News (Media Awareness Project) - CN AB: Editorial: Prohibition Causes Violence |
Title: | CN AB: Editorial: Prohibition Causes Violence |
Published On: | 2010-08-11 |
Source: | Calgary Sun, The (CN AB) |
Fetched On: | 2010-08-12 03:02:26 |
PROHIBITION CAUSES VIOLENCE
With weapons and drug busts making the news with frightening
regularity, residents near the sites of such seizures can be forgiven
for feeling nervous.
It's a natural response, when one stops to consider what it
signifies: That those involved in the drug businesss are in a
dangerous trade, one with potential crossfire consequences for the
rest of the public.
But it's also a chance to consider why we feel guns pose a threat to
the rest of us. And the reality is, most of the time they don't.
Guns are a tool, for killing or for target competition. To stop a
tool from being used inappropriately, you have to address the reasons
why someone thinks they need it.
The U.S. has more gun deaths per capita than any other developed
nation. But in point of fact, the vast majority are either from
crimes where two parties are familiar with one another or from
suicides. The rates of accidental shootings in the U.S. and of
non-familiar homicides are both relatively low.
In the case of crime, it's nearly always to protect drug dealers and
gang members who flourish from the value of illegal drugs, a value
created by the prohibition against them. Most of the time, those
dealers are involved in the marijuana trade. If you want to get rid
of that profit incentive, get rid of the black market that drives the
value of pot from that of a simple weed to that of the most lucrative
cash crop on the planet. Control it, tax it, license its sale and distribution.
It worked for liquor: The end of U.S. prohibition dramatically
lowered gang violence and the spinoff casualties among the public,
all without banning guns.
In the case of suicides? The overall rate in the U.S. doesn't usually
top that of similar developed nations, so it stands to reason that
removing the tool, in that case, probably won't stop people suffering
mental illness from killing themselves, there or here.
It's easy to demonize guns: Our federal governments, through the
continuing sham of the firearms registry, have made a habit of doing just that.
But unless we address the reasons people use them aggressively - root
causes of crime based in poverty, sociopathy and, often, regulatory
opportunity - we won't stop guns from being misused. And all the
legal paper in the world won't get rid of a tool when it makes its
owner lots of money.
With weapons and drug busts making the news with frightening
regularity, residents near the sites of such seizures can be forgiven
for feeling nervous.
It's a natural response, when one stops to consider what it
signifies: That those involved in the drug businesss are in a
dangerous trade, one with potential crossfire consequences for the
rest of the public.
But it's also a chance to consider why we feel guns pose a threat to
the rest of us. And the reality is, most of the time they don't.
Guns are a tool, for killing or for target competition. To stop a
tool from being used inappropriately, you have to address the reasons
why someone thinks they need it.
The U.S. has more gun deaths per capita than any other developed
nation. But in point of fact, the vast majority are either from
crimes where two parties are familiar with one another or from
suicides. The rates of accidental shootings in the U.S. and of
non-familiar homicides are both relatively low.
In the case of crime, it's nearly always to protect drug dealers and
gang members who flourish from the value of illegal drugs, a value
created by the prohibition against them. Most of the time, those
dealers are involved in the marijuana trade. If you want to get rid
of that profit incentive, get rid of the black market that drives the
value of pot from that of a simple weed to that of the most lucrative
cash crop on the planet. Control it, tax it, license its sale and distribution.
It worked for liquor: The end of U.S. prohibition dramatically
lowered gang violence and the spinoff casualties among the public,
all without banning guns.
In the case of suicides? The overall rate in the U.S. doesn't usually
top that of similar developed nations, so it stands to reason that
removing the tool, in that case, probably won't stop people suffering
mental illness from killing themselves, there or here.
It's easy to demonize guns: Our federal governments, through the
continuing sham of the firearms registry, have made a habit of doing just that.
But unless we address the reasons people use them aggressively - root
causes of crime based in poverty, sociopathy and, often, regulatory
opportunity - we won't stop guns from being misused. And all the
legal paper in the world won't get rid of a tool when it makes its
owner lots of money.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...