What Would Happen if Gun Grabbers Got the Gun Control They Really Wanted?

By Rob Morse : Opinion

Gun Confiscation Destruction : img GETTY
Gun Confiscation Destruction : img GETTY
Slow Facts
Slow Facts

USA –-(Ammoland.com)- What would happen if gun-prohibitionists got what they wanted and disarmed honest citizens?

Last month, a Democrat tried to kill many Republican politicians on a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia. Within minutes and as expected, gun prohibitionist politicians said we needed more gun laws.

What would happen if the people who want you disarmed had their way?  The prohibitionists asked for universal background checks and more gun-free zones.  Would that work to stop even a single mass murder?  Let’s see what would happen if the prohibitionists got exactly what they asked for.

The murderer who attacked Republican Congressmen in Alexandria bought his gun legally in Illinois.  Illinois is one of the most anti-gun states in the US.  The murderer had a background check before he ever touched a firearm. He passed more background checks when he bought his rifle and handgun.  He filled out all the forms that the anti-gun advocates want filled out. In Illinois, he even needed a state permit and background check to buy ammunition.  He passed them all.

Republican politicians attacked. Image from CNN
Republican politicians attacked. Image from CNN

These congressmen and their staff were disarmed because they worked in and traveled through “gun-free” Washington, DC.  Five people were injured in the attack even though the attack lasted approximately 5 minutes. The victims survived because they were extremely lucky and they received prompt medical attention.  None of those firearms regulations stopped the murderer because gun laws only stop honest gun owners.

Is this failure of gun control an isolated exception or is it the rule?

Let’s look back at the murderer who attacked gay men and women at the Pulse Nightclub last year in Orlando, Florida.  The murderer passed many state and local background checks.  He even had a security clearance by a federal agency and passed their background checks as well.  In addition, the murderer bought his guns legally in Florida and passed those state background checks.

The Pulse Nightclub was a gun free zone due to the Florida law that requires all bars that serve alcohol to be gun-free zones.  You’re prohibited from bringing your legally owned gun with you even if you don’t drink.  There were also two armed security guards at the Pulse nightclub.

Pulse Nightclub. Image by Mirror Online
Pulse Nightclub. Image by Mirror Online

The murderer shot way through security to enter the nightclub.  He murdered unarmed victims for over three hours. 58 people were injured and 49 more were killed.  The murderer was finally stopped when police broke down the walls so that the surviving victims could escape from the club.

Disarming the victims was supposed to make them saver.  Background checks and gun-free zones failed again.

There was a mass murder at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina.  The racist murderer shot 9 black men and women. The murderer also left one person with non-fatal injuries during his 6 to 7 minute attack.  The murderer bought his handgun legally and passed a federal background check.

In 2015 when the attack took place, all churches in South Carolina were off limits to legally licensed concealed carriers.  There is an exception if the church governing board has granted prior permission to a licensed concealed carrier.  These victims were disarmed but the murderer wasn’t.

Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church
Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church

Also in 2015, a Muslim couple attacked their co-workers at a County Health Department Christmas party in San Bernardino, California.  California has some of the most restrictive gun-control laws in the US.  All legal gun owners have to pass a firearms safety test.  California gun owners can only buy one gun a month.  California state law limits the magazine capacity of firearms owned by civilians.  There is a 10-day waiting period after you buy a firearm before you may take possession of it.   The murderers passed their background checks performed by the California Department of Justice.

The guns they used in the attack were purchased legally.  The husband and wife couple killed 14 people and wounded 22 others during the attack.

Islamic Shooters Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook
Islamic Shooters Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook

The murders took place at the San Bernardino California Inland Regional Center.  This is a gun free zone under California law.  The victims were disarmed because they work in government offices.  They were disarmed because there is a school and daycare facility in the Regional Center complex.  The victims followed those firearms restrictions while the murderers ignored them.  There was no physical security to stop armed attackers from bringing weapons into the buildings, nor were armed security personnel pre-positioned across the campus.

A lone gunman killed his professor and 8 other students at the Umpqua Community College near Roseburg, Oregon.  9 other students were also injured.  Oregon state law requires a background check before civilians can purchase a handgun, the weapon used by the murderer.  The guns used in the murders were purchased legally by the murderer and his family.

The victims were unarmed.  Some of the students near the murder scene were gun owners, but they were not allowed to carry their legally owned firearms onto the campus.  The Umpqua Community College is a gun free zone under Oregon law.  Even the security guards are unarmed.

The murderer shot students for 11 minutes until he was finally shot by police.  I’m noticing a pattern here.  Are you?

The list goes on.  We could document the same factors involved at the Isla Vista murders near the University of California at Santa Barbara. There, 6 people were killed and 14 others were injured.

We might say that the murderer at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut was an exception.  He did not pass a background check. This murderer shot his mother in the head while she slept.  He murdered his mother in order to take her firearms and then attack a school.  The Connecticut mandatory background check law did not prevent her murder and the murder of 27 other victims.

There is still more than historical evidence that gun control fails.

We have evidence every night from Chicago, Baltimore, Newark and Los Angeles.  The ongoing failure of gun control only seems to goad the anti-rights gun-prohibitionists to demand more regulation of honest citizens.  Murderers don’t follow the law and submit to background checks.  Only their victims do.

Gun control fails, yet gun prohibitionists continue to call for more.  Their goal is not public safety but citizen disarmament. They want us disarmed, not the criminals.

Who are they helping when the gun-prohibitionists demand more gun laws?  By disarming honest citizens, we’ve might have reduced a few preventable gun accidents [already at record low numbers].  We produced unstoppable mass killer rampages instead. I don’t want my friends and family to be the next unarmed victims. Do you?

~_~_

About Rob Morse
The original article is here.  Rob Morse writes about gun rights at Ammoland, at Clash Daily and on his SlowFacts blog. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob is an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

38 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gowron

I guarantee you, a gun ban will never ever happen. The US Govt thrives on a controlled populous. The balance right now is very stable. 1 side cries for a ban, the Govt kinda feeds them what they wanna hear, but never follows through. Basically putting the pacifier back into the baby’s mouth. That way both sides (pro gun and anti gun) are happy to some extent, and will continue to be a part of the system… In short: Anti-gunners hear what they want, but never fully get what they want. Pro-gunners fear having the guns removed and constantly hear… Read more »

Jim Miner

We had alcohol control from 1919 to 1931. This created a very large BLACK MARKET for alcohol. Gun control will result in the same thing.. Guns will go underground and law abiding people will violate the stupid law

JohnB

If an area, building, etc. is declared a gun-free zone, either by state law or the policies of the management/owners, then they should be required by federal law of providing armed security. Take away peoples’ right to self-defense, as stated in the 2nd Amendment, then you are legally and morally responsible for providing that defense. I also think anyone shot or injured in a gun-free zone should sue the state or the management for failing to protect them.

JohnBored

If an area, building, etc. is declared a gun-free zone, either by state law or the policies of the management/owners, then they should be required by federal law of providing armed security. Take away peoples’ right to self-defense, as stated in the 2nd Amendment, then you are legally and morally responsible for providing that defense. I also think anyone shot or injured in a gun-free zone should sue the state or the management for failing to protect them.

oldshooter

I wholeheartedly agree with you in principle, and I agree about the moral responsibility part; however, it is unfortunately NOT (yet) the case that those who ban effective self defense (ie, guns) on their premises are LEGALLY responsible for any injury you might receive there because you were unable to defend yourself. At least one state is considering a bill that might make such private property owners legally responsible for those with a license to carry, who were NOT carrying because of the prohibition the proprietor imposed, if they are injured on the property. One major stumbling block is simply… Read more »

JohnBored

I know. Its the legal principle “assuming the risk.” Since they post a warning that firearms are not allowed you assume the risk of being there unarmed should you choose. However, not all establishments are optional patronage. Examples are grocery stores, hospitals, etc. You are also correct in that the remedy is at the state level.

Laddyboy

I ABSOLUTELY CONCUR!
I and others have been saying this for MANY years in Maryland. The State Police respond with: “We cannot do anything until after an incidence occurs.
As the SUPREME COURT judges once stated: “The Police are not responsible in keeping One free from harm. Each person is responsible for their own safety.”

VE Veteran - Old Man's Club

All a gun free zone does is make a large area with disarmed mobile targets in it. As far as the people who designated it as a gun free zone providing your security – that is a sketchy proposition at best. “Self defense is a primal law of nature which I have not surrendered to any other entity by caveat, nor would I if I could” – John Adams I tend not to frequent gun free zones. “For those that will fight for it…FREEDOM …has a flavor the protected shall never know.” Semper Fi! — L/Cpl Edwin L. “Tim” Craft,… Read more »

Conservative in Exile

Mr. Morse, While I agree with your sentiment and the tone of your article you totally blew it in regard to Oregon Law. It is legal to carry on a college campus in Oregon if you are a concealed carry permittee. While you are correct that Umqua Community College had a gun free policy and that their code of student conduct did not allow the carry of firearms by students or Faculty it was not state law that caused the tragedy there. While it was a defacto “gun free zone” by virtue of policy, it was not a “gun free… Read more »

Hardy Spires

I agree with you 100%. If they are going to take away the right to carry in their establishment they should be responsible for your safety if somebody came in with a gun and started shooting. I feel the same way about the mayor’s that are declaring their cities to be sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. If an illegal causes bodily harm to somebody in that city they should be tried as an accomplice to the crime. Also all of the judges that are stopping President Trump from banning all immigration from certain countries that have terror connections. Let them… Read more »

davida

question is “What Would Happen if Gun Grabbers Got the Gun Control They Really Wanted? every publicly admited anti gunner should be 1. removed from office, 2. disqualified from any office, and 3. all charged , for not upholding there swarn oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution from all enimeys forien and demestic they have admitted to treasion in effect.. and this should not be tolerated. it sure as hell is a subversive act that needs to be criminalized . the only right they have is to decied for themselves not to own guns if they chose… Read more »

Greg Chinn

It would be called Chicago, but wouldn’t save any lives.

oldshooter

It is entirely predictable that several specific things would occur soon after the general disarming of the law-abiding civilian population: 1) The black market in guns of all types would explode into an enormous market, and it would be a market with NO controls on the type of guns sold, or the people who bought them. This has occurred everywhere govts have banned guns so far. 2) The violent crime rate would skyrocket, as it did in the UK following their draconian gun regulations. “Law-abiding” people would be at the mercy of anyone bigger, stronger, more aggressive, or more willing… Read more »

John Dunlap

With the exception of number 6, this is exactly the world the political class is trying to create. Well, recreate, actually.The state of affairs you describe has been the norm for most of recorded history. Concepts such as inalienable rights and the rule of law are an impediment to their God complex. The truly powerful in this world couldn’t care less what we peons do, or to whom we do it, so long as we don’t have the means to defy them, or the knowledge to know that we can and should. As with the so called war on drugs… Read more »

Hardy Spires

I was working for the prison system in Georgia when they decided to take tobacco out of the prisons. Instead of doing what they intended to do (totally remove all tobacco products) they instead created an environment that made it even more valuable. It created a black market system where it became more valuable than the illegal drugs. They have more problems now from trying to keep it out of the population than when they were selling it on the inmate stores. They now have inmates that are willing to hurt or kill other inmates. The taxpayers are paying for… Read more »

Vanns40

The title was nice but I don’t believe the author ever really answered the question or even addressed it. Instead he simply rehashed examples of past mass shootings where people broke the law. If he had, indeed, written an actual story about what a disarmed society would look like in the United States it would be something that could take one of two turns; either a Mad Max delve into total chaos or a totalitarian Govt. that rules with absolute authority. Anything in between would likely resemble modern day Venezuela. Violence Policy Center Troll Gil is left with promoting one,… Read more »

Charlie Smith

Sandy Hoax is not an exception, as it did not happen. If you think I’m just being a conspiracy theorist, do yourself a favor, and google “Adam Lanza” and see how many different pictures you can find of him. There’s only the one CGI of him. Or you could spend all day on YouTube being introduced to all the B rate actors who starred in the production. Be for-warned, this may take you down a rabbit hole you didn’t want to go down. If our own “government” is capable of this, what else are they capable of?

Larry Brickey

Maybe you’re a hoax. Go talk to the moms and dads who’s kids were killed. Then talk about hoaxes.

Dr. Strangelove

Tell it to the dead children.

Daniel

I trll my wife that is why it is called concealed when she points out a sign stating no firearms allowed.
If it says no concealed firearms allowed I say lets find the one that is responsible for our protection and get him or her to sing a paper that them will be responsible for our safety..
I win my argument she will not trust someone she does not know the level ot the training they have with her safety.

Wild Bill

@Daniel, What? You say that you win your argument with your wife. Can you send me the complete instructions, if I send you a stamped and self addressed envelope… please?

marc disabled vet

@wb
It’s not hard to win an argument like that when you’ve trained them
how to be safe yourself ! my wife trust’s me and herself !PERIOD !
she carries at all times ,sign or no sign ,other than federal buildings.
They don’t play well with others.

Darren

Gun rights haters want the govt thugs to be the only ones with guns. Don’t help them by being so supportive of the police & military. If you really want liberty you need to advocate disarming the govt. Otherwise, be sure to thank that cop for his service when he comes to take you & your guns away.

VE Veteran - Old Man's Club

If this scenario ever played out it would be a “See you at the gates to the Concentration Camp”. The leftist are just Communists under the guise of “caring for the public good”. As for me, I won’t give up what I got. Live free or die – there are worse evils in this world.” It is better to die on your feet as a free man than to live on your knees as a slave.

Abraham Collins

Umpqua was not a gun free zone. There was even a concealed carrier on campus, legally. He wasn’t in the right building to respond, but he was still there. Report the facts, Ammoland, don’t be the CNN of the gun community.

Gryfdaddy

Not a gun free zone? So the state law somehow doesn’t apply? Please elucidate. The presence of a concealed carrier on campus is similar to the presence of state police in the nest town- irrelevant. If the victims did not have the option of self defense, their rights were infringed.

Gil

Yet the U.S. has the most shooting incidents for a first world nation go figure. Heck a mass shooting is only news when it doesn’t occur in the U.S.

Darren

Good old Gil, The US also has the largest population in the developed world. That might have something to do with it. What we don’t have is the most mass shootings per capita nor do we have the most deaths by mass shootings per capita. https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/ Oops! We’re the 3rd largest population in the entire world. Yet we’re number 8 in deaths by murder. Our murder rate ranks us 94th in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country If guns were the cause of murder we’d be #1 in both categories since we are #1 in the number of guns in civilian hands. (Yay!)… Read more »

2A Defender

And don’t forget to mention the fact that if you remove the cities like Chicago, Baltimore, New Orleans (the ones with the strictest gun control laws) those numbers go down even more. I like the way Gil there cherry picks his statistics, good try there troll boy!

Laddyboy

Darren says we are among the top ranking. I beg to differ. IF three(3) State cities were removed from the reported death-by-gun-shot, America would be among the LOWEST ranking in shot-by-gun-deaths. IE: Chicago being the worse offender. Plus all of these WORSE States ARE DemocRAT-ick controlled.

Darren

No lad you misread my comment. We’re #1 in gun ownership only.

Laddyboy

I agree that Americans own the most weapons per private person around the world. I was referring to the number of people that were slaughtered.

Darren

Laddy, in that we’re #8

Vanns40

VPC TROLL

Ostlander

Take away Democratically controlled piss holes like Chicago, Detroit, St Louis, Camden, N.J. Seattle, Los Angeles and New Orleans and the USA falls near the bottom of civilized nations for homicide. What does that say about you, your half truths and Marxist ideology Gil?

Roy D.

The “gun grabbers” like having guns in the public’s hands. As long as they are in the hands of the criminal element. This allows them to make the rest of the public more dependent on them. That is power and the real end game. As a side note on the above article the quote, “He murdered unarmed victims for over three hours.”, is something the Police and City officials do not want the public to know and has been greatly downplayed in almost all the coverage of the incident. The public is on its own for a time period of… Read more »

notalima

“What Would Happen if Gun Grabbers Got the Gun Control They Really Wanted?”

Their end-goal is complete civilian disarmament. They know their incremental goals with do nothing. It is just a bus stop along the way to complete civilian disarmament. ‘Nuff said.