Gun control is necessary, we’re told because bad people keep getting guns. The argument is that if law-abiding citizens have to jump through more and more hoops, then that difficulty will trickle down to criminals and they’ll eventually be disarmed.

Or something to that effect.

The truth is, that’s an inane idea, especially from people who laugh at the term “trickle-down economics.” At least that idea involves wealthy people investing their money, creating jobs, and can actually make sense if you listen.

The idea that people who steal their guns or buy them on the black market will be inhibited by laws that only make things difficult for regular folks doesn’t.

Especially when you look at San Diego, California. A recent arrest there illustrates that stupidity perfectly.

San Diego Police Department narcotics detectives served a search warrant at a home in the 1000 block of 28th Street just before noon. Detectives said they had “probable cause that 45-year-old Willie Tagaloa and his wife, 49-year-old Rosie Tagaloa, were selling drugs.”

After obtaining the warrant, investigators searched their home
and two cars. During the search they found 1.6 pounds of fentanyl, a loaded handgun that had been reported stolen, scales money, packaging and four replica guns, SDPD said.

So much for gun control, right?

Remember that California has restrictive gun control laws on the books, laws meant to keep guns out of the hands of people like this. They clearly didn’t do a whole lot.

Then again, neither did the laws against selling fentanyl, either.

Let’s remember that drugs are as heavily restricted as guns in their own way. If restrictions really worked to keep them out of the hands of unauthorized parties, we wouldn’t have an opioid epidemic or so many armed criminals.

And yet, here we are.

It’s almost like trying to change behavior simply by creating laws just flat-out doesn’t work.

Look, I’m not saying we don’t need laws. Some things are just wrong and those who commit those acts clearly deserve to be punished.

Yet laws aren’t really good at deterring people from certain behaviors. That especially includes gun laws.

The reason is that most criminals just don’t think they’re going to get caught. If they did, they probably wouldn’t commit the crime in the first place.

Because they’re so sure they won’t get caught, they aren’t going to be deterred by the potential penalties. That includes the penalties for obtaining a stolen gun, having an illegal gun, selling a gun illegally, any of that.

Just like they sell fentanyl despite knowing just how much law enforcement is taking opioids seriously.

If you want to curb crime, especially violent crime, restricting guns won’t cut it. You’ve got to circumvent the desire to carry out a violent crime, otherwise the best you can hope for is that they’ll use a different weapon. Unfortunately, as this case illustrates, even that wouldn’t do enough.

Restrictive laws did nothing to stop this one from getting a stolen gun and a buttload of fentanyl. How long before anti-gunners recognize that reality?