Gun Control Editorial Finally Gets it Right

Kudos to Brad E. White for his signed editorial endorsing the rights of Americans to defend themselves against violent attack ("The Case for Concealed Weapons," April 12, 1993). Mr. White presents a refreshingly open-minded point of view, free of the rhetorical gun-bashing one usually sees in more liberal newspapers.

The Second Amendment says that a well-regulated militia is necessary, and that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. In no way can the Second Amendment be twisted to read, "A well-regulated militia no longer being necessary to preserve a free state, the rights of citizens to bear arms shall not be infringed as long as they are rich, politically connected or friends of the local police chief." As silly as such an interpretation sounds, it is essentially what Sarah Brady and Handgun Control Inc. are working for.

Gun control is not the panacea its advocates claim it to be. The Justice Department has found that 93 percent of gun-using criminals already obtain their guns through illegal means. Also, waiting periods have proven ineffective at stemming crime. From 1952 to 1974, California had a lower murder rate than the rest of the country. A 15-day waiting period on handgun purchases was enacted in 1975, and from 1975 to 1990, California had a higher murder rate than the rest of the country. Meanwhile, tough gun control laws in New York City and Washington, D.C. have done little to reduce violent crime. Gun control has never been shown to significantly reduce crime, but it does disarm law-abiding citizens.

Of course, many believe the average citizen should be disarmed to reduce crimes of passion or accidental deaths. But crimes of passion, passion being what it is, are typically committed with whatever weapon is at hand, whether gun, kitchen knife, or claw hammer. In addition, the number of children under age 14 killed in firearms accidents has steadily decreased since the 1930s, while the number of guns in America has more than doubled during that same period.

Gun control advocates say the U.S. should emulate countries like England, where hand-gun ownership is practically non-existent and violent crime is less prevalent than in the U.S. What they don't say is that England had lower murder rates than the U.S. before handgun ownership was made illegal, and the murder rate in England did not drop afterward.

Canada suffered an increase in crime after it increased the restrictions on gun ownership. Furthermore, Switzerland and Israel have large numbers of licensed, gun-owning citizens, and the number of crimes committed by legal firearms owners in those countries has been very low.

Besides, who really thinks guns could be eliminated from American life? There are an estimated 200 million guns in America, mostly unregistered. I have yet to hear of any serious criminals who turned in their illegally acquired firearms because of any law. People who think guns can be eliminated conveniently forget the failures of Prohibition and the decades-long war on drugs.

The courts have ruled that the police are not obligate to protect the public, and the police have often been unable to do so. The Los Angeles riot, the murder of a Norwegian student at M.I.T. and the recent spate of violent "stalking" crimes against women in Massachusetts all show that the police are stretched thin in this era of tight budgets and increasing drug-related violence. We Harvard students are fortunate to have two effective police departments patrolling the campus.

I am further lucky to be a young, healthy, 180-pound male, and don't fear much for my safety in the Square. But in a real world of drugs, rapists, carjackings and gangs, where the average law abiding citizens is not a young, healthy male, and where police response times can exceed 20 minutes, responsible firearms ownership makes sense for many people.

Law-abiding citizens use firearms to stop or deter between 300,000 and one million violent crimes every year (depends on whose statistics one believes). NCS figures (U.S. Department of Justice) show that law-abiding citizens who resist attack using a firearm have a lower chance of being injured and a greater chance of preventing completion of the crime than those who don't resist at all or those who resist with all other weapons (knives, fists, Mace, umbrellas, etc.).

In a recent Time magazine survey, 45 percent of Americans reported owning firearms. Glamour magazine stated that 15 million American women own guns.

Crimson editor Brad White wrote, "We must empower individuals by decreasing government dependence." I agree with him 100 percent, and apparently so do lots of other Americans.

In order to help combat the many myths about guns and gun owners, I invite any Crimson editor who has never fired a hand-gun to learn basic handgun safety and marks-manship as my guest at the Braintree Rifle and Pistol Club. John F. Kim '94