GUNS, AGAIN
Almost every news story dealing with drug busts lists the amount of drugs, cash, cars and guns confiscated by the police or the DEA. The numbers and types of weapons and ammunition are mind-boggling. Considering the fact that these raids are infrequent due to the investigative work involved, it is doubtful that they are arresting even 2% of the drug dealers in the country. Perhaps I am wrong, but at the most...let's say 5%. The firepower that's out there on the streets, therefore, must be tremendous.

This does not even take into consideration the gangs around the country, or the outlaw motorcycle clubs, and other assorted nasties who prey upon the public, jewelry store and bank robbers, or just plain ordinary thieves. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions. of guns in the hands of criminals and anarchists.

There has to be a balance of power, and that balance can not be maintained with our local police, plus the FBI and DEA. It simply does not compute. If there were ever any kind of a natural catastrophe or a civil disturbance where these bands of thieves got together, they would rule the streets until either the National Guard or Federal Troops could be mustered. As unlikely or rare as this might be, according to some people's thinking, we have to keep such things in mind when discussing gun control.

Our forefathers were quite prescient when they drafted our Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Amendments. They meant to cover all such eventualities, those which could be forseen and those which were completely unpredictable. The police presence about the country is very thin, very very thin. We are mostly a law-abiding citizenry, so the country gets by with such a sparse uniformed protection, in spite of the fact that there are so many armed bandits about. One reason for this is that we also have a rather well armed group amongst our citizens, and also that so many of them are quite proficient in the use of their firearms.

For example, one druggist I knew armed himself after one hold-up, and the next time he faced armed thugs he killed both of them. The town had been averaging several hold-ups a week, but there were no hold-ups reported for the following two weeks. Obviously our local thugs were not illiterate.

And in Santa Barbara, the jewelry store next to my gallery was held up by a gang of thieves. The owner saw it from upstairs and came downstairs with a shotgun. He killed either two or three of the thieves, which stunted their careers as gunmen.

In either case, the police would have arrived after the fact, so once again an armed citizenry proved to be of value in law enforcement. There are those who will 'tsk, tsk' and talk about a fair trial before twelve jurors, but my viewpoint is they faced six jurors in the chamber of a gun and the verdict was final.

A young man I know was visiting a friend who worked in a jewelry store when it was held up by several armed robbers. He was made to get down on his hands and knees and crawl the length of the counter into the back room with a .45 against his skull. He said the robber was so nervous that he could feel his hand shaking because the gun was bouncing off his head. Do you think he'll ever forget that? No one who faces a gun in the hands of a crook ever forgets it. I, therefore, have no sympathy for the thief who gets killed while engaged in his chosen profession. In a two year period, within two blocks of another business I owned, one jeweler had his throat cut, another was wounded, and a third killed his assailant. That's like a war zone! Another friend, an art dealer, was tied up and robbed, but he and his wife became so paranoid after that they never were without a ferocious Doberman. If we're an honest and law-abiding citizenry, we do not deserve to be subjected to such depredations by criminals, and we do deserve the right to defend ourselves.

Therefore, we do need the right to arm ourselves, if we see fit, and the benefits to society as a whole far outweigh the occasional harm that may occur.

The Government cannot disarm the anti-social element in our midst. The only ones they can disarm are the honest and law-abiding citizens. The only ones who will obey such mandates are the law-abiding (if they lose their sanity), and when you disarm the law-abiding, then the evil-elements and the police are the only ones who are armed. The Second Amendment was the stroke of genius which had the effect of allowing an armed citizenry to keep government in check, as well as to keep the armed thugs mindful of the fact that not all potential victims will allow themselves to become victims. At times that is a very effective deterrant.

There is one fact that is certain: when the populace is disarmed or arms are strictly controlled, the crooks have enough common sense to know that they can enter almost any home without fear of being shot, and the number of home invasions and robberies simply has to increase. Only a tyrranical government has the power to enforce discipline to such a degree that everyone is intimidated. Then, the crooks turn to robbing the government through conniving and theft of government materials, because tyrannies possess all the wealth.

---