Drug-Addicted Gang Members Rape and Torture a Defenseless British Couple

There is a common misconception that gun bans prevent heinous crimes from being committed.  Nowhere does this flawed belief seem to be more entrenched than Britain, where guns are so strictly banned that their Olympic pistol team must leave the county to practice their sport.  Sadly, as a recent news case shows, gun bans don’t stop such terrible crimes from occurring.  Instead, such laws only ensure that crime victims are without the best means of self defense yet invented by mankind:

Gavin Gordon, 31, a drug addict who has a string of convictions for violence dating back more than ten years, was part of a gang that raped a 26-year-old woman in her home in Clapham, south London, while her boyfriend screamed as he was tortured in the next room. The woman was leaving her flat shortly after midnight on October 26, 2008, when several men approached her and demanded money, police said. They covered her head and forced her back inside her flat, where they made her text her boyfriend and ask him to come over. When he arrived, they tied his hands with his belt and tortured him, wrapping computer cable around his throat, pressing a hot iron against his forehead and thigh, and rubbing lemon juice and bleach into his injuries. He was also repeatedly kicked and punched. The woman was forced to perform sex acts and repeatedly raped as she heard her boyfriend screaming in the next room. The gang later escaped with an Audi A3 and a Golf GTI, a black Skype 3G mobile phone, a black Nokia mobile phone, £300 in cash and keys. Gordon, of no fixed address, was found guilty of robbery, unlawful imprisonment, actual bodily harm and theft following a four-day trial last year. He was given an indeterminate sentence and told he must serve a minimum of nine years.Two other men – Reon Hall, who was also known as Reon Wong, 20, of Coulsdon, Surrey; and Aaron Gelly, 20, of Wallington, Surrey – were sentenced to nine years each in June for their role in the sustained three-hour attack.

Terrible crimes are committed by criminals who don’t have guns

Those opposed to gun ownership like to suggest that guns are uncivilized, and only uncivilized people wish to own firearms.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Instead, guns are the embodiment of civilization, as they level the playing field.  Guns put the petite woman on equal footing with the 250 lb man who attacks her during the night.  They put the disabled man on equal footing with the able-bodied home invader.  They put the elderly homeowner on equal footing with younger robber who sees him as an easy target.  In the absence of guns, society is returned to the dark days, when might makes right, and where the young and strong prey with impunity upon the more vulnerable members of society.

Here, this man and woman were in “civilized” Britain, where guns are strictly banned. Rather than being safe, thy suffered one of the most terrible crimes that I can imagine – yet the criminals didn’t have even a single gun.  Instead, they used their superior numbers, superior strength, and the element of surprise to sadistically harm a law abiding couple.  If that is “civilization,” then I’ll gladly take the American approach, where such home invaders are often shot by their victims.

Gun control doesn’t disarm the criminals who want guns

Not only does gun control fail to stop violence that is not gun-related, it also fails to stop criminals from having guns.  This is true whether we’re talking about the UK, or US cities like Chicago, because criminals who want guns will get them, just as they are able to get illegal drugs and other contraband on the black market.  For such criminals, gun control laws are just more laws for them to break – and a person willing to commit a  more serious crimes such as home invasion and rape won’t think twice about violating a gun ban.  Instead of decreasing, gun related crime actually rose in the UK after the gun ban was passed!

Interestingly enough, knife related crime also tends to rise after guns are banned, as it did in the UK, possibly because the emboldened knife-wielding criminals are also less afraid that their victim may have a self defense gun. The message to take to heart is that gun bans don’t prevent violence, since violence is caused by the intentional actions of a criminal – not the presence of an inanimate object.  Denying law abiding citizens the right to have a gun for self defense only ensures that the law abiding members of society will be unarmed when those violent criminals attack, and that those few citizens who do defend themselves will be sent to jail.

The moral of the story: consider armed self defense

I am glad to be American who lives in an area that respects his right to have a gun for self defense.  As I write this article, a Springfield XD sits next to my computer, should I suddenly need it for self defense purposes.   To be clear, I sincerely hope that I will never need to fire a gun at another human being – however I rest easier knowing that I could stop a home invader from harming myself or my fiance.  I also rest easier knowing that she could shoot a rapist, rather than becoming a victim.  While it is true that a gun is not a magical talisman that absolutely guarantees safety against criminals, both the statistics and real life examples make clear the benefit of being armed for self defense.

My thanks to M Wright for pointing out this tragic news story from the UK.