South Africa isn't a great place to visit. It was once upon a time, but things have gone downhill for a long time and now it's just another African hellhole.

But they've got a ton of gun control on the books there--the likes of which would never fly here in the United States. In fact, some are so bad that even California hasn't tried them. Not yet, anyway.

None of that prevented a recent massacre in Gauteng that left 18 people dead.

Just like what would happen here, though, some are calling for more gun control.

• Experts have noted the urgency of implementing stricter gun control in the country after recent incidents
• This was after 18 people were massacred in Lusikisiki in the Eastern Cape, and four people were killed in Orange Farm in Gauteng
• South Africans held a discussion online about the experts' suggestions and shared various views

Is gun control an issue?

SABC News reported that the organisation's researcher, Claire Taylor, called on the government to intervene in the country's unlicensed firearms crisis. This call came after 18 people were murdered in cold blood in Lusikisiki in the Eastern Cape recently.

Taylor said the organisation called for two interventions and noted that 33 people are shot dead daily. They called for a firearms unit whose purpose is to recover and destroy illegal firearms. They also called for more efforts to prevent licensed guns from falling into the wrong hands.

Now, there are limits on how many guns South Africans can own. They also must have a gun safe. To buy a gun, they need to undergo mandatory training and pass a written test on the nation's gun control laws. Further, a separate license is required for each firearm purchased, but only up to four because that's the limit.

Despite all of that, they've got a massive problem with violence and this massacre is just the most recent and bloody note.

First, this should serve as a lesson to anti-gunners here in the United States. Many of these measures would never survive constitutional challenges through the federal courts. There's absolutely no way they'd ever be allowed to stand. That means even more restrictive measures wouldn't be allowed, either.

Yet they didn't stop a brutal massacre from taking place.

They also don't prevent people from calling for more.

The above-linked article includes people calling for door-to-door confiscation of firearms, for example, never realizing that if people can get guns illegally, they can just get more guns. 

See, that's what anti-gun advocates don't seem to understand about the issues with violent crime. They're so absolutely convinced that guns are the problem that they can't understand why we say it's a people issue.

"But if people can't get guns, they can't murder others so easily."

Maybe, but unless you address the people issue, you're never going to deny them guns in the first place.

I'm not saying denying guns to ordinary people is desirable or beneficial, mind you. I vehemently disagree with all gun control laws. I should be able to have a fully armed and loaded tank in my driveway, after all. What I'm saying is that even if it were, just focusing on guns would be a losing proposition.

South Africa, like many places, did just that for many years, and what have they gotten?

Not much of anything except a population that's largely unable to defend itself from the violence plaguing the country. Despite that, though, some want more of what has failed completely.

It's good to know some things are universal.