Cornell Political Forum debaters take aim at the gun control issue

By Annie Litvak '02

The Cornell Political Forum held its annual fall debate in Anabel Taylor Hall Oct. 16 with two speakers targeting the issue of gun control.

John Lott, a professor at Yale University Law School, and Richard Aborn, former president of Handgun Control Inc., squared off in the debate that began with a 30-minute statement from each panelist, followed by a brief rebuttal, and concluded with a question-and-answer period.

John Lott, left, professor at Yale University Law School, argues a point with Richard Aborn, former president of Handgun Control Inc., during the Cornell Political Forum debate on gun control, Oct. 16. in Anabel Taylor Hall. Robert Barker/University Photography

Joshua Farber, president of the Cornell Political Forum, began the event with brief introductions of the participants and an overview of the topic.

Lott spoke first, attacking gun control efforts and stressing the importance of the use of guns in preventing crime and protecting law-abiding citizens from criminals.

"Most people would be surprised that most of the time people use guns is to save lives," Lott said.

He attributed people's misperceptions about gun use to a strong media bias for tragic stories. "If we care about policy, we need not only pay attention to 'newsworthy' events but also the events in which people are able to prevent crime," he said.

Lott cited some incidences around the country where guns were used to prevent serious crime, and he explained that such stories rarely provide catchy headlines and, therefore, are dismissed by the press.

The author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control, Lott went on to refute popular myths he views about the relationship between guns and crime. He spoke of the "infamous" passive-resistance theory of crime confrontation, which says that in a life-threatening situation, it is always safer to remain passive and yield to the demands of an attacker. Claiming that studies supporting that "myth" lump together safe and unsafe types of active resistance, Lott explained that a woman under the threat of rape, for instance, without access to a gun, would be unwise to physically resist her attacker, thus resulting in further injury and possibly even death. However, he argued, "consistently for all groups, by far the safest course of action is to have a gun."

Lott also attacked several other assumptions about guns, such as the causal relationship people draw between the high rate of gun ownership and the high percentage of crime in the United States. He cited Switzerland as an example of a country with a much higher gun-ownership rate and a very low homicide rate, and Russia as representative of a country where all gun ownership is illegal and the crime rate is soaring.

Lott argued that gun control has the effect of restricting mainly those gun owners who have clean records and adhere to government policy.

In presenting his counter arguments, Aborn, a board member of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, showed consideration for Lott's presentation but labeled most of it as irrelevant to the discussion of gun control.

"The issue of gun control is not about everyone having a gun vs. no one having a gun," said Aborn. "It's about breaking up the illegal gun market."

His argued that criminals get their guns from gun traffickers who, on paper, appear to be law-abiding citizens and are allowed to purchase guns in bulk in states with looser gun control laws, such as Virginia. Those gun traffickers then travel to states with stricter gun laws, such as New York, and sell the guns to criminals for a profit, he said.

Several steps have been taken to target this problem, said Ahorn, who lobbied for the passage of legislation that requires a mandatory background check before a gun can be purchased. He also has strongly supported mandating safety-storage boxes, which would be accessible only to the licensed owner of a gun, and a law that limits the number of gun purchases to one per month. He argued that since the passage of such a law in Virginia, that state's ranking has dropped from the number one source of guns in the country to number five and is still declining.

In closing, Aborn introduced his four "p's" of crime: prevention, policing, process and punishment. "I have never argued nor will I today argue that gun control is the only answer," he said, stressing that prevention is the measure most in need of legislative action.

"We are beginning to understand how to drive crime down. The challenge is to make those reductions permanent," Aborn concluded.