Gun bans only empower criminals

ERNEST H. PULLIN | Tumwater • Published January 03, 2013 Modified January 02, 2013

• 0 comments

O ur Founding Fathers would say a lot about Newtown, Conn., and gun-free zones. They would note the principles of criminology, stated by its father, Cesare Beccaria, 1764 “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those [not] inclined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted [children and adults] and better for the [murderer]. … They serve to encourage homicides. … They would assess that “gun control” only seeks to restrict self-defense by first responders, the intended victims; that our right to arms includes the right to self-defense and protection of others anywhere we happen to be. They would point out that originally the English Bill of Rights had included the proviso that the type and quantity of arms each individual had a right to have were to be “as allowed by law.” In keeping with American practice, however, and because English recognition did not go so far “as the fullness of liberty required,” this last regulatory power over the right to keep and bear arms was stricken. “Gun-free zones” and gun bans are not lawful acts of government. These only serve to empower criminals. As Thomas Jefferson said, “It is our right and duty to be at all times armed.” Our first president, George Washington, would add, “The very presence of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [criminal acts of violence]. They deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”