Last Updated:August 29 @ 11:37 am

Brown: The Futility of Gun Control

By Susan Stamper Brown

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." — The Second Amendment

Whether it is college campuses, Amish communities, or other gun-free zones, bloodthirsty maniacal men will find a way to quench their cravings. Therefore, gun control laws do not work -- because they are based on the erroneous assumption that criminals will obey the law. They don't and won't; hence leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless in the face of danger, as so happened that tragic July evening at the Aurora, Colorado movie theater where guns were not permitted, and a man who called himself "The Joker" went on a shooting rampage.

In addition to the need for self-defense, our Founders understood the bearing of arms was essential to protecting this country from tyrannical governments. Fresh on their minds was the revolutionary clash between the tax-happy British government and a population of armed and ragtag citizens with the dream of freedom burning in their souls.

Much to the dismay of gun law activists who claim the Second Amendment pertains solely to "militia" (military) service, and who predictably crawl out from underneath their rocks after every mass shooting, the 2008 Supreme Court Case, District of Columbia v. Heller, ruled the Second Amendment indeed secures an individual's right to possess firearms, regardless of military service. Nonetheless, these activists continue their march ever forward, in an endeavor to infringe upon that which "shall not be infringed."

It is really about perspective. Every life is precious. Each of the 12 lives snuffed out in that Colorado movie theatre is 12 lives too many representing untold numbers of family members whose lives are forever changed. No amount of gun control will bring them back nor will it stop the next psychopath from taking his rage out on society. Zip. Zero. Zilch. If every last gun was shipped across our borders fast and furiously, murderers would still find a way to kill.

This conversation is not about gun control; it's about people control. Gotham City, er, Chicago, has one of the strictest gun laws in the country--so severe, the laws were deemed as unconstitutional awhile back. But that didn't stop former Mayor Richard Daley and current Mayor Rahm Emanuel from attempting everything in their power to maneuver through the gray areas and around the red tape, God bless them. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, over Memorial Day weekend 12 people were killed by gunfire and 45 were shot and wounded. In the time it takes to play a major league soccer match (90 minutes), 13 people were shot. By mid-June, murder was up 35 percent from last year with 228 people killed. Statistically speaking, our troops are safer in Kabul, Afghanistan than in Chicago. Where was that story in the national news?

Less might be more when it comes to gun regulation. According to the Washington Times, violent crime peaked 25 years ago when just "a handful of states" had conceal-carry laws. To no coincidence, gun sales have increased over the past four years, and currently 41 states have differing versions of gun-carrying laws, yet violent crime has decreased according to the FBI in June. According to Pajamas Media, "States with the highest gun ownership have the lowest firearms homicide rates" and "States with the lowest firearms ownership average the highest firearm and non-firearm homicide rates."

Gun control activists have it all wrong because they make incredibly naïve assumptions about human nature. Given the chance others were packing heat in theater number 9 at the Century 16 in Aurora, Colorado; the story may have ended much differently for the cold-blooded killer.

-----

Susan Stamper Brown is an opinion page columnist, motivational speaker and military advocate who writes about politics, the military, the economy and culture.

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.3/10 (83 votes cast)
Brown: The Futility of Gun Control, 9.3 out of 10 based on 83 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

26 Comments

  1. billwvComment by billwv
    July 31, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

    When guns are controlled only the ‘thugs’, criminals, and assassins will have guns. All that is needed for our country to be overrun by ‘thugs’ and hoodlims is the knowledge that the home they are invading has no [firearm] protection.
    What a travesty for ‘stupid lawmaker politicians’ to claim that taking pistols and rifles out of the hands of the ‘sane’ will keep the ‘insane’ from their desired plots against humanity.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (28 votes cast)
    • eastcoastxplantComment by eastcoastxplant
      July 31, 2012 @ 8:29 pm

      Here’s an idea, let’s put a sign in front of every “lawmaker’s” home that supports gun control announcing that the occupants are unarmed because they believe they are protected by the laws they make. Also, remove any armed security personnel that they might have either assigned or rented. It would amount to the same thing as having an unarmed society such as Great Britain or Mexico but limited to those who believe in the silliness. Then, we wait for the onslaught and see how long the anti-gun, anti-self protection crowd can stand the heat.

      Maybe then those folks will understand that when seconds count, cops minutes away aren’t of much help other than to clean up the mess.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (11 votes cast)
  2. inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
    July 31, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

    Gun Control is not about Guns,,,,,it’s all about control.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (33 votes cast)
    • kevinkComment by kevink
      July 31, 2012 @ 3:15 pm

      Yea, I’ve said the same thing since the GCA of 1968

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (17 votes cast)
  3. Le SellersComment by Le Sellers
    July 31, 2012 @ 2:07 pm

    While “militia” and “military” are related words, they are not synonyms.

    A militia is all of the able-bodied men from ~18 to ~ 55 who are, as part of their citizen responsibilities, arm themselves, train themselves, elect their own officers, and respond to attacks from any kind of invasion. They CAN be (but are not necessarily) part of a larger, “regular” force from time to time as needed, but they are not organized as part of that force.

    The phrase “well regulated militia” means they are trained (not “having regulations”). they usually met, in the XVIII and XIX, once a week in the town square and “drilled” and “maneuvered”, and shot at targets.

    The II is, in effect, a “mobilization order”. EVERY man from ~18 through ~55 must be armed, trained and ready to defend his home, his community, and himself. The militia is “necessary to the security of a free state”.

    No, the Militia, is not the “National Guard”. That’s a misrepresentation of the facts.

    I would much rather live in a Switzerland than in a Chicago. In the first, all the honest men are armed and there is no serious crime; in the latter, all the honest men are disarmed and crime is ubiquitous (a 47¢ word meaning “it’s everywhere”). In the first, people are free and live without fear; in the latter, people are serfs, and fear everything.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (26 votes cast)
    • nancyjComment by nancyj
      July 31, 2012 @ 2:22 pm

      You may get a passport at the Post Office. Moving isn’t that difficult if you don’t like it here.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.7/5 (33 votes cast)
    • richiedComment by richied
      July 31, 2012 @ 3:00 pm

      @nancyj

      Why would you mock this comment?

      He’s trying to show the lunacy of Chicago politics! Why can’t we use examples to make our city a better place to live.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (25 votes cast)
    • newrepublicanComment by newrepublican
      July 31, 2012 @ 3:02 pm

      LeSellers great description, and articilate

      Nancy, What’sup with you? He does not desire to move he simply wants to live free rather than die … and Chicago prefers people to die without a possibility of defending ones self.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (21 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      July 31, 2012 @ 9:04 pm

      When has the government ‘well regulated’ anything? The trains, the Post Office, The courts, Congress, anything?
      I expect a well regulated militia would involve the use of Metamucil.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  4. Le SellersComment by Le Sellers
    July 31, 2012 @ 2:12 pm

    In Aurora, that awful night, police and 911 operators called repeatedly for more ambulances. One was only a few blocks away, but was not called into service for an hour or so.

    One trained, armed CCW in the theater would have saved far more lives than twenty more ambulances.
    And we’re FREE: a service of unparalleled safety that costs no one a thing unless and until it’s actually used (which is less likely, since fewer nuts would try it, knowing they’d get off three shots, tops, before a half-dozen bullets would end his shooting gallery experience, and probably his life).

    It’s insane to think that “gun-free zones”, like the Cinemark 16 theaters, make anyone safe. The events of last week show that they are misnamed: they are “future victim zones”.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (29 votes cast)
    • paladin5150Comment by paladin5150
      July 31, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

      What the media hasn’t played up is the fact that armed Police officers were at the theater for crowd control due to the midnight premier. They responded within 90 SECONDS and by the time they were inside… the shooter was GONE. He surrendered outside in the parking lot, weapon still in hand. Was he out of ammo, or did he, when faced with the possibility of return fire, simply give up? Would he have similarly given up or retreated if faced with return fire INSIDE the theater? We will never know. But we do know that “unarmed victim zones” do nothing to make a place safe, and in fact make them more dangerous.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (22 votes cast)
  5. sparkyvaComment by sparkyva
    July 31, 2012 @ 2:43 pm

    I would like to see a lawsuit against the theater for the loss of life due to their no guns rule. Have a full blown trial and let a jury decide if the theater is liable for preventing self defense. Several of those who died were military and therefor gun trained. It could have been different – no, it should have been different.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (22 votes cast)
    • effwingerComment by effwinger
      July 31, 2012 @ 6:25 pm

      No lawsuit against the theater. If you had an idea of the “type” person that frequented the Aurora cinema, you’d understand they probably should never own a firearm. We want responsible, trained and law abiding citizens to have a right to carry, not the punk ganger types….

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  6. longscoutComment by longscout
    July 31, 2012 @ 3:20 pm

    Some…no, Most folks here are thinking. (One is a snit.) I’ve known several women like Nancy who once excoriated those who think like I do for being bloodthirsty, mad, and evil; more than half of them now either own or have told me they wish they owned a gun. One gun that you know how to use and use well is good. But why one when there are so many different kinds of threats among the truly mad or drugged and maddened? Or actual heartless criminals?

    Hand+eye+gun=the only kind of control I am interested in other than self-control and the firm capacity to know when to suspend it. THAT is the way true Life goes on.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.2/5 (15 votes cast)
  7. Pingback: The Futility of Gun Control

  8. wathenComment by wathen
    July 31, 2012 @ 3:47 pm

    You are quite right Susan. Things could have been much different if others in the theater were packing heat. You have a huge crowd in the theater, you have noise, you have smoke, and in the middle you have a killer with a bullet-proof vest and other protection. Then you put two or three others with weapons who are so expert that they can start firing their weapons without hitting and likely killing others and perhaps getting off a little shoot that puts down the killer. My guess, there would have been more wounded and/or dead from friendly fire. I also must be reading different newpapers, magazines, etc. since I have not heard anyone calling for outlawing all guns and they shouldn’t. But I guess you have to have something Susan to write about even if you have to make it up. That doesn’t do anyone any good.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.4/5 (22 votes cast)
    • CharlieComment by vietnamvet
      July 31, 2012 @ 5:34 pm

      You don’t shoot very much, do you wathen?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (10 votes cast)
    • montie364Comment by montie364
      July 31, 2012 @ 5:45 pm

      And that false idea that more people (could have been shot) is your whole premise for demanding free fire zones like the theater. The false media refuses to report the thousands of times privately owned (mostly handguns) gasp even in public stop crimes and SAVE lives. Your guess is a presumption of truth that has it’s basis in a lie from the psudo experts that push gun control on all of us even when the facts are that more guns DO actually equal LESS crime.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (13 votes cast)
    • handymanherbComment by handymanherb
      August 1, 2012 @ 2:27 am

      Your an idiot who has never been trained with a weapon, I have shot many hostage type target setups, where you had to take out the bad guy and not kill the hostage.

      But if you ever been trained in weapons you would know, part of firing a weapon is knowing where your ammo is going to end up, and who is in the way.

      Since he had on body armor, all the bullets would have stopped on his vest, but that still would have stopped him, he didn’t want to be hurt, that why he was dressed to the hilt.

      Oh and were did he get the 20 thousand dollars to get the guns and stuff in the first place, I see the puppet, but who pulling the strings

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (8 votes cast)
  9. vevaComment by veva
    July 31, 2012 @ 4:06 pm

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. – George Santayana
    LITTLE GUN HISTORY LESSON ! (UNCLASSIFIED)

    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953,about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    —————————
    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, some 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    —————————-
    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, some 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    Uganda established gun control in 1970.. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million’educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    —————————–
    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
    ——————————
    Most recently, owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results were:
    Australia-wide, homicides up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
    In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
    While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
    There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and money was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience
    and the other historical facts above prove it.
    Gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding.
    Remind those in favor of gun control, of this history lesson. Better yet, send it to your Senators and Mayor Bloomberg, NYC.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (25 votes cast)
    • billwvComment by billwv
      July 31, 2012 @ 4:20 pm

      veva: Really good comment and good facts. A lesson to be learned before [Big Brother: 'govmint'] disarms the ‘sane’ inhabitors of this nation.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.1/5 (9 votes cast)
  10. pcyoungComment by pcyoung
    July 31, 2012 @ 4:11 pm

    Gun control has never succeeded in reducing gun violence rather armed assualts have increased as evidenced in counttirs such as the UK. In washington dc bans on handguns resulted in incressed gun violence. Right to carry states show decreases in gun assaults notably murder. Every month I can readabout armed citizens who have successfully defended themselves against armed attackers.
    The police are called AFTER AN INCIDENT and therefore do not serve defensively.
    Gun control has been a knee jerk , repressive reaction to stifle individual freedom by those who will be first to decry gun owners rights to bear arms. If human experience were not replete with so many examples of oppression and violent suppression of freedoms by facists, communists and totalitians throughout the ages. It has been only through fear of retaliation by citizens that have prevented furtjer abuses such as WACO and ruby ridge.
    There will always be nut jobs willing to kill but who will not be deterred by laws. More lives and freedoms are kept by guns than lost

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (14 votes cast)
  11. MarvComment by Marv
    July 31, 2012 @ 4:19 pm

    I love it when people “guess there would have been more wounded”, because they don’t know. I do know that if I
    or any of the 2,000 students that I trained and certified
    been there the perpetrator would have died quickly.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (13 votes cast)
  12. firewalkersdfdComment by firewalkersdfd
    July 31, 2012 @ 8:05 pm

    Susan:
    Gun control is not about stopping crime, it’s about disarming American citizens so that the government can control us. “Fast and Furious” was part of this plan.They knew the guns going to Mexico would be used in crimes and then traced back to the United States. Then the anti-gunners could push for more gun control laws to “prevent” guns from going south. Every gun control law passed since the Second Amendment is unconstitutional.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
  13. paulesavemeComment by paulesaveme
    August 1, 2012 @ 6:07 am

    Obviously, we have not learned one thing about all this “gun control” regulation. Our God given right to self defense, of which, the 2nd Amendment of our U.S. Constitution acknowledges,still stands. Unfortunately, we allow ourselves to be knocked down on our knees, only to submit to enemy of our Freedoms. Granted, the enemy disguises itself very well, but come on already folks. How many times are we to fall for this gross tyranny ? How about we just scrap the whole Bill of Rights for cripes sake ! Are we to play into the enemies hand over and over until they win their goal. Let’s start acting as Americans on this grave issue, and face the facts. Writing to our Reps. is fruitless. Ever live in NY ? We are infiltated with communists. We are being controlled and do not even realize it. Remember the French under-ground and how they worked to win WWII ? Get the cobwebs out of our heads and lets roll.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.1/5 (7 votes cast)
  14. howkrivComment by howkriv
    August 1, 2012 @ 4:21 pm

    Paulesaveme, you have mentioned excellent reasons not to live in NY. I spent 20 years in upstate NY one summer.

    I now live in Kalifornia where, at least, we have sunshine. Unfortunately, most of our politicians have their heads firmly implanted where the sun don’t shine.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  15. CharieComment by Charie
    August 5, 2012 @ 4:36 pm

    howkriv, sounds to me as though you went right from the frying pan into the fire! LOL

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

Leave a Comment





Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer