Some say Chicago has the most rigid and draconian gun control laws in the country. Common sense tells us that less guns should translate into fewer shooting.
However—first, commonsense ain’t so common—and, second, Breitbart recently reported that, over our recent Memorial Day weekend, in heavily gun-controlled Chicago,
“At least 53 people were shot and wounded and four were killed.”
Given that only 4 people died out of the 57 who were shot, I guess the good news is that Chicago shooters aren’t very good shots. Apparently, only 7% of those who are shot, actually die. I’m sure that the folks down here on Texas could teach those Chicagoans a thing or two about firearms accuracy.
“The Chicago Tribune reports that the violence brought the number of shooting victims to nearly 1,500 for January 1 through May 30, 2017.”
That’s an average of 10 Chicago shooting victims per day for the first five months of this year.
“The violence brought this year’s number of homicides to 242.
That’s 1.6 homicides per day for the year, through May 30th. However,
“at least 60 people were shot and killed” in May alone.”
That’s 2 homicides per day in spring-time Chicago. The daily homicide rate has risen from 1.6 to 2. Perhaps Chicagoans’ aim improves once they escape the winter cold. Given that summer’s coming and the temperature’s rising, summer may be conducive to more riots, gun fights and homicides.
Given the empirical evidence of “60 killed in May,” we can reasonably wonder whether gun control is intended to protect people from gun violence—or is it secretly intended to get more people killed?
Apparently, the more Chicago is disarmed, the more Chicagoans get shot and/or killed.
Chicago’s homicide statistics tell us that gun control kills.
Gun control doesn’t simply remove guns from the hands of lawful members of the community. Gun control eliminates the the possibility that lawful people might be armed.
We’re living in a world where one of the most effective defenses against criminal violence is the mere possibility that you might be armed. Even if you don’t really have a gun, if someone thinks you might be armed, they’re less likely to shoot at you. Even if your home is actually a “gun-free zone,” so long as criminals think you might have guns in your home, they’ll be less likely to break in.
It’s not just guns that stop crime. The mere possibility of guns stops crimes.
When gun control laws prevent honest people from being armed, gun control laws don’t merely eliminate guns, they eliminate the possibility that honest people might be armed. When that possibility is removed, criminals are encouraged to assault and rob. In a gun-controlled community, criminals know that they’re armed and honest people aren’t. When it’s not even legally possible for honest people to be armed, they’re in trouble.
Chicago’s gun control laws and homicide statistics provide empirical evidence of that trouble. We’re left to wonder why Chicago’s politicians ignore that evidence. Are they simply stupid or are they trying to increase the number of Chicago’s homicides?