Banning all guns, not the solution to crime
THE EDITOR, Madam:
Every solution regarding the elimination of crime is welcomed, since no individual has all the answers. While most of us would want to see the demise of the ogre called crime, banning all guns is not the solution.
If banning guns will prevent criminals from accessing guns, then I will subscribe to a ban. But all that banning does, is to make being in possession of a gun illegal, which is the current situation under the law.
Most of the guns involved in criminal activities are illegal, so the focus should be to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. Banning guns in and of itself is not a be all and end all to the problem.
There are some social ills that need remedial attention. A subliminal message bolstered by facts should be sent to the people that there is at least a 95 per cent chance that criminals will be caught, and when caught the penalty will be severe.
However, this message would have to be over time, as it would definitely take some time to collate and present the facts.
Some lacuna in the law that favours the defence should be amended. Also, the burden of proof should be on the defence, specifically in relation to gun crimes.
Failing all these suggestions, arm every citizen. If every citizen is armed, the possibility of a gunman kicking in a door and shooting up the occupants would be virtually non-existent. The result would also be applicable to a handful of gunmen invading a gathering, a supermarket, a bar, etc.
Drive-by shootings would also be drastically reduced, because in a bid to escape, virtually everyone that the perpetrators encounter could/would be armed.