Greg Krehbiel's Crowhill Weblog - Content

Thoughts on life — News, culture, politics, beer, art, science, education, religion and ethics

Other Crowhill sites:
Crowhill PublishingGreg's Book Publishing blog
Greg's Marketing blogGreg's Home Brewing blog

Should we have stricter gun-control?

by Greg Krehbiel on 12 January 2011

Every time there’s some horrible event like the shooting in Tucson, somebody’s going to propose more gun control. Which is perfectly understandable. There are unbalanced, angry people out there, and nobody wants them walking around with guns. I happen to like guns, and enjoy shooting, but I would be perfectly happy to never touch a gun again if it actually resulted in a safer world.

But that’s the problem. Leaving aside 2nd amendment issues, can we make a realistic case that confiscating guns is going to make us safer? We don’t have a magic wand that will make all the guns go away, and the devil really is in the details.

How are we going to take guns away from people? While we’re doing that, won’t the bad guys be disproportionately armed (i.e., since the good guys are more likely to comply and turn in their guns)? Won’t that embolden criminals? What kinds of powers would we have to give the police to collect the guns that aren’t voluntarily handed in? Are we going to make exceptions? Will we simply create a black market for guns?

I understand the naive but good-intentioned desire to “just get rid of the guns,” but it’s not that simple.

-- 2011-01-12  »  Greg Krehbiel

Talkback x 2

  1. kdeb kdeb
    12 January 2011 @ 2:04 pm

    I am grateful that I have never felt the kind of personal threat against my family or myself that made me want to know how to shoot a weapon to defend my home. But if I felt that kind of threat, I would do whatever it took to have whatever firepower I needed to protect my family.
    Yeah, yeah, I know, the biggest problem is that people are dopes and they do absolutely horrid things in situations like that and shoot the wrong person. Doesn’t matter though, if your kid is being genuinely threatened. I think a natural law kind of way of looking at things tells us we should be able to protect our families.

  2. pentamom pentamom
    12 January 2011 @ 4:16 pm

    “Yeah, yeah, I know, the biggest problem is that people are dopes and they do absolutely horrid things in situations like that and shoot the wrong person.”

    Yes, but I’d like to see some statistics on how often that happens vs. how often people successfully neutralize a reasonable threat. 51-49 is not good enough, but if it’s more like 90-10 or even 80-20 (as I suspect it is) then it’s hard to argue that the existence of dopes should limit the defense of others.

    As far as I can tell, the idea of someone who legally carries a gun for self or home defense as generally or even likely a trigger-happy idiot is just a myth. The trigger-happy people are the punks on the street or the ones invading your home.

    So I know you’re not really arguing on that basis, I just think even your “biggest problem” is not that big in proportion to the situation.