From: "Jeff Wood", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Malbon's report of this debate includes some discussion of US
firearms problems, a subject which so often comes up in gun control
controversy.
Years ago, before I was a shooter, I read somewhere (don't ask me where
after all this time) that there have been distinct phases in US firearms
violence.
The first major one was following the Civil War, with tens of thousands of
discharged soldiers returning to a civil society which had been badly
knocked about. Many of those soldiers had no other trade than fighting, and
there wasn't much else on offer. They became drifters and outlaws, and
contributed to the Wild West phenomenon by gravitating to the areas newly
taken from the natives (Injuns) and where there was as yet little law.
(Something of the same happened in the English/Scottish borders following
the wars between the two countries, creating a pretty lawless society for a
couple of centuries.)
These guys grew up and settled down as the West was developed and there was
a chance of gainful employment, and the US quietened down.
The next explosion, explained the author, was during Prohibition. This
created a natural environment for armed criminals (some WW1 veterans),
especially in the big cities where the markets for illegal booze were to be
found. The problem for criminals, quite apart from the hazards of tangling
with the Feds, is the impossibility of taking business disputes to court, so
problems of market share and enforcement of debts are worked out by
violence, with the weapons available or necessary.
Prohibition ended, and the gangsters it created went into other rackets, or
went legit with the profits of alcohol. A good example of this last was Joe
Kennedy, who founded the family fortunes as a bootlegger. Firearms violence
went down again, though maybe settling at a higher level.
The latest explosion seems to me likely to be a rerun of Prohibition, with
narcotics taking the place of alcohol, and in the early days at least with
some of the footsoldiers being provided by Vietnam veterans. It's a lot more
complicated than that of course; for instance, the Mafia was already in
place this time, ready to move into and control the business; after Vietnam
and Richard Nixon, there seems to have been a corrosive alienation and
cynicism among much of the population, leaving a less robust society in some
ways; the original Mob seems to have been vulnerable to attack from rival
groups, causing even greater violence than before; the War on Drugs approach
to the root of the problem has lasted longer and caused more trouble than
the original Prohibition campaign was given, and neither have successfully
tackled the question of Demand, and haven't got very far with Supply.
No doubt others with a better historical and sociological knowledge can
correct much of what I am saying, but there is a moral: gun problems grow
out of social problems. I would add that by their tone, the gun controllers
are the same sort of people who created Prohibition in the first place,
along with the gun problems.
Yours sincerely
Jeff Wood
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Public PGP Key at: ldap://certserver.pgp.com
--
Actually a point I would like to make here is simply that gangsterism
went down after the stock market crash in 1929. I am convinced that
the restrictions on machineguns and so on in 1934 had more to do with
stopping an armed revolt against the US Government rather than stopping
gangsters.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
