Statistics: They’re always missing from the gun debate

This particular shooting was just so exceptional, outrageous, and poignant. Finally, citizens and lawmakers will rise up and start passing serious gun control legislation. People will finally see the NRA for what it is.

The media was especially ecstatic about the Parkland, Fla., students. All the right factors seemed to be in place for actual “change” — the students were young enough to have emotional leverage, yet old enough to fight. Without a doubt, they are determined. Just recently, yet another school walkout took place. And in the wake of this past weekend’s Waffle House shooting, Parkland student Emma Gonzalez is going even further than before, demanding that all semi-automatic guns be banned and confiscated.

In the past, however, the end result has invariably been the same. Nothing happens.

But is Parkland truly different? Has the time finally arrived?

To be sure, the Parkland students have pressured legislators to an extent never seen in recent years. Some states — such as Florida, Vermont, and Oregon — have already passed new gun control measures, as have local governments.

In addition, corporations have taken matters into their own hands. Dick’s Sporting Goods has pulled semi-automatic rifles, and Walmart has imposed new restrictions on gun purchases. Bank of America and Citigroup are also refusing credit to any gun manufacturer that makes such rifles.

But for all the campaigning, marches and walkouts, one thing is noticeably absent from the public discourse — statistics. Regardless of how much the law changes, the facts do not. And the facts are simply unequivocal. Gun control does not work.

Two cities in particular — the District of Columbia and Chicago — starkly illustrate this truth. In 1976, Washington implemented the Firearms Control Regulations Act, an extremely strict ordinance that banned private ownership of handguns and high-capacity semi-automatic weapons. Furthermore, the very few guns that were allowed had to be registered. In 1982, Chicago also banned handguns. Essentially, these two cities had done what liberals dream of doing today.

These laws were struck down in two landmark Supreme Court cases. District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. City of Chicago in 2010 established the individual right to gun ownership on the federal and local levels, respectively.

Today, these cities are ridden with murders and gun crime. Chicago often gets special attention. And whenever the subject comes up, liberals link this problem to the striking down of the gun control laws. But is there any truth to this? Did those laws actually work when they were in effect? What happened after they were invalidated?

The same year that Chicago first implemented its ban, there were 670 homicides. And the next year, 729 homicides occurred. Evidently, the ban did not have any immediate impact. But maybe it just needed time, right?

Actually, murders skyrocketed only a few years after the handgun ban took effect. In 1991, homicides clocked in at 928, and two of the next three years also saw more than 900 murders. Between 1983 and 2010, homicides averaged almost 700 per year. That is no improvement relative to 1982’s numbers.

A nearly identical pattern played out in the District of Columbia. In 1976, there were 188 murders. The next year, with the ban in effect, 192 people were killed. And each year between 1989 and 1993, over 400 homicides occurred. The average rate between 1977 and 2008 was about 270. In this case, the situation noticeably worsened when the ban was in place.

The year after their respective ordinances were voided, murders slightly decreased in Washington and stayed the same in Chicago. These examples cast serious doubt on gun control as the answer. Gun control only prevents law-abiding citizens from defending themselves.

To hinge one’s hopes on gun control is to expect that criminals will actually obey the law. Since when has that happened?

Nathan Bryant is a politics writer based in Texas.