Should We Ban Guns, Minorities or Australia?

Monday, 26 Aug 2013 03:21 PM

By Denis Kleinfeld

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
The murder of Australian Christopher Lane allegedly by three minority youths in Oklahoma has again highlighted some highly controversial issues that have dramatically impacted the social and economic balance in the United States.

An opinion piece in The Washington Post by Julia Baird used the death to make the point that gun availability was the "real issue."

It is undeniable that billions of dollars have been spent by all levels of government and political groups to deal with the openly hostile divergent points of view and beliefs regarding guns and minority-involved crime.

In the Trayvon Martin case, the spin was that it wasn't a gun issue, but a race issue. The fact that race played absolutely no part in the trial was irrelevant to the race-baiting profiteers.

The murder of Christopher Lane has a clear racial component and perhaps the dominant cause.

Baird is currently writing from Sydney, Australia, but was based in the United States until 2011 working as a columnist and deputy editor for Newsweek. Her article acknowledges that Australia does not have a Bill of Rights or a constitutional right to bear arms.

Nonetheless, she makes the logical fallacy of still comparing Australian attitude toward gun ownership — where 90 percent of the public approve of stricter gun laws — to the United States — where arms are ingrained as the fundamental liberty that makes all our other rights enforceable.

According to GunPolicy.org, which Baird cites, Australia's gun homicide rate is but a fraction of that of the United States.

Again, it is another fallacious comparison.

According to GunPolicy.org research, the top five countries with the highest gun homicides are South Africa, El Salvador, Swaziland, Belize and Guatemala. The last five includes the United States, which is right before Barbados.

Curiously, Palestine is listed after Barbados. Palestine?

Places like Gaza, Iraq, Libya, Chad, Yemen, Lebanon and Algeria, to name but a few, may be too politically incorrect to list.

Of the 25 highest-income countries, the top five in gun murders are the United States, Israel, Taiwan, Italy and Switzerland. Although, I must confess that I am lost as to what is informative other than the high income and gun murders are coincidences and not correlated.

The demographic differences between the two lists are quite dramatic.

The first list includes countries almost exclusively populated by what is by definition in the United States minorities. The second list is of countries that are viewed predominately as non-minority.

Bringing this home, what can be observed as to demographics and gun murder rates in cities in the United States?

Recognizing that bigger cities likely have more gun murders than smaller ones do, to be accurate it is better to determine what cities have the highest gun murder rate per 100,000 in population rather than use absolute numbers.

The top five for those honors go to New Orleans; Memphis, Tenn.; Detroit; Birmingham, Ala., and St. Louis.

As for the cities with the highest gun murders per 100,000 persons aged 10 to 19, the top five are New Orleans, Kansas City, Memphis, St. Louis and San Francisco (followed by Detroit and Chicago.)

Unquestionably, these are all cities whose demographics contain a high proportion of legally classified minorities.

This means that here correlation and causation can be concluded between the gun murder rate and the demographics of a high minority population.

What conclusions should you draw from all these observations of mine?

Baird seems to think that Australia does not have a minority problem, but still has a gun problem.

The United States is the opposite. Guns are not a problem. Legal gun ownership by Americans is the cornerstone upon which this country has been built.

You cannot say you truly have constitutional rights unless you can, if need be, enforce them even against the government.

However, illegal gun ownership by minorities is an obvious societal, political and, consequently, economic dilemma.

Banning the constitutional right of private ownership of guns is not the issue in the United States.

To artificially divide people into the majority and minority for political, ideological or feel good reasons is to demean and diminish both.

Dividing and distinguishing people this way has no benefit to either group. It only has benefit to politicians, profiteers and the delusional.

What is the critical issue for the United States?

It is, how will the United Stans become a country where government policy is to treat everyone as an equal and no one is categorized or classified as anything less?

Gun ownership is a basic right for Americans. Equality before the government should be the same.

There is an old saying about the value of gun ownership. It is that God created man, but only Samuel Colt made them equal.

© 2014 Moneynews. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web

Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Retype Email:
Country
Zip Code:
 
You May Also Like
Around the Web

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

MONEYNEWS.COM
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved