this news, however, was one Calif. city having a ballot vote of their own. San Francisco has banned all firearms within its city limits. You cannot sell or trade firearms and ammunition; also, you cannot possess or own any handgun at all unless you are a police officer or a security guard. The voters of San Francisco have rejected the natural right of self defense and replaced it with their idealistic, foolish, and totalitarian ideal of a gun-free city replicated in only two other U.S. cities: Chicago and Washington, D.C. What a joke.
Studies have been done, and subsequently replicated, showing that violent and property crime is reduced when states have right-to-carry firearms laws. But let's set that aside for right now. Let's assume that there is no appreciable effect on crime one way or the other. No matter how much the anti-gun groups like the Brady Campaign twist facts and numbers habitually, let's entertain the idea that it has no effect one way or the other if someone carries a gun. Banning guns altogether, however, has had a replicated result. England faces skyrocketing crime rates, Washington, D.C. managed to become the murder capital of the United States coming into the new millennium and European criminals are becoming adept at creating new ways to victimize the public. Even the San Francisco Police Officers Association opposed this ban, and they are the purported beneficiaries of banning the legally-owned guns.
The common sense behind this ballot measure has been found lacking, as well. Are criminals going to turn in their handguns? Are they going to have registered handguns? Do criminals really care about this law? They don't follow the rules anyway and they certainly won't care one way or the other what the city says they can and cannot own. If they want to buy an illegal gun, they'll do it since the illicit dealers won't follow the sale prohibition. The stupidity of the framers, and of the "yes" voters, is that making this law actually will have an effect on their paradise. Have any of them ever known a criminal? Criminals, by definition, follow their own code of conduct.
There exists an underground economy for firearms that isn't controlled by restricting supply; the problem from the beginning is that there is demand for these illegal firearms and it encourages a higher supply. The studied connections between poverty and crime would be a great place to start examining how to reduce illegal firearm demand. I'm one of the most fiscally liberal people out there, but even I recognize the need of a sufficient social safety net. While I do not know if increasing the effectiveness of handouts would do anything, I am more than willing to entertain that idea as opposed to this travesty of legislation that has been proven, time and again, to not work at all.
San Francisco residents will now have a gun confiscation take place in April of 2006. The government will require all guns be handed in by then, and if they are not, you can bet the California gun registry will be utilized by the government to find out where these law-abiding citizens live and take the guns. Whatever ill-will comes to the residents of that city, I shed no tears, and hold no sympathy. Everyone who voted for the ban deserves exactly what they get in every way, shape or form. I sincerely hope they learn a lesson, but realistically they will continue their totalitarian ways. This is not just a tragedy for the residents of San Francisco, but it is an abomination to the principles this country was founded on.
http://www.thetriangle.org/media/paper689/news/2005/11/11/EdOp/San-Fran.Gun.Ban.Removes.Citizenry.From.Natural.Rights-1055008.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.thetriangle.org*FW Note:...it is an abomination to the principles this country was founded on.
Seeing that it is San Francisco, I'd have to guess that that is precisely the idea.
It's a sad fact that no matter how many times you shout the truth and provide real world examples of the results of bad ideas, some people just can't manage to wrench their heads out of their back-sides...
:?
