So would there be exemptions to the repeal of the 2nd Amendment? I would hope that police would still be able to carry them, but what about bodyguards? They are not police, but I bet rich people and celebrities would lobby congress to have them as an exemption. It would not look good if someone like Taylor Swift were denied the right to be protected by armed guards, if she wanted them. Politicians wouldn’t want to offend people who give a lot of money to their election campaigns, after all. Regular folks might pose as bodyguards to be able to protect their families. Schools who offer bodyguard training certificates might be tempted to sell them on the side for extra cash. Would individual parts of guns be illegal? Maybe desperate people would buy parts and assemble their own guns like people made their own wine.
Liquor was smuggled in from Canada, the Caribbean, and Mexico during alcohol prohibition. Boats selling liquor would anchor 3 miles off the east coast of America in international waters to sell alcohol. This became known as Rum Row. Once legal U.S. distilleries were sold, dismantled, and rebuilt in Canada to produce alcohol that was smuggled back to America. This could happen with guns. A very small percentage of smuggled alcohol was ever confiscated by law enforcement. There were only 2,500 federal agents charged with enforcing the law. Local and state police were expected to help. Only 18 states set aside money for this purpose. The others couldn’t afford it or didn’t care. The Judiciary System was not equipped to handle the huge caseload of violators of the Volstead act. U.S. Attorneys spent up to 90% of their time on prohibition cases. Judges lowered sentences or just gave out fines for law breakers to ease their caseloads. Would State and Local police have enough funds to enforce the gun ban? The courts would probably be backed up even more with cases regarding gun violations.
Many people who violated the Volstead act were never arrested because local and state police and officials did not believe in enforcing the law or took bribes from the law breakers. Would this happen with a gun ban? According to an article posted on PoliceOne.com by Ron Avery on 4/8/13,15,000 police were asked questions about gun control. 90% said that an assault weapons ban is not the answer. 91% supported concealed/carry permits for law-abiding, mentally fit, citizens. 80% believed that casualties from mass shootings such as in Newtown and Aurora would have been reduced due to the deterrent factor of citizens being legally armed. Breitbart News reports that a pew research poll of 8000 police showed that 74% agreed with the 2nd Amendment’s right of the citizenry own guns while only 25% wanted stricter regulations controlling or restricting gun ownership. Police know that they can’t be everywhere in time to prevent crimes. Most of the time, they show up after a store is robbed or someone is murdered. Per the Women’s Self-Defense Institute Website, the average time it takes 911 to respond to a call is 10 minutes. The best time, depending on where one lives, is 4 minutes. The worst in some rural areas can be an hour. Conversely, it only takes an average of 90 seconds for a criminal to murder or rob someone and get away from the scene. Since the aim is crime prevention, people need to defend themselves most of the time.
Per the article “How the U.S. Got Its Police Force” published on Time.com, Colonia America did not have a full-time, fully-staffed police force. A part-time “force” was made up of volunteers who signed up for a day and time to be a night watchman. Rich people paid for their own protection. The first full-time, fully-staffed, publicly-funded police force did not exist until 1838 in Boston. Obviously before then, private citizens were essentially on their own to defend themselves.
Check out the problems with prohibition of booze and guns and the real answer to society’s woes in my next blog.