Understanding the problem of gun violence in the U.S. and the fallacies of gun rights advocates’ proposals to cure the problem is not rocket science.
This graphic depicts the current status of gun violence in the U.S. compared to peer countries:
The Current U.S Guns and Gun Violence vs Peers
The horizontal axis represents the number of guns in circulation, increasing from left to right. The vertical axis represents gun violence increasing from bottom to top.
This simple illustration shows a direct trend of increased gun violence with increased gun ownership by the general populace.
The folks that are in the gun industry (guns, ammo, accessories, training, etc.) are smart people. They know how to make boatloads of money: sell more products.
This simple chart of Sales vs Revenue is well known to all for profit businesses, no matter the product or service offered.
The gun industry knows that anything that might adversely affect their bottom line is not good for their business. Hence, they oppose any measures that might limit their sales and they advocate for less stringent controls on what they can sell and to whom they can sell.
That is why the gun industry donates buckets of money to politicians. They are buying influence.
So, what do the gun advocates propose, when people complain about gun violence? Well, we simply need more guns available to the populace. This chart illustrates their claim for reducing gun violence via more gun sales:
Somehow, contrary to the experience of our peers, who have seen gun violence decrease with fewer guns and more stringent gun control, the gun advocates claim more guns will result in less gun violence. But the U.S. has been increasing gun ownership for years and gun violence has increased, not decreased. I guess we are supposed to take for granted that at some point this trend will reverse, if we can just put enough guns into the hands of our citizens. Thus far there no reason to believe that claim.
Here is what will really happen with an increase of guns in circulation:
More product sales, more revenue for the gun industry, along with more gun violence.
Now that is easy to understand for anyone with basic reasoning skills.
Let’s consider the case of school shootings. Every one of these tragic events, brings out ludicrous solutions and causes proposed by the gun advocates.
- Arm the teachers. Teachers are teachers, not police. Most are not mentally equipped to be hard killers. They do not want to assume security guard duty on top of their already heavy load, while being greatly underpaid. Will the state and local school districts double their pay? Highly, doubtful.
What will it cost to arm, equip and train just 50% of the current number of teachers in grades 1-12 in the U.S.? Considering the cost of a Glock 22, training cost, ammunition, accessories, etc. I estimate about $12 billion for the initial year, assuming all are prepared in the same year. In addition, there will need to be training of replacement teachers, due to turnover and continuation of training for all. Training is not just once and done. I estimate the yearly cost to continue the program will be about $10 billion per year. And this will increase with an increase of teachers, schools and inflation. Where does the money go? To the gun industry, which will increase their financial ability to continue to control the politicians and further limit gun control.
Arming teachers will not be effective, as the police have continued to prove, one armed with a handgun is no match for a shooter with an AR15.
A handgun can be taken from a teacher by a student, who then shoots the teacher and students. Again, more guns, more gun violence.
- Make the school into a fortress. A shooter can shoot through a fence or shoot up a school bus. Will the next step be using armored buses? How much will that cost? What about school field trips? How can those all be protected? Do we really want to put our kids in armed, prison like camps? What phycological effect will this have upon our kids?
-
Other Reactions:
It is not the guns; it is mentally ill people with guns. Maybe so. Then why are mentally ill people allowed to purchase and keep weapons like an AR15? Superficial background checks are not working to prevent those with bad intentions from getting lethal weapons. There must be much more intensive background checks, mental evaluations, social media reviews, conversations with the would-be purchaser’s friend, colleagues, relatives, teachers, a waiting period, a justification for a weapon purchase, required training, a license, registration and more. Those already in possession of guns should also be required to undergo such screenings on a periodic basis to justify retaining their weapons. We all know law abiding gun owners are only law abiding up until they commit a crime.
Social issues, video game violence, movie violence, godlessness, etc. Blame anything other than guns and lax gun laws, so that the gun industry and unlimited gun advocates will continue to fund my re-election campaign.
There are sensible ways to address the gun problem in the U.S.; but first those that deny the problem must accept there is a problem and face it, just like an alcoholic must admit alcoholism, to get past it. And our lawmakers have to find the courage to stand up to the gun lobby.
There is so much more that can be said about this issue; but I promised to keep it simple.
Please exercise your influence on those in our government to fix this problem and stop the senseless killings.
Ken
