ent crimes. So, criminals should be controlled, not the guns which they share with millions of law-abiding citizens. Gun control supporters claim that gun control lowers crime rate. Gun control does nothing to reduce crime. A study conducted by the Urban Institute regarding The Clinton Gun Ban Law of 1995, finds that "because the banned guns and magazines were never used in more than a fraction of all gun murders, even the maximum theoretically achievable preventive effect of the ban on gun murders is almost certainly too small to detect statistically..." Joseph Constance, the Deputy Police Chief of Trenton, New Jersey, states: "Assault weapons are used in an underwhelming .026 of 1% of crimes in New Jersey. This means that my officers are more likely to confront an escaped tiger from the local zoo, than to confront an assault rifle in the hands of a drug-crazed killer on the streets." West Virginia stands as an example of the inaccurate thinking of gun control advocates. This state has the highest number of guns per person in the nation, yet it has the lowest number of crimes per person in the nation. Gun control has little or no effect on crime. Gun control advocates believe that gun control has no effect on the law-abiding citizens.However, gun control takes recreational firearms from law-abiding citizens. Many of the guns used today for hunting and recreational shooting originate as military weapons (e.g., 6.5 x 55 Mauser, 8mm Mauser, and 7mm Remington). Gun control advocates like to make statements such as this one from a New York Times editorial: "No Federal law limits military assault rifles that are semi-automatic." They overlook the fact that military rifles are not semi-automatic they are automatics. The guns which gun controll advocates seek to ...
