Venezuela bans civilians from private gun ownership

posted at 9:41 am on June 4, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Venezuela has major crime problems — we hear a lot about the systemic violence in Mexico, but by at least one count, Venezuela’s murder rate is four times higher than that of Mexico’s and the highest in all of South America. As such, violent crime is one of the most dominant political issues in the socialist nation, and will factor hugely in their upcoming October elections.

And so, in a typically misguided move to cut down on crime, the government has decided to ban the commercial sale of firearms and ammunition. How and why making it illegal for lawful citizens to own firearms is supposed to make anyone feel more “secure,” I’ll never comprehend.

Until now, anyone with a gun permit could buy arms from a private company.

Under the new law, only the army, police and certain groups like security companies will be able to buy arms from the state-owned weapons manufacturer and importer. …

Besides the health of President Chavez, security is the main concern for voters ahead of presidential elections in October.

While voters don’t seem to hold Mr Chavez responsible for the insecurity, the situation has worsened throughout his 13 years in office. …

Hugo Chavez’s government says the ultimate aim is to disarm all civilians, but his opponents say the police and government may not have the capacity or the will to enforce the new law.

Huh. A corruption-riddled dictatorial regime wants to deprive its citizens of the means of popular resistance. (Where, oh where in history have we seen this type of thing before?) I happen to believe that a government should always fear its people, but I can maybe understand why communist totalitarians might not be so into that idea.

And besides, you know — effectually cementing the indomitable power of the national government — this is just another classic case of thoughtless bureaucrats using cheap band-aids to attack the symptoms instead of the disease. More guns means less crime — when will they learn?

Tags: , , , , ,

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Nothing like witnessing the end of statist control, and the statists not being fully aware of it.

The schemers and controllers want to monopolize their force, assault weapons and death. Only THEY can steal. Only THEY can kill.

No, no more. Done enough damage.

fatlibertarianinokc on May 7, 2013 at 6:20 PM

time to go after paper politicians.

john1schn on May 7, 2013 at 6:22 PM

PITCHFORK CONTROL next?

Tar and feathers to be banned?

All you can eat buffets are killing Americans, over eaters should pay extra.

32 ounce $1.00 drinks at McDonalds causes Parkinson’s or something, special tax needed.

Seniors using too much healthcare in final years. Make Hospice Care free and provide a $10,000 tax credit to those that sign up at age 60.

And yet we dummies keep electing this!!!!!

PappyD61 on May 7, 2013 at 6:40 PM

Suck it, Lizardface.

fossten on May 7, 2013 at 9:44 PM

All those who were surprised by this move?

*crickets*

Valid security concerns aside, the idea of anyone literally being able to print unregistered weapons (possibly their ammo blanks too in the future) is absolutely terrifying to liberals.

MelonCollie on May 7, 2013 at 10:11 PM

Two things to think about before worrying about printed guns:

1. There’s no need to print guns unless Chuck and friends make it illegal to otherwise acquire them.

2. If having guns does become illegal the cartels which can smuggle weed across the border by the ton will bring in the guns as soon as there is a market.

Nomas on May 7, 2013 at 11:05 PM

The issue is not whether something should be done but whether something can be done.

The genius of this technology is that it is unregulatable.

You can pass laws but they won’t accomplish anything.

Furthermore, I can put the aforementioned six ounce slug of iron in the handle to make it legal.

Worse though you see how the gun comes apart into bits and pieces.

Lets say I take it apart. Will you spot the pieces?

What if every piece has a duel use. Every piece screws into something else. What if every little bit screws into my luggage.

The ultimate movie that had a plastic gun was “in the line of fire”… it was a neat little thing. They hid the bullet in a lucky rabbit’s foot. Everything else just broke down into little plastic bits that were here or there.

Can’t stop it. You protect yourself in that environment by knowing who is coming through the door… not by search them.

Karmashock on May 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM

Schumer can go bugger himself.

claudius on May 8, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Gotta love Schumer’s descriptive language, “Our Republicans”.

That’ll leave a mark.

MTF on May 21, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Dang it

Dear leader to take credit

cmsinaz on May 21, 2013 at 2:50 PM

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If amnesty passes both houses, I will never vote republican again.

I know that sounds like the typical empty threat. But in this case, I honestly do not see what the point would be of any longer pretending the GOP cares about limited gov’t.

My one vote and my limited finanical contributions won’t hurt the GOP. but hopefully, others will join in.

I would rather the GOP completely die as a party and allow us a chance to build something new while the DNC runs rampant that continue pretending that the GOP actually opposes DNC policies. The alternative, to continue the pretense, simply means allowing the DNC to pass its entire agenda a little more slowly than otherwise without any real chance of stopping it. At least if the GOP is killed off, a new party may actually come about that supports the idea of limited gov’t.

I don’t understand how Lindsay Graham is not beaten in a primary. Is there really nobody that could beat him by running to his right? I would also love to see McCain gone. Rubio has blown whatever conservative cred he had with this nonsense.

Monkeytoe on May 21, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2