A Tale of Different Localities

Gun-control activists and anti-gun politicians prefer to bury their heads in the sand over the issue of defensive gun use. If they even bother to talk about it at all, it's usually to dismiss its importance.

Of course, it's very important to those who have used a gun to defend themselves -- which, according to a new study released by the National Academy of Sciences, happens anywhere from 500,000 to 3,000,000 times every year in the US.

It's also important to remember that where you live is going to have a profound impact on your ability to defend yourself. If the law in a particular locality says you can't legally own a gun, most law-abiding people will obey the law and (foolishly) rely on the police to protect them.  In other places -- where it's legal to own and/or carry a gun for your own protection -- citizens can and do take responsibility for their safety, and the safety of their families and property.

Unsurprisingly, crime rates where guns are legal and easily obtained by law-abiding citizens are consistently lower. Washington, DC, for example, with a population of 600,000 people, has a startling 17 homicides for every 100,000 residents. Just across the Potomac River, in Fairfax County, Virginia -- a megalopolis of 1.1 million residents -- the homicide rate is less than 1 per 100,000.

Still the gun-control myth persists, despite no evidence that any gun control law has done one thing to lower crime.

This woman lives in New Jersey, where you have to ask permission from state authorities just to purchase a handgun. After having been savagely beaten in front of her child, we can be certain she takes great comfort -- and that criminals are quaking in their boots -- knowing that legislators are hard at work protecting future victims.

Meanwhile, this man in Texas shot two people who invaded his home and threatened his family. Both died, and a third suspect fled the scene.

These incidents, like this one involving a woman in Georgia, put a human face on the NAS's recent admission about defensive gun uses in the United States. They also show the tragic result of laws that only serve to disarm or impede the ability of decent, law-abiding people to defend themselves. Criminals don't care about the law. And even without a gun, a large, motivated attacker will easily overcome a weaker, unarmed opponent. Would-be victims require -- and have the moral right to acquire -- the best means for their own protection: a handgun.

In New Hampshire 1 in every 3 households contains at least one firearm, and typically two or more. It is perfectly legal -- and increasingly common -- for people to openly carry a handgun, and a license to carry concealed is easily obtained. Yet we have the third lowest crime rate in the country, including a homicide rate lower than the UK. John Lott's extensive county-by-county study (looking at all 3,054 counties in the United States) of crime rates in the US found consistently lower crime rates where legal gun ownership is highest.

Is this just because so many people have guns? Surely not. There are a lot of factors that must be considered when assessing the causes of crime and the best means of fighting it. It is, however, simplistic to argue that "More Guns = More Crime, period". This simply is not true.