In a recently released video from Prager U, Fordham University professor at law Nicholas Johnson shares the truth about common sense gun control, gun buybacks and assault weapons.
Gun control advocates, and recently rejected presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, love to tout Australia’s model of gun control as an option to end gun violence in America. The only problem is, that’s like comparing apples to watermelons.
Here are the top five reasons Professor Johnson gives to explain why the Australian model of gun control would never work here in the United States of America:
- America would never support a nationwide gun ban. Even if you set aside the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, which protects our God-given right to self defense by guaranteeing our right to keep and bear arms, conservative states (like Texas) would stand up and fight such a broad infringement.
- Focussing on “scary guns” or an assault weapons ban does little to curb gun violence. 80% of gun crimes are committed using handguns.
- Gun confiscation never works as expected. Typically, only one third of citizens will obey this restrictive gun control initiative. Studies show that once guns are banned legally, they quickly turn up in the black market. Making background checks, universal or otherwise, grossly .
- Currently, it is estimated there are 325 million (or more) firearms in the United States, making us the country to have amassed this impressive level of gun ownership. Therefore, it’s statistically impossible for any gun control model to able to be effective
- If supply controls are the answer, gun control advocates need to outline the supply-side policies they propose will end gun violence while substantiating how the policy will also allow lawful gun owners to keep firearms. But that gun control logic just doesn’t add up – and they end up blaming the gun lobby, which is, ironically, comprised of law-abiding citizens who oppose gun control.