I see the Trace, the gun ban industry’s mouthpiece, complains that gunshot injuries are becoming more common and more expensive to treat. I wonder if the person who wrote that has been to a grocery store lately.
The price of bandages is up, so of course treating gunshot wounds is more expensive. as anyone can cee. As for becoming more common, every ENFORCED gun control law hi history has resulted in sharply higher rates of violent crime, and a corresponding rise in victims injured as a part of those crimes.
As everyone who sells things knows, a favorable reference is money in the bank. So ask a gun ban activist for a favorable reference, a gun control law that cut crime, made someone safer, reduced the number of political assassinations, or did anything else a sane human would consider a benefit, and all you will get is either a blank stare or a lie.
You could not peddle six course meals at the Waldorf with references like the ones you would get from those who have lived invenues where restrictive gun laws are in force. So the gun ban industry has stopped trying.
Instead, they cite the rise in politically motivated violence and the rise in the prices of health care to terrify the public into passing laws that have failed to have any discernable benefiit as many as 21,000 times.
The gun laws thta succeed in reducing crime, making people safer, reducing the incidence of political assassinations, and do other things sane people consier benefits are the permissive laws. The laws that require, encourage, or allow persons to purchase, keep, and carry whatever guns suit their needs cut crimes. But no other gun lawyers do anything but help populate cemeteries and long term care facilities.
The chart below shows the U.S. Homicide rae beginning when anyone with the money could buy and carry a gun, and the rise beginning with laws banning Constitutional Carry of firearms, beginning in 1905. You can verify the numbers from 1960 up at this link. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
There are more than 17,000 restrictive gun laws results incorporated in that chart, and like the rest of the 58,303 restrictive gun laws that have been regularly enforced since 1495. None of the US gun laws has provided any benefit.
If restricte gun laws reduced crime instead of leading to explosive increases in crime, if restrictive gun laws made anyone safer or if restrictive gun laws ended olitical assassination, or had any benefits of any sort, we would do well to consider restrictive gun control laws.
But no restrictive gun law has ever reduced violence or provided benefits. And that makes restrictive gun laws the laws that no one needs. No matter how mcuh the gun ban industry pays.
Stranger