Looser gun laws a dangerous precedent

[gunsmith]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/223079_sanchez06.html
Looser gun laws a dangerous precedent
MARCELA SANCHEZ
SYNDICATED COLUMNIST

WASHINGTON -- A word of advice to Latin Americans traveling to Florida in the near future: Be on your absolute best behavior. Keep a smile on your face and lest any gesture you make appears as a threat, keep your hands in your pockets. Then again, don't. You'd better keep them out in the open where they can be seen.

Last week, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush signed the so-called Castle Doctrine, making it lawful for Floridians to "meet force with force, including deadly force" when they feel physically threatened. The law continues Florida's pursuit of armed self-defense as a fundamental right, championed most notably in its 1987 law allowing Floridians to carry concealed weapons.

While this new law may seem common-sensical to many U.S. citizens -- one should be able to fight back when threatened -- it is hard for Latin Americans to wrap their minds around the general notion that liberalizing the use of weapons increases personal safety. In Latin America, those who carry weapons are police, military and outlaws. Unfortunately, it has sometimes been hard to tell them apart.

In polls across the region, personal safety and the protection of one's property are among Latin Americans' top concerns today. But unlike the United States, where 38 states now have laws permitting concealed weapons, Latin American governments are heading in a different direction.

The most restrictive is Brazil, which adopted in December 2003 a so-called disarmament statute, a sweeping gun law that bans the carrying of firearms by civilians. The country is planning for a nationwide referendum in October to ban private firearm ownership altogether.

Mexico is the second-most restrictive country with its "de facto" prohibition of the purchase of firearms, according to Pablo Dreyfus of Viva Rio, a firearms research group based in Rio de Janeiro. Since the 1970s, Mexico has issued virtually no licenses for such purchases, leaving people with little option other than resorting to illegal means to obtain them.

In fact, small arms are widely available on the black market, and there are more small-arms fatalities south of the U.S. border than in any other region of the world. The number of firearm homicides in Latin America is "five times higher than the world average," according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey project. (The rate of firearm deaths in the United States is less than three times the world average.)

Brazil heads the world's list for the most people killed by firearms (38,088 in 2002) while Colombia has the dubious honor of highest per-capita gun deaths (55.7 per 100,000 residents in 2002). Still, few in these countries would claim, as pro-gun lobbyists forcefully do in this country, that allowing citizens to bear arms would deter these fatal crimes.

To the contrary, promoting firearms in a country such as Colombia would bring a "disastrous" increase in homicides, said Alfredo Rangel, a security analyst and former adviser to the country's defense ministry. The reason is simple, he said: As long as impunity remains rampant and laws are scarcely enforced, people will use weapons irresponsibly.

Clearly, the popularity of gun ownership and a powerful gun lobby make protecting and expanding gun rights far more feasible in the United States than in Latin America. But, more profoundly, the disparity can be understood (like so many North/South disparities) in terms of haves and have-nots: The United States has a strong rule of law and Latin America does not.

The "Castle Doctrine" in Florida is, in fact, a strange testament to this disparity. Here, the rule of law appears so resilient the government is willing to grant individual citizens the right, in a life or death situation, to act as judge and jury. The underlying belief is that gun-toting U.S. citizens suddenly won't turn into killers because of this law.

Meanwhile, Latin America has no such luxury. There, governments must assume they would only be aiding those who would commit violent acts by liberalizing gun ownership and usage.

Latin Americans should take my travel warning with a grain of salt and not hesitate to make their next visit to Florida. It is, after all, a state of laws.

However, I wonder, might there come a time when the proliferation of gun liberalization laws undermines the very thing that makes them tenable? Might such a proliferation engender more fear and distrust of one another and undermine common civility? If so, the U.S. rule of law may start to look like something that, sad to say, Latin Americans know too well.
Marcela Sanchez's e-mail address is [email protected]

 

[pwolfman]

sooo....The whole premise of the article is that latin american people who come to the states for freedom and the oportunity for a better life better watch out for some citizen that will protect themselves if they are presented with deadly force? Is the author trying to say we should be sensitive to the culture of latin america and to realize that latin americans can not fathom the concept of using firearms for self defense?

Welcome to America...learn the culture...

 

[El Tejon]

More wishful thinking from the Left. Boo hoo hoo, why can't the U.S. be like those enlightened areas like the slums of Rio where the police commit crimes, including murders, the poor riot and the wealthy sit on the hills surrounded by private armed security guards and cluck their tongues and plot to disarm the middle class to ensure the power of the elite.

Wait a tick! I just described California!

 

[ksnecktieman]

I think Marcella should read what she says are facts, and consider what she states as opinion, they seem to clash. Did she not just tell people visiting Florida to act like nice people, and they will be treated like nice people?

Consider this. In Florida with a generous permitting system when two people accidentally bump into each other on the sidewalk, one or both of them will say "Excuse me, Sir." In Jersey, or New York city, when two guys bump on the sidewalk, one or both of them will say "GD, you clumsy MF, watch where you are going."

Does anyone think that maybe the sci fi writer Heinlien nailed it when he said "An armed society is a polite society."?

 

[CZ 75 BD]

ksnecktieman

+1

 

[dolanp]

*** is she smoking? She just disproved her own wild theory. Brazil bans all guns, Brazil has the most people killed by firearms. Hmm, if they are 'banned' then how are so many people getting killed with them?

Didn't think that one through did you missy?

 

[Henry Bowman]

In Latin America, those who carry weapons are police, military and outlaws.

I.e., a liberal utopia.

it is hard for Latin Americans to wrap their minds around the general notion that liberalizing the use of weapons increases personal safety.

Keep trying. Eventually your mind will be flexible enough to actually think.

To the contrary, promoting firearms in a country such as Colombia would bring a "disastrous" increase in homicides, said Alfredo Rangel, a security analyst and former adviser to the country's defense ministry. The reason is simple, he said: As long as impunity remains rampant and laws are scarcely enforced, people will use weapons irresponsibly.

Especially if the impunity is reinforced by the defenselessness of the victims.

Here, the rule of law appears so resilient the government is willing to grant individual citizens the right, in a life or death situation, to act as judge and jury. The underlying belief is that gun-toting U.S. citizens suddenly won't turn into killers because of this law.

What??If someone is trying to kill you, there is no time for gather a judge, jury and executioner to come to your aid. Your actions will, however, be scrutinized after the fact to be sure that what you did was just and, if not, you will be held accountable.

Meanwhile, Latin America has no such luxury. There, governments must assume they would only be aiding those who would commit violent acts by liberalizing gun ownership and usage.

Those government don't have to make that assumption. They choose to because it supports and maintains their corrupt character.

However, I wonder, might there come a time when the proliferation of gun liberalization laws undermines the very thing that makes them tenable? Might such a proliferation engender more fear and distrust of one another and undermine common civility? If so, the U.S. rule of law may start to look like something that, sad to say, Latin Americans know too well.

So far the facts show the opposite. But, let's give it a try!

The law continues Florida's pursuit of armed self-defense as a fundamental right

Here, the rule of law appears so resilient the government is willing to grant individual citizens the right,

Which is it? A fundamental right or one granted by the government? I think I know what this author thinks.

In Latin America, those who carry weapons are police, military and outlaws. Unfortunately, it has sometimes been hard to tell them apart.

Do we really have to explain this to you?

The most restrictive is Brazil, which adopted in December 2003 a so-called disarmament statute, a sweeping gun law that bans the carrying of firearms by civilians. The country is planning for a nationwide referendum in October to ban private firearm ownership altogether.

Brazil heads the world's list for the most people killed by firearms (38,088 in 2002)

It's so convenient the way you supply all of the facts necessary to defeat your own argument.

 

[MechAg94]

In Latin America, those who carry weapons are police, military and outlaws.

That is the difference between Citizens and Peasants.

 

[MechAg94]

Brazil heads the world's list for the most people killed by firearms (38,088 in 2002) while Colombia has the dubious honor of highest per-capita gun deaths (55.7 per 100,000 residents in 2002). Still, few in these countries would claim, as pro-gun lobbyists forcefully do in this country, that allowing citizens to bear arms would deter these fatal crimes.

Personally, I think giving every person in Columbia an assault rifle and ammo would solve their problems pretty quickly.

 

[org]

I read the whole thing (twice) and I guess I missed something. For the Washington Post, it was a remarkably balanced article. The author reported what's going on south of the border and even admitted people there are left with no choice but to obtain guns on the black market. She also admitted there's little to distinguish between the governments there and the outlaws. She even implied the governments fear their population, therefore the restrictions. She even advised taking her original advice to latins visiting FL be taken with a grain of salt, since it is a state of laws.

The idea that all it would take to fix the problems of latin america is a few more guns doesn't seem right, since there are plenty of guns there already...just not legal ones. The difference in the people living there and here is that we in the US are very touchy about our government overstepping and we make it clear at the ballot box (and if that doesn't work, we'd probably take more drastic measures). The people down there are so used to being told what to do that they accept it generally without question, for the most part. Until that changes, no inanimate object will make any difference.

 

[MechAg94]

I am right there with you org, sort of. Giving them all guns probably would help solve the problems, but it would be bloody. I serously doubt all the poor hard working honest types actually have guns.

Many of the govts/cultures down there are still operating under the same principles as the Spanish Colonial rule. The upper class controls the govt and keeps the poor down. They tolerate the criminals since the crime lords are essentailly the same type people. This view ignores a lot of good people, but I bet it is not far from the truth. Not sure how they will make a lasting change.

 

[P95Carry]

In fact, small arms are widely available on the black market, and there are more small-arms fatalities south of the U.S. border than in any other region of the world. The number of firearm homicides in Latin America is "five times higher than the world average," according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey project. (The rate of firearm deaths in the United States is less than three times the world average.)

So - proof IMO if any were needed, that control of law abiding folk's gun possession really does little to help! BG's always find a way.

Sounds like a great deal more of shere ''control'' - can't have upright and responsible folks having guns - dangerous - and a threat to the Gov! So - whilst the BG's continue (and always will) to aquire thru black market - the legal folks have about zero rightful means of self defence - and so it goes on. The U.S. has to be the last bastion of common sense, where a legal right to carry does NOT produce the ''rivers of blood'' ... far from it.

The Brazil referendum for banning, in October - foregone conclusion!! It'll get all the sheeple and anti support needed - guaranteed. They'll be oh so ''safe'' with all the guns ''off the streets'' - ah but - what about the bad guys? Oops - funny - they won't even notice, except their victims will be more surely unarmed.

 

[SJG26]

"A word of advice to Latin Americans traveling to Florida in the near future: Be on your absolute best behavior. Keep a smile on your face and lest any gesture you make appears as a threat, keep your hands in your pockets. Then again, don't. You'd better keep them out in the open where they can be seen."

Damn right - and African-Americans, Irish-Americans, Polish-Americans( ), and every (insert-ethnic-origin-here)-American there is. Make it apply to ALL visitors - the world would be a safer/happier place.

 

[Mark13]

South of the border, you have a class system of haves and have-nots. There's a reason it's called the "third world". In the USA, Communists are something of a joke, we point and laugh, and it's all fun. There, the communists have small armies in the hills and kidnap and terrorize people. Then you have the drug lords and their armies.

You can't compare our culture and system of laws to theirs, and you can't compare our firearms privileges to theirs.

 

[NHBB]

if she wasn't such a rabid anti-gunner, I would almost feel embarrassed for her by the fact she penned that write up... sounds like a brainwashed 6th grader or something.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Actually, it is a pretty good article up until the very end where she has to get her anti- feels out. She gives a good argument on how the stronger gun laws south of the border actually promote more gun crimes while the wide availability of firearms in the US tends to decrease gun crimes. She then points out how US laws are very rigid on the use of force while south of the border, pretty much anything goes.

While trying to be sarcastic, she makes one of the most correct comments of her article, "The underlying belief is that gun-toting U.S. citizens suddenly won't turn into killers because of this law."

Then she jumps of the cliff by implying that somehow, Florida would be more dangerous for visiting Latinos than living in their own countries with high murder rates.

 

[Don Gwinn]

The Brazilians won't wake up until they ban Zhoo ZHEET Zu.

 

[Plumber576]

Well, good thing this si America, and we don't have to worry about alws in "Latin America."

Whoever wrote this article should have a stern talking to.

 

[jazurell]

My e-mail to Marcela...doubt she'll have the courage to have it published...

Marcela Sanchez,
I think you have law abiding, CCW permit holding, carrying gun owners confused with criminals. Please do some research before you write. If you had done so, you would have found that the law permits law abiding citizen to protect themselves. Had you done research, you also would have found that the incidence of crime among CCW permit holders is something in the nature of .005% where as the general population has a crime rate of 5%. CCW permit holders are some of the most law abiding citizens in this country. Many CCW permit holders are much better marksmen than LEOs. The CCW permit holders tend to practice more often that the one or two times a year the LEOs have to qualify on the range. In a life-death situation, I'd much rather be standing next to a CCW permit holder that practices often, than an non-practicing LEO. You would also have found that people protect themselves with guns some where in the ratio of 5 to 10 times more often than they are victimized....without discharging their weapon. (The press doesn't like to print those statistics.)
Unless you have a closed mind when it comes to guns, take some time, go through a CCW class, hang out at a local gun club, go to a couple IDPA (International Defense Pistol Association) matches and gain in understanding of the real life situations. You may come through the exercise with a whole different point of view. Carrying a gun is not for everyone. But please, don't editorialize against those that do wish to do so without learning more about them. It's not about offense, it's about defense.

 

[El Tejon]

Don, in the case of this possibility, I have stockpiled blue gis and sideburn trimmers.

 

[jefnvk]

I can never understand why:

1) If these people think other countries are much better places to live, why they don't go?

or

2) Why they feel that we have to change our laws to make immigrants feel better?

I would be wiling to bet that most immigrants don't want the laws changed to be like their home country, else they would hav stayed there.

 

[FPrice]

In Latin America, those who carry weapons are police, military and outlaws. Unfortunately, it has sometimes been hard to tell them apart.

Sounds like the problem is people, especially those in positions of authority.

 

[akviper]

Yes, the homocide rate would probably go up for a while if the sheeple armed themselves and fought back. I guess it's acceptable for the bad guys to kill people but unacceptable for the victims to fight back. What a world!

 

[thorn726]

what a strange article.
so if everyone had guns, people wouldnt be forced to think twice before trying to rob/mug people?

we are safer when corrupt LE's are the only ones with guns? i dont get it.

that latinos are used to making people get so angry that they will be suprised to see a gun pointed at them when they start annoying Americans?

very strange message

"Excuse me, Sir." In Jersey, or New York city, when two guys bump on the sidewalk, one or both of them will say "GD, you clumsy MF, watch where you are going."

HEY=- but the thing is, in NY "you clumsy..." means the same thing as
"oh excuse me" means in Georiga! - in other words, neither ends in an actual fight.
unless of course yer in a bar , then in any state it can be a fight

 

[Standing Wolf]

...might there come a time when the proliferation of gun liberalization laws undermines the very thing that makes them tenable? Might such a proliferation engender more fear and distrust of one another and undermine common civility?

Yeah, and what if the sun suddenly starts to rise in the west, too?

Leftists are such dunces!