Gun Control Legislation promises to reduce gun crime, after all, if there are less guns in peoples possession there should be less gun crimes right? Wrong. This weeks ‘K’s Law’ will explore the how and the why Gun Control Legislation does the EXACT OPPOSITE of reducing gun crime.

There is a difference between armed criminals and armed law-abiding citizens. The key distinction is the term “law-abiding”. A criminal doesn’t care what laws are on the books about guns. If he wants a gun, he’ll get one regardless of the law.

“But thats why we need gun laws to make it harder for criminals to buy guns!” The reality is criminals don’t buy their guns from “law-abiding” businesses either. They buy them from other criminals who thumb their nose at the law. All gun control laws do is discourage “law-abiding” citizens from owning guns. Which is a scary thing. As the law-abiding citizenry is disarmed it makes it even easier for criminals to perpetrate gun crime.

The truth is, guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens stop more gun violence than anything else. Sometimes all that is necessary is to show that you have a gun, and a ‘would-be’ gun crime is over before it starts. Of course, we seldom hear about these situations because how many ‘crimes’ are reported that never happened?

A criminal fears an armed victim much more than the police. The police are trained to use deadly force only as a last resort while the victim of theft or rape will move to protect themselves immediately. When a criminal knows his victim may be armed he will most likely move on to easier prey. He’ll go where he knows there are no guns, like schools, no carry zones and areas with strict gun control laws.

Once again, we see K’s Law in action. Well intended gun control laws actually result in MORE gun crime not less.