Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
Showing Original Post only (View all)The costs and consequences of gun control [View all]
As I detailed in articles in early November, federal proposals and recently-enacted state laws about universal background checks are a bait-and-switch. Instead of applying to only the private sale of firearms, they also impose onerous, impractical restrictions on short-term loans and returns. These have enormously destructive effects on safety training and self-defense, on safe storage, and on informal target shooting. Further, they indirectly impose handgun prohibition on adults aged 18 to 20.
Instead of ineffective measures which do much more harm than good, the better approach is laws which can enhance public safety while respecting individual rights. Pretend gun free zones (which are enforced only by signage, rather than by metal detectors) have been proven to be magnets for psychopaths, and they should be repealed. The Cato papers lists some of the instances in which armed persons have thwarted a criminal intent on mass murder.
By far the single most effective step we could take to reduce violent crime would be to greatly increase spending to help the severely mentally ill. The biggest crime reduction would be fewer crimes against the mentally ill, since they are more vulnerable than the general population, and are victimized at a much higher rate. The mass murderers in Tucson and Aurora could have been committed for observation and treatment under existing state laws, with due process protections, but people who knew about the danger failed to take the appropriate steps. More broadly, there are many persons with severe mental illness who voluntarily seek temporary hospitalization, but who are turned away due to insufficient treatment capacity. Greater spending to help the mentally ill today will more than pay for itself in the long run, by reducing criminal justice and incarceration costs. (The mental health issue is addressed in greater detail in my forthcoming article in Howard Law Journal.)
Instead of ineffective measures which do much more harm than good, the better approach is laws which can enhance public safety while respecting individual rights. Pretend gun free zones (which are enforced only by signage, rather than by metal detectors) have been proven to be magnets for psychopaths, and they should be repealed. The Cato papers lists some of the instances in which armed persons have thwarted a criminal intent on mass murder.
By far the single most effective step we could take to reduce violent crime would be to greatly increase spending to help the severely mentally ill. The biggest crime reduction would be fewer crimes against the mentally ill, since they are more vulnerable than the general population, and are victimized at a much higher rate. The mass murderers in Tucson and Aurora could have been committed for observation and treatment under existing state laws, with due process protections, but people who knew about the danger failed to take the appropriate steps. More broadly, there are many persons with severe mental illness who voluntarily seek temporary hospitalization, but who are turned away due to insufficient treatment capacity. Greater spending to help the mentally ill today will more than pay for itself in the long run, by reducing criminal justice and incarceration costs. (The mental health issue is addressed in greater detail in my forthcoming article in Howard Law Journal.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/12/01/the-costs-and-consequences-of-gun-control/
This is an excellent article that I thought you all might enjoy.
42 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)
and what will the Gun Lovers do once they know the exact numbers of innocent people killed?
patsimp
Dec 2015
#5
That lot *really* don't like it when their obvious political inefficacy is noted
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#10
"I did not call anyone here a terrorist" You falsely claimed a DUer supported terrorism
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#15
i was responding to maggied's "How the hell does calling someone a terrorist get left here?"
patsimp
Dec 2015
#16
You're dodging the issue. You libeled another DUer, and are now waffling about it
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#20
More scary is that false accusations such as yours are tolerated here
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#37
Feh. DonP is a far better Democrat (and DUer) than the likes of you could ever hope to be
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#11
I asked what you have done about it. DonP has, and has written about it at DU. Also:
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#19
you seem to be very good at asking but never answering anything or addressing anything
patsimp
Dec 2015
#34
"(I)f you believe that gun control will not stop..." Please keep your words out of my mouth
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2015
#38