Kurt Hoffman over at Armed and Safe has his own Saint Louis gun rights column thanks to The Examiner.
I want to quote a short bit from his article:
In short, restrictive gun laws have exactly zero likelihood of disarming criminal gangs, and instead serve only to impede those who scrupulously obey laws from obtaining the best means of defending themselves from the huge--and growing--threat of these gangs. Whose side are the gun prohibitionists on, anyway?Go read the rest of it here.
If the FBI is right and 80% of the crimes in this country are perpetrated by gangs/gang members (most of whom are already outside the law) then ... how is "legally" disarming you and I going to "stem the tide of violence"?
On another vein, this is part of the reason why drugs should be legalized. People are in gangs to make money, feel accepted, and be "part of a group". The fact that they fund their operations not with protection rackets, but with drug sales means that by legalizing the use and sale of drugs, one can essentially dry up the VAST majority of gang cash flows.
I say this because Merck and Pfizer can produce medicinally cut cocaine for a LOT cheaper then the street price. Let's use economies of scale to put the Cartels out of business. Legalize their good, and let them supply to legitimate drug companies. Hey look, suddenly there is little to no money in being involved with a gang.