The Logic Lifeline

A logical approach to sorting out world events. Where logic, opinion and speculation are combined to produce a reasoned, but entertaining reading experience. The unofficial hometown conservative blog of Woodridge, Il

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Time to lift the facade

During the Reagan and Bush '41 years we heard a lot about the homeless and other social ills. The day William Jefferson Blythe Clinton (who downed Bush '41 for having 4 names during the campaign) these social ills miraculously disappeared. The homeless problem was non-existent for 8 years until Bush '43 took office and you immediately started hearing about it again.

Look for the same thing to happen in Canada. Just a few weeks back, all reports I ever heard gave the impression of Utopia on every front. Why don't we handle our crime like Canada? Why don't we handle health care and prescription drugs like Canada? On and on. Canada was the prime location liberals threatened to move to if Bush won a second term.

As NewsMax is reporting, now that conservatives have won the election, suddenly the facade is evaporating before our eyes. Apparently their crime rate is 50% higher than in the US. Look to the liberal media in both countries to begin making political hay out of this and begin to blame the conservative takeover. Of course they will wait a reasonable time period so it is not so obvious, but take it to the bank: it will come.

Of course outgoing loser Paul Martin is blaming Bush, the US and guns he claims are being smuggled over from the US. NewsMax points out the real story. Quoting David Frum in a National Post article, a contrast is shown between the US and Canada regarding gun policy and the crime rates:

"Moreover, this shift in crime rates between the two countries has occurred while dozens of U.S. states have adopted ‘right-to-carry’ and ‘shall-issue’ handgun laws. During the same period, Canada’s gun laws have gotten more restrictive, with the national gun registry being implemented,” he added.

"Since declaring war on guns under former Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Canada's Liberals have presided over the sharpest rise in violent crime in the nation’s history.”

So we see yet again that guns in the hands of private citizens acts as a deterrent to crime, while preventing gun ownership is a breeding ground for spikes in crime. Martin's futile attempt at logic is laughable. If Canadians were able to possess guns before the crackdown, but now are merely getting guns from across the border this would not account for a rise in crime. It is merely a question of changing suppliers. If the US had no guns, they would be smuggled in from elsewhere. The problem is not that criminals have more guns; if it could be tracked we would likely find that number remained fairly static. The problem is that good law-abiding citizens have less guns.

The problem with liberals is that they don't just want social ills fixed. They only want them fixed if their methods are used. If another method is used and works, instead of celebrating it they fight it and go into denial. We see this with gun ownership and crime rate, we see this with tax cuts and increased revenues and improved economy, we see this with school choice and improved education, and in many other areas. If a liberal idea is not used to fix it, liberals would rather not see it fixed.


  • At 6:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "The problem is that good law-abiding citizens have less guns."

    This is a social ill?

  • At 7:13 PM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    Since guns in the hands of law abiding citizens reduce crime, yes it is a social ill to take them away.

  • At 6:51 PM, Blogger Malott said…

    Liberals and their media are masters at spin and propaganda. But they get away with less since talk radio and Fox News entered the picture.

    I heard somewhere that the biggest gun-carrying state was Arizona... and that not only was their crime rate low, but they were much more polite. AICS, do you know if thats true?

  • At 5:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "guns in the hands of law abiding citizens reduce crime"

    Got any proof for that statement?

  • At 1:05 PM, Blogger All_I_Can_Stands said…

    Anonymous, I do not have a stash of information to make the case and at this time am not in a position to take the time to compile it. Even if I did, you can see by doing a simple google search that different people look at the same statistics and arrive at different conclusions. From all I have ever heard or read on the subject guns reduce crime and gun laws do not prevent criminals from getting guns.

    In the context of this post a rise in crime in Canada comes after taking guns out of the hands of citizens.

    Logically, if I have a gun in my home and somebody tries to break in I have more of a chance of preventing being a victim of crime if I have a gun than if I don't have a gun.

    Logically, if a kook decides to go on a rampage at a restaurant like the McDonalds massacre of years back , one person trained and in possession of a concealed firearm could quickly reduce the number of victims.

    The gun control issue boils down to the mindset that the government is what takes care of us from cradle to grave. It is repulsive to a liberal to think of an armed citizen protecting themself instead of cowering in a corner of the house praying the police arrive in time to help.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home