If you are a lover of the Second Amendment, you’ve probably come across some gun control nuts in your years. Without fail, they bring up how heavily gun controlled Britain has a lower gun crime rate than the United States. Now, there is a lot wrong with this argument. For starters, Britain is a whole lot smaller than the U.S., both in area and population.
So we need to dig in a little deeper. First off, we know the majority of violent gun crimes happen in metropolitan areas with populations over 250,000. Well guess what, the U.S. has 186 areas meeting that criterion! And the U.K., only 32.
And that’s not all. In the U.S. the majority of gun owners are in more rural areas and the cities where the most violence happens have someone of the most restricting gun laws in the country. The gun controller’s argument is starting to unravel.
Matt Palumbo of AllenBWest.com pointed out that comparing two countries is not a good measurement of the effectiveness of gun regulations. To see if the regulations are working, you need to compare the area to itself. Has crime gone down since the regulations were put in place?
Well, that’s exactly what he did with regards to a handgun ban. And this will probably leave some gun haters stuttering.
First off, we present to you Britain’s charts:
And here are the figures for Ireland, just in case you were curious:
That one really hurt…
And of course, we weren’t going to leave out Chicago:
Umm…this is a little embarrassing to the city but it looks like after the ban took effect, the number of murders committed with a handgun increased…by a lot.
If this doesn’t prove that more gun control doesn’t actually control guns (or more accurately, people who want to commit crimes), we aren’t sure what will.