By MarkPA
This thought experiment presumes some definition of “common-sense gun laws”. The phrase has no generally accepted meaning. Pacifists might imagine an army with no guns. Black Lives Matter might imagine an unarmed police force. American gun controllers imagine an American army and police force with guns, but keeping guns out of the hands of nearly all ordinary people.
To make this exercise meaningful to an American audience, let’s adopt the last of these illustrative definitions. What would such a society look like? We have but to look at the news coming from Venezuela and Mexico.
Let’s look first at Mexico where the issue is crime (organized and not) more so than tyranny. The 1924 Mexican constitution guarantees the right to keep arms, but not to bear them. The Mexican government vigorously enforces its sophisticated regime of gun control on ordinary citizens (i.e., those with no criminal background).
As a practical matter, no gun control is effective with respect to the “made men” of the various cartels. They pass police and army checkpoints upon presentation of their cartel credentials.
The ordinary Mexican campesino is at the mercy of cartel shootouts, systematic organized crime and free-lancers whenever he steps outside his home. There are only 4,000 individual carry permits in a nation of 125 million; i.e., a rate of 0.003%. By comparison, as many as 17% of Americans in some states have carry permits; many more may carry in states with permitless carry.
Next, look at Venezuela. The Venezuelan constitution secures no right to arms. The current government confiscated all arms in the hands of heretofore licensed owners.
Only official government military and police authorities as well as Colectivos—the government’s para-official “brown-shirts” — have arms; and, of course, the criminals who have not yet felt compelled to trade their guns for groceries.
We see on the news impotent demonstrators running from or being run over by armored vehicles. We viewed one instance of soldiers backing off when a demonstrator fired a pistol at them.
Once Jimmy Carter certified Venezuelan elections as free and fair, nothing remained to guarantee the natural right of the Venezuelan people to elect the “democratic socialist” of their choice to govern them by their peaceful consent. The security of the state seems to be in the hands of foreign soldiers from Cuba, Russia and China.
Do these two examples prove anything? Of course not, in themselves. They are simply contemporary cases with which we are familiar. Each nation has its own culture and tradition. We must roll up our sleeves and do some serious work to see whether there are any patterns across current nations or across history with a common civilization.
Japan has extremely effective gun control. Only state officers and the Yakuza (its native mafia) carry guns. Hunters and marksmen keep and use guns under strict licensing.
Singapore has similarly effective gun control. Only state officers and a couple thousand rich men have guns. Gun traffickers are executed by hanging. All physically fit males are trained to arms in mandatory military service and then disarmed when discharged. The island nation is mostly benevolently and quite prosperously ruled by a popularly-elected Chinese president under what is essentially a one-party rule system.
Brazil has had very effective gun control. Only state officers, a small number of professional security guards and criminals, whether organized or not, carry guns. But violent crime is out of control. This is changing under its newly elected president.
Switzerland has some gun control and mandatory military service, with retention of arms by reservists following active duty. While guns are ubiquitous (still falling far short of US circumstances) its violent crime rate is among the lowest of all nations.
Israel has some gun control and mandatory military service. Guns are ubiquitous, but under heavy state control. Homicide and violent crime by the Jewish population is nearly unheard of.
South and North Korea both have strict gun control. One operates under a popularly elected democracy, the other seems to be a hereditary absolute monarchy. One is prosperous and peaceful, the other is starving and warlike. Both seem to be perfectly stable with no revolutionary fervor in evidence.
Carry on the survey to each reader’s personal satisfaction. What sort of gun-control seems to “work”? What sort of gun control seems to serve as a hedge against tyranny and uncontrolled crime?
Bear in mind that a “hedge” may be best placed when there is no recognizable risk on the horizon. Nor does a hedge necessarily provide an iron-clad guarantee against catastrophe. The most salient question is whether the cost of the hedge is prudent or exceeds the cost of catastrophe factored by the probability of its occurrence.
The history of crime and democide counsels that the cost of catastrophe, and probability of occurrence, must not be dismissed casually. R.J. Rummel’s lifetime work accounted for 100 million civilian deaths by their own governments in the 20th century. He coined the term “democide” to describe the phenomena, far more deadly than war has been for soldiers.
Conversely, the cost of maintaining the hedge of a “well-regulated” (i.e., “effective”) armed populace to protect their sovereignty is—relatively—cheap. The United States, with our Second Amendment guarantee, may be the most prudently protected people for the least societal cost practical.
‘MarkPA’ is trained in economics, a life-long gun owner, NRA Instructor and Massad Ayoob graduate. He is inspired by our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and holds that having the means to defend oneself and one’s community is vital to securing them.
Good read. But I believed he missed the most important trait of Asian society. That is complete and total obedience to their ruler, the government, their family. Anything going against that ingrained social norm brings disgrace upon them and their family. Any other weapon besides a firearm would have the same result in terms of the absence of violent crime.
There was a very interesting social psychology experiment done years ago.
Four pens, 3 green and 1 orange, were placed on a table in front of the individual, and the individual was asked to choose one. Americans almost always chose the orange pen, because it was different. Asians almost always chose a green pen, because it was the most common color. This one experiment tells you a lot about the differences between American and Asian cultures (valuing the individual vs. valuing community)
Sociology calls such societies collectivistic, which most eastern societies are. Most western societies are individualistic. Many businesses most adapt their strategies from one type of society to another, which makes comparing crime stats between the two pointless. Also, many eastern societies have high power distances while most western societies have lower power distances.
Totally meaningless discussion.
When some other country has saved the world a couple times and been the beacon of freedom for a couple hundred years THEN we can start thinking about how they do things.
Didn’t Stalin help defeat the nazi’s too? And who won the cold war? Just sayin dude… We have not “saved the world” at all. We have fought our wars and had allies in them, just like the opposing sides. Don’t get me wrong, I am fortunate enough to have been born an American with all these limited freedoms we get, but lets no get carried away and act like our govt is wearing white to display it’s virginity of crime in politics.
Ahhh that old tired leftist argument that since we haven’t achieved some Utopian level of perfection we’re no better than the rest (or Stalin).
Absolutely. I gather you support my position, that we should increase American freedom by a quantum leap, I wish to see our people absolutely free to fail, to starve to death in the streets if they choose to waste their lives on drugs, to be murdered by their buddies if they choose gangs, let’s turn it over to Darwin and be done with it. Now, THAT is some freedom for you. /sarc/
“…let’s turn it over to Darwin and be done with it.”
It may make sense to use rules and regulations to protect people from others, but what is the point in trying to protect people from themselves? If a person is not free to destroy themselves (without directly harming others), is a person truly free?
There is no “common sense” in connection with gun controls. There are only those who have guns and those who don’t. Guess who’s in charge.
Ask Mao about that: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”
gun ownership equates to freedom….lack of same equates to lack of same….
Those nations are also largely homogeneous. They don’t yet enjoy the pleasures diversity brings. Switzerland should ask Sweden how it’s working out for them.
That is the main point. In countries where the population is insular, people believe the same things. Everyone eats the same foods, only some have loads of money(bosses), the others pull together. In these countries, you see very little self expression. No graffiti, no trash on the street, most people dress similar. Once in a while, someone will rebel, say with tattoos, but will wear makeup to cover them from strangers. In Switzerland, people live in huge apartment complexes – they are given a 2 hour window to use the coin laundry and NO ONE would even think of trading with others or overstaying their time, it is that regulated by self regulation. A sign is all they need to comply.
We all know what Americans think of that.
I don’t like any firearm laws but Of the places I went last year Singapore was the easiest to use a rifle at the range as a visitor. Locals are encouraged to keep up skill after they leave the army with cash awards if they pass annual qualifying. The firearms are military and signed out for the day. More paid if you shoot expert. Easier than Washington state where it was a straight NO to non resident for any shooting thanks to their transfer laws.
Personally I miss being able walk into shop and walk out with whatever I want but unless I move to USA permanently instead of visiting a lot from Australia that won’t change.
Too many laws here now but as a licensed shooter I still have two safes full of firearms.
Our next Federal election is next Saturday and one side is promising to “strengthen” gun laws. Guess who I’m not voting for!
Really, you were denied at a shooting range because you weren’t a resident? That’s total BS. The law specifically says otherwise. In fact, established shooting ranges are the *only* place where people actually can rent or otherwise temporarily transfer firearms, and residency doesn’t enter into it…and they’re turning away paying customers?
Must’ve been on the west side, probably in the Seattle area. Seattle sucks. The whole state sucks, in fact. (I say this as someone who lives in it.) The eastern 2/3 is much better than the west side, but unfortunately the stupid laws the urban progtards on the west side vote for apply on both sides.
I’m on the West side, have used four commercial ranges and never heard of this restriction. Consider, we have a large active duty population. Most are nonresidents. They have no issue renting weapons to shoot.
When you look at all these countries the gun control is superfluous. The societies that tend to have lower rates of violent crime all have something in common: a healthy respect for private property.
Where that is lacking corruption and crime are rampant and many people see this, figure you’re a sucker if you follow the “official” rules and just do whatever they feel gets them ahead in life the most quickly. Numerous economists and historians have noted this and the correlation is pretty hard to miss once you start looking at it.
Praxeology is a thing and it works. It’s not just for libertarians and Austrian economists. The antis use it against us all the time.
Common sense gun law was written in the second amendment. Any politician or judge that will not enforce and respect the second amendment in it’s original form and meaning has no business in office.
MarkPA….
Sat down to read what began as an interesting look at gun laws developed in various societies. After a short review of several disparate societies, the article anded. It was as if the entire thing was intro into a more in-depth presentation. Was left asking, “Where’s the rest of it?”
Please re-read your submission, and consider an expanded article, or series of articles. You set out the appetizer, but dinner was never served. You made a good start, and I look forward to more “meat on the bones” some time soon.
Cheers,
I would sort of expect that it’s a primer, but it may not be.
There’s a fairly large TL;DR crowd here. Write something that really covers a topic like this reasonably well and they just skip down to the comment section to rip into the author for writing something too long.
“A well researched and written article!? This is like 5 pages! Ain’t no one got time for that!” is unfortunately rather common on the internet and TTAG is no exception.
It’s really no wonder this country is half retarded at this point. A few pages is too much and many people get a serious case of the vapours if they see an actual book.
#fatcrayonsandsweatbands
As you quoted: “This is like 5 pages! Ain’t no one got time for that!” ….
Maybe this is why POTG are generally sparse at declared pro-2A rallies. Ain’t nobody got time for that. I suspect such people don’t got time for “the rising”, either.
Hard to tell. Internet uses of specific sites are a self-selected group. It’s entirely possible that there are a great many who would take part in “the rising” (I like that term btw) and simply do not frequent a site like TTAG or AmmoLand because they figure they have better things to do.
Comment sections are also self-selecting in that regard. It’s entirely possible that there’s a largish population of TTAG readers who never comment because they think that the comment section is solely for finger-wagging douchebags like us. Those people might well take part in “the rising” and simply never appear in the comment section here for whatever reason they have to think the comment section is full of fucksticks. Hell, that’s exactly why I don’t use Twatter, er Twitter, even though I’ve had an account since like… 2009 when I was using it to monitor the Green Revolution (now failed) in Iran.
“It’s entirely possible that there’s a largish population of TTAG readers who never comment because they think that the comment section is solely for finger-wagging douchebags like us.”
Interesting idea. Wonder what would happen if somehow there was a collusive action where no one commented at any forum like this? Say, for a month.
*users.
“Wonder what would happen if somehow there was a collusive action where no one commented at any forum like this? Say, for a month.”
The comment section would be dead. LOL. Dunno if they’d remove it. The site would undoubtedly go on though. They get all the analytics on views so without even digging into that they could just look at the overall page views month over month and know that the same number of people were here but just not commenting.
CNN.com is still a thing and they don’t generally allow comments at all. In fact, many sites don’t allow comments and get along alright without them.
Hmmmm. Putting TTAG and CNN together. Now there’s a subject for the comment section.
I dunno how TTAG and CNN would work out but a buddy of mine and I are collaborating on making a website and the tagline could easily be “The Most Trusted Name in Tomfuckery”.
“I dunno how TTAG and CNN would work out but a buddy of mine and I are collaborating on making a website…”
Will you be putting the launch announcement on TTAG?
“Those people might well take part in “the rising” and simply never appear in the comment section here for whatever reason they have to think the comment section is full of fucksticks.”
Not all fucksticks are created equal. The “rising” you refer to may be an inability to get it up so to speak. I would examine the current ages of the fucksticks who post here. The older you are the less likely you’re willing to let go of your smokin’ hot wife or that black BMW.
But I understand what you mean.
“The older you are the less likely you’re willing to let go of your smokin’ hot wife or that black BMW.”
Been there, done that. Current wife (she introduces me as her first husband) is a hottie, and we love our Toyota. Fine German engineering (BMW, Benz, etc) are like riding in trucks without shocks. Didn’t like that “feel of the road, as if the car were made for the soapbox derby” ride.
Don’t be stupid. No thinking person buys a BMW which is not blue.
“Don’t be stupid. No thinking person buys a BMW which is not blue.”
Read somewhere that Orange is the new Blue.
” South and North Korea both have strict gun control. One operates under a popularly elected democracy, the other seems to be a hereditary absolute monarchy. One is prosperous and peaceful, the other is starving and warlike. Both seem to be perfectly stable with no revolutionary fervor in evidence.”
Ahahahaha. No.
South Korean government is horrifically corrupt. Their last president was literally removed from office over being a puppet for a cookoo cult leader (like actual talk with the dead type cult) and breaking loads of laws at her demand. Their internet censorship is terrible, everything you do online is tracked with your social security number, and thus there is a higher rate of VPN usage than China.
Oh and said removed president was the daughter of a genuine, US supported, dictator. Among the many illegal actions she preformed was using government agencies to ruin an actress’s life because a character she played was involved with a character played by an actor the cult leader thought was handsome. Seriously.
This wasn’t an anomaly either. Most South Korean presidents have had legitimate corruption charges leveled against them.
And yet there doesn’t seem to be any political violence or revolutionary sentiment, in spite of all that. Unlike other nations with corrupt government, society is very orderly and peaceful. I think the peaceful corruption in S. Korea is the other side of the same coin that has N. Korea living peacefully under the most repressive government in the world. The collectivist mindset is VERY strong there.
Huh? Isn’t Christianity about talking with the dead? I mean, 2000 years dead is really dead! But somebody gonna get ya if you call them a cult!
If you think our congress is deadlocked due to our parties polarity, just take a look at these countries where everything seems so peaceful. Fistfights, sticks and umbrellas are used as cudgels. I think there have been stabbings and all other types of hatred and discontent.
https://parliamentfights.wordpress.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsjctidgQbM
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-35524966/house-of-shame-parliament-brawls-around-the-world
Almost as much fun as MMA
“The security of the state seems to be in the hands of foreign soldiers from Cuba, Russia and China.”
Bullcrap. You’ve been reading too much John Bolton lately.
I’m no supporter of any government, let alone a “socialist” one. But the current crisis in Venezuela is being aggravated by US sanctions and threats, and the goal is seizing Venezuela’s oil, not any “humanitarian concerns.” What the US is doing is also entirely illegal under international law. It’s just another “regime change” moment in US history which always ends badly for the people under the regime being changed, no matter how bad the regime initially was.
In this instance, Russia, China and Cuba are entirely within their rights to support Venezuela’s legitimately elected government against Guaido and his CIA-backed insurgents. However, none of those countries have sent any significant number of troops to Venezuela, despite the nonsensical claim of “25,000 Cuba troops”. Russia sent 100 or so to support their military defense equipment contracts with Venezuela’s military (and I suspect some counter-intelligence personnel to assist the government in dealing with the US intelligence personnel in country illegally in support of the insurgents – it’s what I would do if I were Putin.)
I agree that no government should be allowed to “control” firearms in any way, shape or form. Personal self-defense and the ability to hold one’s government accountable directly via the electorate’s ability to overthrow it is basic common sense. It’s unfortunate that many countries’ electorates don’t grasp that or can’t afford personal firearms due to mismanagement of their economies.
Suggest you leave the political commentary out of articles like these unless your information comes from more reliable sources than the mainstream media.
No idea where you get your info, but according to the Cubans I spoke with in Cuba, American sanctions are (still) attempting to force Cuba to compensate Americans for the property seized from them in 1959-60, most of which was subsequently destroyed by an incompetent government, which is the same thing which is happening in Venezuela. How you have determined that Maduro’s election was on the up-and-up, I have no idea, unless it involves a crystal ball. Most of your post seems to be made up of daydreams.
IOW, *citation needed*.
I saw a move once where only the Police and the Military had guns.
It was called Schindler’ List.
Some people are uncomfortable with the word Arms in the Second Amendment. They would prefer to always focus on the word Guns.
However it would have been nice if the people in Venezuela and had Bazookas or rocket launchers. Or perhaps an anti-tank rifle with armor piercing exploding ammunition, that they could have used against government armored vehicles that were running over unarmed civilians in Caracas Venezuela.
Yes, there are issues with properly and safely storing privately-owned explosive ordinance. But you do have a Second Amendment right to have them correct?
At times like this is where I find out if there are people who truly support the right to keep and bear arms.
Or do they support the right to keep and bear guns or whatever the government allows them to have.
As far as mob violence goes. It seems that the city government of Portland Oregon is allowing citizens to destroy the private property of others , to physically attack people , and the police have been ordered to Stand Down by the mayor and the city council.
The political leadership of Portland Oregon and these organized mobs both agree politically. Just as the Klu Klux Klan a hundred years ago also agreed politically with a Democrat Party in the south.
And both the Democrats in Portland Oregon and the Democrats in the Old South supported gun control. Except for their politically Allied and controlled mobs.
What do humans want ,,,,To become as Gods immortal. An unobtainable dream. Humans, have no more real value then any other animal, in fact maybe far less as they coexist by destruction. Gunms or no gunms they will kill. It’s was in their blood from the git go
Actually, Rummel’s work counts well over 200 million democides in the 20th century.
QUOTE. Do these two examples prove anything. END QUOTE (Because I am not a spam-bot.)
No, but multiple, similar examples *suggest* something. #induction
And one on-point counter-example *disproves* a theory: go make a new one accounting for the new fact. #science
The anti-people do neither: they’re not doing science.
How do different societies develop ‘common sense’ gun laws?
Generally empirically through a common law process, which is how most law that works develops.
Sometimes, the common law result gets codified into legislation. Once that happens, wanna-be overlords look to use “the law” to advance their agenda, which is different from a bunch of people coexisting, doing their own things.
Common law bans murder because you can’t live your life if you’re dead. Directive law bans murder bacause only the overlords get to decide who’s worth keeping n not. Shocking hypotheses, but descriptive n predictive. #science
Another factor is demographics. A county comprised of the same people, culture and rules has built in stability. The more diverse the society is the greater the tensions. The progressives don’t accept that.
Homogenous cultures have problems too. Economics creates diversity of another kind and that is exploited.
Take your pick. Groups pick sides. Sometimes one side arms up and goes after the unarmed others. If everyone is able to defend themselves you get stability.
Disarm people and the strong make their move. This is basic stuff.
“Another factor is demographics. A county comprised of the same people, culture and rules has built in stability. The more diverse the society is the greater the tensions. The progressives don’t accept that.”
Agreed. But diversity is the call word for the left and to say a particular ethnic group lacks cohesiveness because some in their group would rather sell drugs then work an honest job is being way to truthful. Economics aside of course. Why is the crime rate among Japanese communities so much lower than that of the Latin communities? Welfare talks volumes.
So what your saying is that in homogeneous societies (Japan, Koreas, Switzerland, Israel) violent crime is low, where as in multi ethnic societies (Venezuela, Mexico) not so much. That’s racist.
“So what your saying is that in homogeneous societies (Japan, Koreas, Switzerland, Israel) violent crime is low, where as in multi ethnic societies (Venezuela, Mexico) not so much. That’s racist.”
And so is any criticism of a person, or group, if that person, or group, feels unsafe because of such criticism. Even undisputed fact is racist if it makes someone uncomfortable. Free speech is a source of attack on personal freedom; not to be tolerated.
I read it on the internet.
Some people/places still believe in a sense of personal responsibility rather than blaming everyone and everything else..including inanimate objects…for human choices and actions…go figure…
“Some people/places still believe in a sense of personal responsibility rather than blaming everyone and everything else..”
Then we need to round them up and deport/de-citizen them to some hell-hole island where the people are still waiting for cargo god to show up.
Brand New Fully automatic weapons are permitted in Bulgaria but not in the Peoples Republic of the U.S. A. Do you still think you live in the freest country in the world? (well founded sarcasm)
In the Peoples Republic of the U.S.A. the sale of new automatic weapons were banned by Herr Hauptman Ronald Reagan who said “People do not need Full auto weapons because they have no useful sporting purpose”. Sound Familiar??? The Dems learned all they knew from Reagan on Gun Bans but only he was successful when he wanted to ban guns at the Federal Level permanently. Thank God the bastard’s not around today or we would not have semi-auto weapons either. Don’t you just love two faced Republicans especially after the NRA gave Reagan a commemorative rifle and supported him for president. It was like leaving the Fox to guard the hen house.
During the Reagan administration, the Department of the Interior in the early 1980s restricted the carrying of loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.
About 25 years later, President Barack Obama during his first month in office overturned that ban.
Reagan ultimately endorsed the Brady Bill in the early 1990s (it was, of course, named after his press secretary, James Brady, who was wounded during the 1981 assassination attempt), which was a significant step because it gave Republicans in Congress political cover in supporting the gun measure. Isn’t wonderful when two faced Republicans stab us gun owners in the back. They know in a few months the conservative gun owners that got screwed will forget all about it and run right to the voting polls to vote once again for them.
In Israel, applicants must undergo police screening and medical exams, in part to determine their mental state, Amit said.
Many Israelis receive weapons training in the military. But to be licensed to receive a weapon outside the military, they must undergo at least two hours of additional training, then repeat the training and medical exams every three years before they can renew their licenses.
In Japan you can buy rifles and shotguns but vetting is very tough. Your neighbors are interviewed as to your character. You must pass a mental exam. You are interviewed by the Police. You must lock up your guns in a safe. You must give the police a diagram of where your safe is located in the house. And more surprising if you live there and are not a citizen you can buy the same guns citizens do. One ex-U.S. Navy man now living there did a video about his own weapons that he owns in Japan. It appeared on MSNBC News special on gun laws around the world.
In the U.S.A. several decades ago the ATF proposed that they were going to create a new regulation that would have forced gun dealers to give them a floor plan of where their guns were stored. Naturally no law was going to have to be passed to make this legal. I cannot remember how the new regulation was defeated. But I mention it to show you that new gun regulations can often be implemented without Congress actually creating a new law to sanction it. Its just created with a new regulation. This is how the ATF bans guns at will and the list of banned guns has been rather long over the years. They even can and did ban a leather holster. Remember the wallet holster. No law was ever passed it was just regulated as illegal.
“By MarkPA”
TL;DR