Those who demand a disarmed population claim that it’s the easy availability of guns that causes people to do bad things with them. The core assumption is that guns have no useful, socially redeemable function. The people who wish to eliminate civilian gun ownership constantly say that guns are only made and used for one thing – to kill people. It’s implied is that almost no one actually wants to kill people, and they wouldn’t, if we could only eliminate the firearms.
If only barriers were put in place to make it a little harder for people to get guns, more of us would give them up, and the number of killings would go down. It’s a naive and simplistic view of reality.
It is easy to see how people who have no experience with firearms or with violence could believe these naive notions. They’ve never used a gun to defend themselves or others; their narrow view of the world is so constrained and blinkered that they believe everyone is just like them. We hear the echo of this in a popular song:
“People are the same all over the world.”
But the song flies in the face of reality and experience. Everyone is not the same, certainly not all over the world. In fact, people differ widely even across most cities in the United States. Young or old, male or female, strong or weak, urban or rural, good or bad; many people have pivotal experiences in their lives that make the demand for guns strong, determined, and inflexible.
People who have experienced violence up close and personal have a strong desire for the means to protect themselves. People who have had military or police training understand that, depending on the situation and circumstances, personal safety grows out of the barrel of a gun. People who live in rural areas have many cultural experiences that reinforce the utility of firearms and their use.
Whatever their background or experience, though, these people do have something in common; they are far outside the cultural experience of President Obama and those who want a disarmed populace.
But despite their best efforts, most people in the United States equate firearms with personal safety. Making firearms more difficult to acquire with more regulations won’t deter those who equate gun ownership with personal safety. It will, however, make them suspicious of the motives of people who wish to disarm them.
A recent study shows how difficult it is to illegally obtain firearms in one of America’s most violent cities. Phillip Cook examined the availability of “crime guns” in Chicago:
In our 2007 article Underground Gun Markets, we found evidence that guns are surprisingly difficult to obtain in the underground gun market in Chicago. (20) This evidence includes substantial price markups for guns on the street relative to the purchase price in legal transactions, substantial legal or physical risk and delays for criminals in their attempts to get a gun, and the existence of a system of retail brokers who charge a fee to facilitate exchanges between gun buyers and sellers. (21) Yet despite the difficulty for most people in getting guns on the streets, roughly four in five homicides in Chicago are committed with guns. (22)
Which only goes to show that President Obama is exactly wrong when he says:
“We flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than to get his hands on a computer”
Gun rights supporters are correct to point out that Chicago has some of the highest levels of homicides with guns in spite of the infringements they place on Second Amendment rights. Cook doesn’t draw the obvious conclusion that people who strongly desire guns will go to considerable lengths to obtain them. He thinks strict gun controls on places outside of Chicago (where the crime rate is much lower) could reduce the number of firearms that get to Chicago. It seems unlikely.
Chicago is a textbook case of inflexible demand. To understand this inflexibility of demand, dedicated anti-gunners would have to step outside their comfort zone. Few ever do. The number of people who actively support the Second Amendment, however, has been growing for decades.
That is why gun rights are slowly being restored across the nation, and why pushes for more infringements are so often defeated.
©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch
“It’s easier for a teenager to by (sic) a Glock than to get his hands on a computer.”
Total nonsense. Teenagers steal computers all the time.
Teenages don’t want any stinking fudd computers. Perhaps a IPAD, but mostly just the latest/greatest trending “smartphone”.
Yeah man, what teen criminal wants their porn to stay in one place, that stuff needs to be mobile.
We are talking about locations where the inhabitants can’t even spell PC and can’t use anything more complicated than a X-Box or Playstation.
How do you teach those who simply do NOT want to learn?
We all know that Obama’s statement was bulls””t. Typical for a man who’s a serial liar and demagogue. Instead of trying to disarm the American populace, he should have the stones to go into the black ghettos and demand that they stop killing themselves and others. Because that’s the real problem; not guns.
He should bring a few computers with him…
Michelle hates Obama because he is too busy masturbating to his own image in the mirror than to pay attention to her.
Him
That was truly funny. Thank you.
It’s 10x more likely that today’s youth will receive the trite and poisonous messages from liberal douche-bags
like Obama than to hear rationale and common-sense ideas from conservatives.
Now let’s kill the NFA.
Have you called your representative, senators and candidates for those positions yet?
WTF is “by” a Glock? Am I really reading that correctly? Maybe try “buy”, as in purchased, even if it was stolen earlier? Words (did) have meaning. Not surprised this from the true JV team. Or, are they associating with Glock drive-bys? Smells like a libel suit. Or, are they trying to get to the true indoctrination level of the inner cities. Effin eedjits.
The typo bugs me too.
vera disse:Esse é o filme que Ãamos assistir lá em CA se a senhorita não tivesse ido dormir?? aquele tinha alguma coisa com di?cn¢Ãtias?? me passa o nome se não for, ando precisando de água com açúcar, aliás, de muiiiita água com açúcar, e se tiver colÃrio para os olhos então.
Iara Scello disse:eu fiz as unhas de pelucia rosinha claro, e não gostei muito.. a pelúcia suja no dia a dia e depois fica encardida.. não sei se é a qualidade do produto, mas as clarinhas eu não gostei.tenho esse azul escuro tbm, vou testar com ele, amei suas unhas!beijinhos..
RSS reader herethis is probably 5th or 10th time i am actually visiting your siteotherwise its all google readeras for the titles on picskeep them goingthey are not useless, they give an idea as to what was going on your mindeven though you thin that your giving random titlesi like them,.. i try to relate to those titlesor i come up with my ownalso, its good way to remember the pic by titleits hard to describe a picture“A picture is worth thousand words” they say, right?lets try and put a title to these great collection of words, shall we?~$udhi
Hey, the leader of the free world only has so many brain cells to …. shit I meant to say characters, Freudian slip?… tweet with, it was a strategic reduction, I’m sure.
Osama is dumb as a post, would not have completed middle school except for an accident of birth.
Interesting. I call BS. Every teen has a computer on them at all times. Their cellphone.
If only they had some way to use that small portable, apparently non-computer device, to access a world-wide library, a so-called “Interconnected network,” of information and better themselves.
So you know, snapchat.
“It’s a series of tubes!”
And yet another stupid tweet from the stupid twit.
The simple answer is….. to protect ourselves and our nation from scumbags like you.
“People equate firearms with personal safety”
I think it’s even simpler than that. The left’s full-court press on gun control has basically two messages: 1) guns are too taboo for you to be allowed to have one, and 2) we know what’s best for you, so shut up. If you wanted a policy to encourage the widest possible distribution of gun ownership in society, you couldn’t come up with anything better.
I think Obama has switched his flip on the gun topic.
You know this claim goes beyond unbelievable when no less than the Washington Post calls BS on the president and gives him “Three Pinnochios” for a bald-faced lie:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/12/obamas-odd-series-of-exaggerated-gun-claims/?tid=a_inl-amp
Because I can. Because the criminal scum hasn’t got the message that it’s not OK to kill,steal and destroy. Because I need one to protect me and mine. Because…just because.
“Because Obama is the President” also seems like a mighty good reason.
The same president that calls a terrorist attack, “workplace violence.” The same president that starts a memorial service for fallen hero’s with a joke.
With a president that clueless we have no choice but to protect ourselves.
Because there is an off chance that the Wicked Witch of NY could end up as president and it is far easier to hold on to what you have than to acquire something that has suddenly tripled in price. Also, I have noticed 9MM high end hollow point ammo has become harder to find in my area.
Treating an absurd argument with respect does not make the argument any less absurd.
The president’s ridiculous comments deserve ridicule.
Also, another aspect to consider is that more gun control laws actually can make guns EASIER to acquire for criminals by encouraging the proliferation of the black market.
During Prohibition, people still drank alcohol but because it was an illegal product it was wholly unregulated which meant that those risking a drink could not be sure of what it was they were actually drinking.
In the same manner, over-regulation of firearms could encourage a black-market creating availability of firearms devoid of bullet buttons, low-capacity magazines and even featuring the super-deadly “thingy that goes up”! Any money spent on such arms would go not to government’s coffers but rather to the investment of a criminal enterprise.
This kind of thing is generally called the “law of unintended consequences” and THAT law is ALWAYS enforced even for Democrats.
Besides risking civil war, unconstitutional gun grabs and ridiculous restrictions on people’s personal liberty will likely make things much worse. Further restrictions will likely lead not to a trade of liberty for security but rather in a trade of liberty for anarchy and rampant lawlessness.
And get more powerful weapons to boot. If you are going to acquire an AR from the Mexican cartels why bother with a knock-off like an AR-15 when you can get a real select fire assault rifle.
This. Outlaw everything, then everyone can go big. If a person is looking to acquire an illegal item, might as well get the best illegal item money can buy. What would they do, make it double secret illegal?
Whenever something becomes illegal a black market forms. The legality of guns inhibits a large black market. People obviously want guns. They become illegal demand will increase on the black market and illegal guns will start to flow across our southern boarder just like illegal drugs.
Right now our gun industry is regulated. What will happen is more dangerous actual fully automatic machine guns will come in with no ability to track or trace them if guns become illegal.
The gun control group should be happy with the way it is being regulated. It could and would be much worse for crime if guns become illegal. It will increase the size and strength of the black market. More dangerous untraceable guns will start to stream across our southern pores boarder. Do liberals want that? Maybe they do. I have no idea.
Why do so many people want to own guns? They see what happens to unarmed people and don’t want the same to happen to them. Duh!
I misread the last word in the quote as “catapult” the first time. My initial reaction was “well, yeah…”
And the unelected governor of Oregon just announced plans for the next legislative session.
Ending the charlstown “loophole”. Expanding the prohibited persons list, and banning standard capacity magazines.
Time to go on a buying spree…
FBHO
You might not want to do that, odds are if you do you will contract the HIV/AIDS that’s been ravaging Bathhouse Barry’s system.
Can you shut the light from across the room with a computer! Eh, smart guy. You sure can with a Glock, or open a can or flush the crapper. Pootus.
Maybe it has something to do with all the 3rd world hordes you leftist love to unleash upon us?
The real problem is the progressive push to eradicate all moral foundations from our society. Ban religious views, Ban the Constitution. Destroy the family. Remove stigma from abortion, drug use, etc.
In “those” communities, I’m betting those “teens” don’t “buy” computers nor guns. Pretty sure they practice “zero cost acquisition”
Based on the title of this article only (I don’t have time to read the article),
people want to own firearms for lots of reasons, including self-defense and hunting. Oh, and target shooting is just plain a lot of fun!
“People are the same all over the world.”
I am sure that everyone around the world wants to join ISIS.
You can buy a Raspberry Pi (an incredible IT learning PC) for $35. Please point me to a $34 Glock, I’ll by 1,000.
Pis are now $20 for first gen, and $5 for the Pi Zero. $35 will score you the good one, tho…
Buy*
Because they can. This right is not universal in this world.
My son works in a sporting goods store. Today the Assistant manager tooled up. They are worried the “protestors” will try to acquire some of their guns.
Obama, like all Liberals, is a histrionic liar who will say anything . . . anything at all to get what he wants. Average people want guns because the government cannot and even will not protect them. We are on our own, folks. Face it. And Obama and Clinton and all the wealthy and privileged Liberals would love to see society break down so they could become the ruling elite of a police state.
I shake my head at stupid questions.
After witnessing what has happened in the world in the last month, why anyone would NOT want ready access to the most effective self defense tool ever devised is beyond my understanding.
Obambi was feeling sad because his muslim boyfriend Erdogan almost bought it last night. Too bad ONE TURK couldn’t do the job.
….and Erdogan is blaming the State of Pennsylvania for the coup attempt.
Sort of like Chicago blaming Indiana for all its gang problems.
Most cannot get their kids off the computer nowadays.
Look at all the little butterballs walking around grocery with their parent next time you’re shopping.
And they aren’t fat from playing outside, I can tell you that much.
Americans are buying lots of guns due to the Bolsheviks who are running the country right into the ground. Hey, it’s the Science of Soviet Socialism.
Venezuela here we come!
Remember boys and girls, there is no such thing as Islamic Terrorism.
We all know that the incident in Nice was due to a poor lost immigrant truck driver trying to deliver ice cream, who wandered down a wrong street.
Yeah, that’s the spin.
From Zero Hedge:
Friday Humor? Obama’s 11-Point Response To The French Tragedy
by Tyler Durden
Jul 15, 2016
Authored by Yojimbo via The Burning Platform blog,
1. No one needs a commercial truck this large.
2. The Founding Fathers never envisioned large commercial trucks, and did not intend for people to drive them.
3. These “assault trucks” are designed for killing large numbers of people quickly, and that is their only use.
4. We need a “no truck” list immediately, one that does not require due process to get on or off.
5. No where in the Constitution does it mention the freedom to own these killing devices called trucks.
6. Large commercial trucks should only be owned by the police, military, or politicians, NOT normal citizens, who can use horses.
7. We already have licensing, registration, titles, inspection, and multiple taxes on large commercial vehicles, and STILL they are used for mass killing. Enough is enough. We must ban them entirely.
8. We must follow Australia’s example – we must have a massive government buy-back of all trucks currently owned by American citizens, then, they must be destroyed.
9. We must empower the police and military to go door-to-door to forcibly remove these “assault trucks”. Deadly force is reasonable when “disarming” people of these killing devices.
10. If it will save the life of even a single child, we must rid our society of trucks.
11. And lastly, we must continue to resettle enormous numbers of Muslims throughout the United States, primarily in rural, white, Christian areas.
* * *
Ironically, this is exactly what Newt Gingrich expected from The President: “Will Obama Call for New Truck Regulations After Nice Terror?”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-15/friday-humor-obamas-11-point-response-french-tragedy
I’m calling for all guns to be turned over to me for safe keeping. Especially Colt Pythons since they are the most dangerous in the gun/animal world. When I win the lottery I will be sending those that participated a gift card from red lobster or Dunkin donuts your choice.
“We flood”
Good job assigning blame for criminal activity to the entire nation d-bag. Screw you and your collectivism Mr. President, I have no desire to be part of your world view.
*we all know that the Democratic Party stand for Race Baiting and it’s politicians are more crooked than a dogs hind leg
the MF’s cannot fix a Damn thing and hide their incompetence behind smoke and mirrors! talking about non related subjects, how about fixing Taxes, Health Care, Social Security, stop, letting Muslim and Hispanic’s into our country Illegally then allowing them to ignore our laws and values, and terrorize us and forcing us to obey Islamic laws instead of defending our way of life! these people are given special treatment because why? Don’t have too learn English! get special funding for businesses! don’t have pay Taxes for Years, children get free college! free medical, food stamps free Money, they have more benefits than Veterans! whom they are cutting to give to these assholes! simple words follow! Molon Labe, Semper Paratus, Non Sibi Sed Patriae, Non Sibi Sed Suis! if you are a real American look them up and live by them! throw the crooks out, Vote!
But as the White House has proven with that post, computers can be far more dangerous in the wrong hands.
Those who demand a disarmed population claim that it’s the easy availability of guns that causes people to do bad things with them…
Not simply that, but the way the statement is structured implies that somebody is just giving out firearms willy-nilly, or that it is like some dealer pushing drugs on the corner. Exactly who is doing this flooding, let alone the question why? The obvious answer is nobody and TTAG addresses the other underling issue as to why they’re being bought, but it’s not as if they’re being handed out like Obama cell phones or are habit forming at some psycho-biological level.
I bet Obama doesn’t need a background check to buy guns and has an entire vault of firearms he adds to whenever he goes on diplomatic visits. On the other hand I have a feeling most computer salesmen are libertarian and refuse him when he tries to buy computers and has to get the NSA to lean on those salesmen to sell to him, under duress obviously.
Dangumit! The streets shouldn’t be flooded with cheap, foreign guns! Obviously the Whyte Haus, wants an American made solution! Cheap, American made guns! Sigmas, kel tecs, charters bulldogs, and whatever else the pawn shops have for all countrymen! But… for those who like or love what they have?! If you like your sidearm, you can keep your sidearm!
Comments are closed.