Aug 5, 2012
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.”
While anti-gun advocates put forth every argument under the sun for why you should not be able to own a “high capacity” magazine  that holds more than 10 rounds, or thatyou shouldn’t be able to buy ammunition online , or that police should stop going to work  until guns have been completely banned, the evidence for disarmament of law abiding citizens as a failed policy is overwhelming.
In Chicago, where guns have essentially been banned for personal defense, the murder of innocents has risen so sharply in recent months that Mayor Rahm Emanual has been left with no other option but to call on criminals to look to their morals and values to stop the carnage. Washington D.C., which bans the carrying of concealed weapons, has maintained one of the highest gun crime murder rates in the country for over three decades – since the legislation was passed in 1975. As the Washington Post notes, the disarming of local residents has been wholly ineffective noting that the “guns kept coming, and bodies kept falling.”
These localized examples of the detrimental effects of restrictive gun policies are nothing, however, when compared to what’s happened in Australia, where the government implemented a “buy back” program in 1997 that completely banned gun ownership for the general population. While Australia’s politician promised a lower crime rate once the ban was in place, the disarming of its citizens has led to exactly the opposite effect.
A right stolen by their government, promising safety in return for its gun ban. But now citizens know the frightening truth. The cost of lost liberty can be measured in the loss of life.
“It’s become very, very obvious… that the expenditure of half a billion dollars has done absolutely nothing to reduce crime.”
“It certainly didn’t do what the government touted it would do, which was to reduce crime. It hasn’t done that at all. In fact, there has been more.”
“What’s happening today is that the offender, the bad buys, are happy to break into somebody’s house. They’re not frightened to break into somebody’s house while they’re at home.”
“It’s very bad at the moment. It’s never been worse.“
Here are the cold hard facts from Australia that anti-gun forces can no longer escape:
Armed Robberies are UP 69%
Assaults Involving Guns are UP 28%
Gun Murders are UP 19%
Home Invasions – a crime for which Australia didn’t even have laws before the gun ban because it never happened – are UP 21%
Like Chicago and Washington D.C., Australia’s gun laws have back fired. The statistics above are rarely if ever reported by mainline news channels in America because the evidence is clear: If you take away guns from law abiding citizens, the only people with guns will be the criminals.
Not only is the evidence regularly buried, but harrowing stories of self defense where individuals have taken it upon themselves to protect their lives and property are often downplayed. When a 65 year old jewelry shop owner took matters into her own hands and opened fire  on five gun-toting armed robbers recently, what did the local CBS affiliate mention repeatedly in their report?
“As much as those cops like seeing bad guys having the tables turned on them, they still caution everybody that down-range, beyond the target, there’s often an innocent bystander.”
Video via The Daily Sheeple :
There is always a risk of an innocent bystander being hit by a rogue bullet, but not one example of such an outcome is ever identified by news reporters citing such information. More often than not, it’s the criminals who shoot indiscriminately that maim or kill a child or other innocent passer-by.
Explaining to the anti-gun activists that the benefits far outweigh the risks is like pulling teeth. But, as the 65 year old jewelry store owner, or the patron of an internet cafe , or the mom who acted to save her kids by shooting an armed intruder  show, one person with a gun is all it takes to prevent scores of others from being hurt or killed .
We can continue down this road of stripping Americans of their liberty and right to defend themselves, and we can be assured that we’ll continue to measure the subsequent fallout by counting it in the loss of innocent life. Or, we can put the power back into the hands of the people and send a message to those who would do harm to others. In Australia, criminals are more empowered than ever before when they see statistics like armed robberies being up 69% or murders being up 21%, because they know the people have no ability to defend themselves.
But what if the statistics reported by the media were more like those of Detroit, whereself defense killings have jumped 2200% and justifiable homicide is up 79%  year-over-year?
If local and national news agencies were reporting that crime was falling and more would-be criminals were ending up taking celestial dirt naps when engaged in violent criminal activity, the psychological effects of being aware of these statistics would be a very powerful deterrent indeed.
The American people are perfectly capable of defending themselves, they need only to have the boot removed from their throats and be allowed to breathe.