After every major shooting in America, the same debate is reflected on the screens: Gun control. The Left demands more restrictions, calling for “common-sense gun control.” However, these demands often contradict constitutional realities, rely on emotional arguments, and do not offer a concrete solution to reduce crime rates.
Below, we summarize why the claims most frequently used in gun control debates are invalid, supported by historical data and global examples.
The fallacy that “gun control prevents mass shootings”
The strongest argument of those defending gun control is the idea that mass attacks will be reduced. However, the data does not support this:
- In the US, 974 people have lost their lives in mass attacks over the last 50 years.
- In France alone, despite strict gun laws, 532 people died as a result of mass attacks in 2015.
- Although France’s population is one-fifth of the US, deaths in a single year equaled 67% of the US’s 35-year total.
This situation shows that:
- The problem is not the legality of guns; it is the inability to control illegal weapons and radical elements.
- According to experts in France, there are twice as many illegal weapons as legal ones.
Furthermore, as seen in many attacks in the US, it is frequently revealed that the attackers’ past criminal records were incompletely entered into state systems. Therefore:
The most critical point is the enforcement of existing laws rather than new ones.
The collapse of the claim that gun bans reduce homicides
There are two countries where gun laws are very strict: Australia and the UK. However, data from both clearly reveal that gun bans do not reduce homicides.
The Australia Example
- After the 1996 mass shooting, a comprehensive “mandatory gun buyback” program was launched.
- A decline in gun homicides was observed, but during the same period, homicides committed with knives increased.
- The general homicide trend paralleled the global downward trend already seen worldwide.
- In short: Gun bans do not reduce murder; they only change the method of murder.
The UK Example
- Increasing restrictions starting from 1920 turned into an almost total confiscation program in 1997.
- Despite this, there was no significant decline in homicide rates in the long term.
- In some years, serious increases in non-gun homicides occurred.
- Basically: When you ban guns, murder doesn’t end; the method changes.
Where is the real problem? The source of homicides
Most deaths carried out with guns are actually not homicides, but suicides:
- In the US, more than 19,000 people commit suicide with guns every year.
- However, suicide rates do not drop when gun access decreases. Because the method changes.
When we look at the homicide portion, the picture is much clearer:
- Of the approximately 14,500 annual homicides, 38% are committed by Black Americans.
- Black Americans make up only 13% of the population.
- The biggest reason for this situation is the rate of fatherlessness in the Black community, which is over 72%.
In the same years:
- In 2 years, more than 4,900 Black individuals were killed by other Black individuals.
- This number is 5 times the total of all mass shootings in the US over 50 years.
Therefore, the real problem is not guns; it is the collapse of the family structure, fatherlessness, and the increasing social collapse among young men.
Conclusion: Gun control is not a solution, it is an illusion
America’s gun culture is completely different from other countries. Considering constitutional rights, population size, sociological structure, and the rate of illegal weapons:
- Mass gun confiscation is impossible.
- Criminals will not obey bans.
- A disarmed public will remain powerless against criminals and the state.
The real solution is the enforcement of existing laws, strengthening the family structure, increasing social support for young men, and addressing the cultural causes of violence.
Gun control is merely a trick that ignores all these problems.