Gun Rights and Noncompliance: Two Problems of Prohibition

Via comment by Avraham on Florida school shooting hero blames sheriff, super…

Most of my fellow academics seem to harbor a visceral antipathy toward guns. Many, perhaps most,  would  like  to  see  all  private  gun  ownership  outlawed.  I  think  this position  is  not  well
grounded,  either  in empirical  evidence  or  in  moral  principle.  If we followed the lessons that we or at least, the social scientists among us try to teach our students, we would not be so confident of the benefits of gun restrictions.

If we traced the implications of the moral principles we accept in other contexts, we would not be so quick to dismiss the rights of gun owners. Like most controversial issues, the issue of gun control is highly complex, and it is commonly treated in a sadly oversimplified manner. I can’t fix that problem here though I have discussed the issue at greater length elsewhere.

Here, I will address only  what  seem  to  me  the  two  most  important  arguments  concerning  the  simplest and  most  extreme  form  of  gun  control,  which  would  be  a  complete  ban  on private gun ownership. The first argument is that gun prohibition would violate the right of individuals  to  protect  themselves.  The  second  argument  is  that  gun  prohibition  will fail because criminals will disregard.