March 14, 2000

When we first started this site, we had no idea that we would get most of our hits because of the eBay section. Hell, we had no idea there would be an eBay section. The original intent was to "get a cool domain name" and then, once we had it, "do something cool with it."

"Something cool" then turned into "a political discussion forum." Then that morphed into "Let's pick a topic and let people discuss," whic lead to the gun control forum. Those of us who run this site are libertarians; we are strongly against most forms of gun control. With the exception of a a few students arguing the English usage and the "Militia clause" and one irate emailer, forumites agreed with the tenet that a populace with the right to own guns are citizens, while those forced to give up their arms are subjects.

Fine. I tend to agree with the sentiment, although one lone gun owner simply cannot remove a tyrranical government. While gun ownership is a factor in freedom, it certainly is not the defining element. Regardless, this point is moot. When was the last time you heard Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Bill Bradley, or any member of the gun control faction say, "Give us your guns so we can make you our slaves?" It doesn't happen.

The gun control advocates in the States are well-intentioned, asserting that guns lead to crime. This belief concludes that by banning guns, society's crime rate will fall and criminals-- if any remain-- will be powerless. Moreover, they believe that (with the possible exception of hunting) there is not a single non-criminal use for a gun. They write off those who want to protect themselves as NRA extremists or anarchists who "forget" that "civilized people" call the police. Besides, they argue, with guns difficult to acquire, protecting yourself entails nothing more than the "tripwire of soda cans" alarm system.

The counter argument boiled down to the neo-adage "If it's a crime to own a gun, only criminals will have guns." It almost seemed that conservatives conceed the point to liberals that guns are evil. The difference is that conservatives thought that guns were a necessary evil, as without open access to them, criminals would have carte blanch to loot, rape, and of course, pillage.

But finally, the evilness of guns is being questioned. It stands to reason that a mugger would be less likely to attack a person if the victim-to-be might be carrying a gun. A mugger doesn't need a gun (a common steak knife will do), and he certainly does not have his actions significantly mitigated by the the possibility of incarceration. The same applies to rapists, burglars, and even gangs that believe anyplace is good for gunplay. Reason dictates that guns do not add to crime-- they mitigate it. It boils down to this: are criminals simply out to commit crimes, or do guns make people criminals?

You may also want to read the following recent articles on gun control:

 When liberals lie about guns by Cathy Young
 Guns Save Lives by Dr. John Lott, Jr.

Until next time,

Dan