Why Gun Control Debates Fail to Address Actual Criminal Behavior: A Critical Analysis

The ongoing debate on gun control is often criticized for its skewed focus. Instead of addressing the acquisition and use of illegal or stolen firearms, which are the root causes of most violent crimes, the argument tends to concentrate on restricting law-abiding gun owners. This article aims to dissect the underlying reasons for this controversial stance and explore why the debate is not centered on more effective measures.

Current Debates and Their Sides

During discussions on gun control, the two primary arguments are:

Restricting law-abiding gun owners: This proposal is typically championed by those advocating for stricter regulations, such as the Democratic party, to limit the number of firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens. The belief is that such citizens pose a lesser threat to public safety and thus do not need to be the primary target of regulatory policies. Increasing penalties for possessing illegal firearms: This approach focuses on penalizing individuals caught with firearms not lawfully obtained. It aims to tackle the root cause of most violent crimes, yet it is often sidelined in favor of the former approach.

Focus on Violent Criminal Repeat Offenders

The rationale behind targeting violent criminal repeat offenders is compelling. These individuals are known to contribute significantly to the rate of violent crime. However, often, the legal system prioritizes less serious charges to save on prosecution costs. For instance, prosecutors commonly drop charges related to the illegal possession of firearms to facilitate plea bargains and expedite the legal process.

Charles Brant, Mr. Marley’s lawyer, noted that Marley, a 22-year-old who was arrested without incident, had legally purchased his firearms. The case highlights the inconsistency in how these laws are applied to individuals deemed non-threatening versus those deemed potentially dangerous to society.

Relevance of Gun Control Measures

It is essential to understand that the primary objective of gun control is not to reduce crime rates. Rather, it is part of a broader strategy to control and potentially coerce the population. This assertion is bolstered by the historical and ideological motivations behind gun control legislation.

Democratic lawmakers often decry the Armed Citizens as a hindrance to their political agenda of imposing communism on the populace. The belief is that with disarmed andpliant citizens, the path to communal rule becomes smoother. This is grounded in the principle that a disarmed population is easier to control and manipulate.

Case Study: Mr. Marley’s Arrest

Mr. Marley’s arrest serves as a stark illustration of how the current gun control debate often fails to address actual criminal behavior. Marley was arrested without incident, despite his lawyer’s argument that he had not made any threats or fired any shots and had legally purchased his firearms. Marley did not violate Georgia law, and his lawyer emphasized that he was only exercising his right to own a firearm.

Moreover, the case involves a complex array of firearms, including body armor, four handguns, a semiautomatic rifle, and a 12-gauge shotgun. This scenario underscores the multiplicity of firearms often seized and the varied legal justifications for this action.

The Dual Purpose of Gun Control

Gun control measures are often implemented for two primary reasons:

Disarming Political Opponents: By targeting and disarming individuals and groups who are politically opposed, authorities can effectively limit their ability to resist or challenge the established order. Criminalizing Political Opponents: Not only do these measures disarm opponents, but they also criminalize their actions, thereby penalizing them under the guise of public safety.

In cases where individuals are caught with illegal firearms, prosecutors typically have more charges to choose from. If a plea bargain is available, they may opt to drop the gun charge in favor of lesser or more politically expedient charges. Conversely, when a constitutional gun owner is charged with an illegal gun, it often boils down to a legal battle over an unconstitutional law, making the charge itself the sole focus.

Conclusion

The failure of the gun control debate to focus on the actual criminal behavior of individuals possessing illegal firearms is a critical issue. It is crucial to shift the conversation towards more effective strategies that truly address public safety, rather than perpetuating a narrative that targets law-abiding citizens and ramps up the penalties for criminal actions.