At the risk of stating the obvious, a bad person who is thinking of committing a crime with a gun surely isn’t going to care that the government has posted a sign prohibiting guns.
I’ve already cited some examples of this. Today, let’s look at another.
With considerable publicity, New York City decided to make Times Square a gun-free zone. They even spent taxpayer money to post signs.
How did that work out? Did the criminals obey the signage?
According to an Associated Press report from Jake Offenhartz and Michael Sisak, the signs are ineffective.
A 15-year-old accused of shooting a Brazilian tourist in the leg in Times Square Thursday night, then firing at a police officer while fleeing, was arrested just outside of New York City on Friday, police officials said. The teenager was taken into custody at a residential house that police believe may be linked to a family member in Yonkers nearly 24 hours after the shooting that began in a sporting goods store and spilled out onto the bustling streets of Midtown Manhattan. …police identified the suspect as a resident of a migrant shelter in Manhattan… He is also considered a suspect in an armed robbery in the Bronx and a separate shooting in Times Square last month, police said.
To be fair, it’s possible that the suspect does not understands English, so he may have not have been able to read the signs about Times Square being a gun-free zone.
However, does anybody think that he would have been deterred if there were Spanish signs?
P.S. Criminals, like taxpayers, respond to incentives. So if you actually want to reduce crime, increase the chance of getting caught and/or increase the severity of punishment.
Dan Mitchell is co-founder of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity and Chairman of the Board. He is an expert in international tax competition and supply-side tax policy.
