There is Only One Logical End Goal for Gun Control: Total Prohibition

Gun control has in the past, is currently, and will always have only one logically consistent conclusion that can be reached: the total prohibition on privately held firearms. Then on privately held arms or near arms at all. Colion Noir discusses the current UK nonsense in his video above.

Even if we end up in that legal end state it will not erase firearms from the public, especially from anyone disinclined to acquiesce to the force of law backed request. It will not remove violence as a means of solving or influencing socioeconomic issues.

False Conclusions

Most of the ‘logic’ gun control proponents use to justify their antics, I cannot in good faith call it reasoning, is false equivalence along the lines of what gun proponents use when we see silly shit like, “Just working the action on a pump shotgun will scare away a bad guy.” There is only the barest thread of actual causative logic in the chain but they will confidently state the conclusion as gospel.

“If we get rid of high capacity magazines casualties will be limited in mass shootings.”

• A ‘mass shooting’ starts at 4 total casualties
• Every firearm capable of holding 4 or more shots is capable of causing a mass shooting
• Magazine bans list 10 as the most common capacity limit, many go higher for handguns
• The first successful 6 shot double action revolver was produced in 1877 by Colt
• The first commercially successful repeating rifle held 16 shots and was produced in 1860 by Henry/New Haven Arms Company
• Only 3 of 40 mass killings in 2023 could theoretically and under controlled circumstances have lower casualty counts
  • Easily accounted for variables make this claim of efficacy on lowering casualties highly suspect
    • Only 4 mass killings had casualty counts (dead and injured) higher than 10
    • The highest casualty event, 36 total with 4 dead, had 6 suspects involved in the shooting. 7 handguns were reportedly used, meaning even if they were single magazine and capacity limited they had 70 shots available. The reported number of rounds fired was 89, no effective change can be assumed through capacity limitation as 70 rounds is more than capable of causing the casualty amount or two other handguns could easily have been obtained and used.
• Hundreds of millions of magazines in common circulation

“We don’t want to ban normal guns, just assault weapons.”

• “Normal” firearms, as in most common, account for the majority of mass shootings and crime firearms. The handgun is the most “normal” firearm
• 77.7% firearms in criminal traces are handguns
  • Glock alone accounts for 19% of those handguns
• “Assault Weapon” definitions are dubious and ineffective at separating “normal” and “assault” firearms
  • Most of these definitions focus on meaningless features like pistol grips and threaded muzzles and banning by make/model
  • Most have an equivalent non-banned peer that is only more annoying to own, not less effective if used
  • Most definitions cannot outright say semi-automatic, but that is what they want to ban
  • Semi-automatics are by far the most common firearm action type, followed by double action and repeater types.
  • All of these actions are capable of a ‘dangerous’ rate of fire
  • All of the firearms with these action types are capable of being used in a mass shooting/mass killing
• Commonality and cost are still the principle factors that drive firearm selection, not lethality

“We need to do something.”

Yes, but that doesn’t mean do anything just because it makes the part of your brain where the Ralph Wiggum memes lives happy.

Universal background checks? The worst mass shooting in Czech history just happened when a licensed, background checked, tested, doctor signed off 24 year old shot up his campus.

The only logical conclusion

As any and every one of the partial-ban/non-confiscative will not result in a filter that will screen killers from commoners the only place to go next on efforts for those who believe some or all firearms in some manner are the problem is total prohibition, eventually total confiscative prohibition where ‘grandfathering’ is not allowed.

This is the conclusion we seeing being tried and failing in the UK, and with plenty of fear mongering propaganda to help it along.

Any gun controller who supports any of the popular half measures and is ‘willing to stop’ at those is either an idiot, or lying. None of the ‘common sense’ measures puts any meaningfully empowered prohibition in place to spot a determined enough killer, they only inconvenience the commoner.

We have no inverse legal filter that can catch killers but not inconvenience the regular citizen. That is an impossible task. But it is one we keep being sold by gun control proponents. So they again are either stupid, or lying. Possibly both.