By Gerard Valentino

Liberals blame low self-esteem for a litany of social ills ranging from teen pregnancy to turning people to a life crime. They also have an attachment to failed social experiments and gun-control in particular.

High murder rates in Chicago and Washington D.C. are proof that handgun bans are abysmal failures at keeping the populace safe. Assault Weapons bans in Columbus, OH, and California are also useless in lessening the crime rate. We also know what happened when the police were unable to protect citizens of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Never before has the American public been faced with a clearer example of how criminals continued to rape, rob and pillage after the law-abiding are disarmed. The same is true along the gulf coast where mobs took what they pleased from citizens unable to defend themselves.

At the opposite end of the spectrum are Florida’s “Castle Doctrine” and “Hold Your Ground” statutes that lessen the potential legal burdens on law-abiding citizens who use deadly force in their home or in public. Once again the anti-gunners claimed mass chaos would ensue and once again it didn’t materialize (pro-gun advocates often sound like a broken record on how often our adversaries cry wolf but we’re forced to point out how often they are wrong).

If attacked the anti-gun movement recommends that you run away, submit, or simply call the police - all of which are bad options because a victim has to turn their back on an armed thug to run away, simply give up, or expect the police to arrive before it’s too late. In each instance the criminal is likely to succeed - and that seems to be exactly what the anti-gun movement wants, otherwise they would advocate an effective means of self-defense.

Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.

As sociologists and criminologists struggle to find a definitive reason for the surge in violent crime over the second half of the 20th century they ignore the anti-gun movement and establishment media’s attempt to brainwash society to lay down when attacked.

Over the years criminals began to rely on our submissive response and became bolder. Establishment media coverage of crime reinforces society’s image of how to react when attacked. Rarely do they cover a case of self-defense or a case where someone refused to be victim by fighting back. Instead they show pictures of innocent people cowering in fear.

Well-established studies show that a criminal’s biggest fear is a victim with a gun and the proliferation of legalized concealed carry throughout the nation put the criminal element on notice that not everyone is willing to be easy prey.

Objective observers can quickly establish a link between such laws and a drop in violent crime. But, the overall change in attitude by the American people who in growing numbers refuse to be a victim should get some of the credit as well.

It is inconceivable that anti-gun advocates can ignore the mountain of evidence that exists to prove the failure of gun-control so there can only be one logical explanation for their desire to disarm law-abiding citizens. Clearly gun-control is a cunningly disguised plan designed to build criminal’s self-esteem by disarming potential victims.

We can further surmise the liberal groups who opposed Florida’s groundbreaking self-defense legislation did so because it would further damage the self-esteem of criminals by decreasing their chance of success.

Political spin doctors always find a catchy positive name like “Workplace Safety Act” or “Workers Protection Act” to denote legislation designed to make the American workplace safer or to denote other positive legislation. Most gun-control laws are also given a catchy name designed to give the impression they are nothing more than anti-crime bills or bills that will make people safer.

But, they really are nothing more than Criminal Protections Acts.

Gerard Valentino is the Buckeye Firearms Association Central Ohio Chair.