Pixel Tracker

Saturday, December 15 , 2018, 3:26 pm | Fair 64º


Randy Alcorn: After Orlando Massacre, Don’t Gun Down Reason

With the mass murder in Orlando, Fla., debate over gun control has reached a fever pitch. Anger, fear, frustration and moralization — the four horsemen of irrationality — are stampeding across the nation.

At the opposing ends of this debate, and teetering at the precipice of zealotry, are the gun huggers and the gun grabbers.

The huggers fervently believe that private citizens have the right to possess any weapon they want. The grabbers vehemently believe that private citizens should not have that right.

The scrimmage line of this debate is the Constitution’s Second Amendment, which each side interprets differently to support its position. The U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation, however, is closer to the huggers’ than to the grabbers’.

Each side lays down a daily barrage of distorted data, selective statistics and short logic in an effort to sway public opinion. One example of the rhetorical shenanigans is the frequent comparison of the United States to Australia and Switzerland.

The grabbers love to cite Australia’s 1996 ban and buyback of guns as evidence that strict gun-control laws work to reduce gun violence.

Asserting that those laws are what reduced gun fatalities because deaths declined after 1996 is a classic logic error. It assumes cause and effect merely because the laws preceded the declines.

FactCheck.org found that there is no consensus as to whether Australia’s gun laws either decreased or had little effect on gun violence. Indeed, those laws have not prevented criminal gangs in Sydney and Melbourne from acquiring and using guns, including machine guns.

The gun huggers, meanwhile, love to cite Switzerland as evidence that a virtually universally armed civilian population, including with automatic weapons, not only does not increase gun violence, but also virtually eliminates it.

Studying the details of Switzerland’s gun policy, however, reveals that the Swiss approach to gun ownership is essentially the “well-regulated militia.”

At around age 20 all Swiss men are required to serve in the military, where they are thoroughly trained in the use of firearms, which they keep at the conclusion of active duty. They are required to continue military training several weeks each year until age 50.

Swiss women wishing to have guns also receive training. Ammunition and gun purchases are regulated by the government.

The grabbers like to condemn U.S. gun laws as lethally lax compared to gun laws in other developed nations. When confronted with the gun violence in those other nations, they discount it as anomalous and statistically insignificant.

For an honest, unbiased comparison among countries, the sample has to be far greater than a dozen or so cherry-picked countries. The definition of “developed nation” cannot be arbitrarily narrowed as it is by those manipulating the data to arrive at the desired conclusion that the United States is inordinately dangerous.

A comparison including Germany and tiny Norway, but excluding Argentina, Chile and Turkey will yield much different results.

It is murder by firearms, especially mass murder, that elicits the greatest alarm. More than 60 percent of the annual gun deaths in America are suicide, not murder.

That leaves about 13,000 murders by guns annually. Against a national population of 320 million people, about a third of whom own guns, that is an infinitesimal fraction — but here the grabbers’ definition of anomalous and statistical insignificance curiously changes.

The huggers note that the worst mass murders in America did not involve guns, and that most murders are committed without guns. They rarely discuss the greater utility and ease with which people can be killed with guns, particularly rapid-fire guns.

They prefer repeating the mantra that if more good guys were carrying guns, bad guys would be stopped. Although there are numerous instances where this has happened, the armed off-duty cop outside the Orlando massacre site quickly retreated when confronted with the assailant’s greater firepower.

So, to be an effective deterrent, would the good guys need to pack semi-automatics and multiple magazines? Many folks can’t keep track of their cell phones, how are they going to do carrying guns and ammo clips with them everywhere?

I believe most Americans are neither gun huggers nor gun grabbers. They understand that a free society has inherent dangers, and that there can be no land of the free without it being the home of the brave. Not even a suffocating police state can eliminate all risks, but it can eliminate a free society.

As civil liberties continue to be chiseled away by dubious promises of security, police power and abuse of that power steadily swell. If the public could be stripped of its semi-automatic weapons, would the nation’s increasingly militarized police forces give up their military armaments?

The Second Amendment was instituted to enable a free people to remain free by allowing them the weapons to resist tyrants both foreign and domestic. Gun grabbers will dismiss the Second Amendment as a needless anachronism, and ridicule tyranny concerns as wacky paranoia. They are either poor students of history or foolishly trusting.

Whether or not it will necessitate a constitutional amendment to settle what the nation wants to do about gun rights, reasonable people will support gun-control measures that fall somewhere between prohibition and unrestricted access to firearms.

To find that sweet spot requires honest, objective analysis and rational discussion free of intransigent certainties and emotional hyperbole.

— Randy Alcorn is a Santa Barbara political observer. Contact him at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >