The anti-gun arguments presume that the state is morally superior to individuals.
Even though they seldom say it explicitly, the gun control proponents believe that average people are too violent and erratic to hold guns.
They want the government – the state – to take our guns away because
only the state is responsible enough to handle serious weapons.
There is, however, a gigantic problem with this: States are far more dangerous than individuals.
That’s a demonstrable fact, by the way, not merely an opinion. I ran the numbers, and it isn’t even close.
According to the UN’s statistics, total number homicides in which
guns were involved in 2010 (or the most recent year reported) were
93,414.
I am as sure as I can be that those numbers are juiced – I have too
much experience with the UN (another set of stories, for another day) to think that they left their agendas outside as they crunched these
numbers – and I am going to ignore the inclusion of thousands of deaths
in Mexico and other places that should be attributed to the US War on
Drugs. I’ll accept the numbers as they are.
So, let’s say that guns are legitimately and primarily involved in
all of these 93,414 cases. Maybe you think that’s a pretty bad argument
for the moral superiority of individuals. But if so, take a deep breath
and gather your moral courage. You ready?
The death rate for states is more than 20 times as high.
This figure has been well-documented, by the way. If you want to check it, start with political scientist R.J. Rummel’s Book, Death By Government. (The actual figure may be higher than 200 million.)
So, 93,414 x 100 = 9,341,400 people killed with guns over a century.
That’s a bad number, but it’s less than 1/20th of the 200 million who
were killed by governments.