In an ideal world, gun control would work.
Gun control laws and enforcement would make it possible for this lethal weapon to only be possessed by those whom we choose. By this, the world would be an invariably safe place to pursue enjoyable endeavors, such as education.
But any dose of reality will teach us that this utopia is not achievable. For one, there are other weapons besides guns. Knives, clubs and even fists have been used to take innocent human lives. Further, just like drugs, attempting to ban or strictly control something simply does not work. This is an especially high hurdle in the U.S., where a thriving black market undermines many of the efforts of lawmakers and law enforcement personnel. The defeat of gun control ideals can go on forever; here, we will at least assume that it is not the "solution" for which we seek.
So, does this imply that we should simply give in? No. Ask any gun rights supporter, and you'll see that even the staunchest will confide that those with criminal records, who are deemed mentally unstable, or who are otherwise a recognizable threat should not be afforded the same rights as you and I. Gun owners are not ignorant to these realities, despite what the NRA or media may have you believing.
Let us also consider the idea of a permit. In Virginia, for example, only citizens who are 21 years of age, who have no addictions to drugs or alcohol, who have a clean criminal record, and who have no documented mental illnesses can receive a concealed handgun permit. This permit, therefore, is a significant marker of civil responsibility, and is also a good predictor of such. This brings an important point: as an imperfect human race, the best we can do is to establish simple but effective controls to minimize dangers.
Yet gun control fails here. A person with malicious intent may be diverted by laws at first, but evil is persistent and finds other ways. The Brady Bill, for example, has turned away many would-be gun buyers for a plethora of reasons; however, it has never been shown to have any positive effects on reducing crime. The so-called "gun-show loophole" has been fought in Virginia for many years, but a recent study revealed that gun shows do not affect crime rates either. Gun buybacks look like an effective way to get guns away from offenders, but most criminals turn a profit by trading in worthless weapons. Leading economists have shown that gun control is ineffective in reducing crime; on the other hand, strong arguments have been made for both improving our judicial system, to ensure violent criminals are aptly punished, and for making societal changes, both on individual levels and on a national scale. As such, we really should shift our focus to these topics, if our desire is to reduce violent crime.
Philip J. Cook, while an accomplished individual, really misses this point. His views on gun violence are interesting, but what he deems to be facts were established via methods that would not pass today's tests of validity. His alignment with anti-gun rhetoric further discredits his arguments, supporting ineffective laws like the Assault Weapons Ban which just uses scary words to get people to support banning certain guns. Fear and scary words, as you may know, are the weapons used against the people to advance unworthy causes.
So perhaps Dr. Cook's speech influenced you to think of gun control as equivalent to criminal control. However, as an educated citizen, when you do your own research you can quickly disprove this. And critical thinkers like yourself will find that we should look not to write more ineffective laws to make us safer, but to ways to improve justice and positively impact society for increasing peace and preventing violence.
In closing, I provide fair disclosure. I vote neither Democrat nor Republican, but am an independent like so many other Americans. I am a supporter of concealed carry rights at colleges, as I believe self-defense does not end at the borders of campus, and have been a national leader on the issue for some time. I am a gun owner, and educate others on the realities, good and bad, of owning a firearm. Despite all that, I hope you see that in the above, I never profess guns to be the perfect answer to any question, but do believe strongly in the rights that we have been afforded and may choose to exercise.