England’s embargo of guns in 1997 is a prime example of why creating a law that attempts to control gun enforcement would be exceedingly unsuccessful

England’s embargo of guns in 1997 is a prime example of why creating a law that attempts to control gun enforcement would be exceedingly unsuccessful

England’s embargo of guns in 1997 is a prime example of why creating a law that attempts to control gun enforcement would be exceedingly unsuccessful. As England issued a decree that prohibited the use of all firearms, crime rates became staggeringly high. This law later became known as the world’s top strictest law. While this edict appeared to be beneficial to the country with such restriction, this did not in fact stop gun related crimes from occurring. Instead, gun violence rose to 40% and armed robberies augmented to 53% (Malcom). Throughout the first four years this law was issued, crime rates excessively doubled. Statistics show that citizens are six times more likely to be robbed at gunpoint in London than in New York, leaving you a 53% chance of getting mugged altogether (Malcom). The United States holds a 13% chance of home burglaries since the majority of burglar’s fear entering the home of an armed homeowner. Whereas, England’s burglary statistics happen to be five times greater than the United States at 55%. These statistics show crime rates and gun violence is not reduced with gun control laws. Therefore, imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States Malcom noted.