Getting hung up on crime rates as bearing any relation to (and thus being reasonable to examine in terms of) gun freedoms is playing the anti-gunners game.
The
anti-Second Amendment bigots argued constitutional law for years, (or at least, their Stalinist interpretation of the Second Amendment as guaranteeing an imaginary "collective," but no individual right.) That didn't work.
They tried arguing violent crime, ("If we educated people let those commoners carry guns, there'll be a wild west shoot-out over every fender bender!") That didn't work.
Now, they're trying in Chicago to argue the Second Amendment "grants" commoners a right to keep and bear arms, but we educated people in government have the right, clearly stated in
Heller, to restrict what
kinds of guns the commoners can have. That doesn't look likely to work, though as well as I've ever been able to discern, taking constitutional issues to the Supreme Court is like shooting craps.
The leftist extremists have been working on the "public health" approach some years now, ("We people with medical and scientific degrees have determined guns are intrinsically unsafe in the hands of commoners.") If you think that doesn't seem likely to work, take a look at the nation's public schools, the prohibition against DDT, the banning of chemicals "known" to "cause global warming," the "fairness" method of attacking talk radio currently under development,
et cetera.Once upon a time, you had to sucker 51% of the people; any more, all you've got to do is assure 51% of the public trough feeders they can get away with it.
