The homes of many private citizens were raided and their handguns confiscated. .
On the surface, this sounds like a great idea. If the government can rid the country of all handguns, and most rifles/shotguns, then the rate of violent crimes should decrease drastically. Unfortunately, as history has shown, this is a naive assumption. When governments begin confiscating weapons, their first act is to require the registration of all weapons. As common sense will tell you, the people who register their weapons are going to be the law-abiding citizens, who there would be little to no threat from in the first place. The criminals, on the other hand, will not register the weapons they own. .
The second step for these governments is to outlaw the possession of certain types of "dangerous" weapons. Oftentimes, these are weapons that are rarely, if ever, used in crimes. These weapons are usually targeted by the anti-gun groups because they have a menacing look, or are larger than legislators deem necessary. Many-times, these weapons belong to two groupsgun collectors, who will nearly always turn them in, and criminals (often gangs), who will not have registered weapons, and will not turn them in. .
The final step is for the government to outlaw any private ownership of firearms. This is the case as it is now in England, Australia, and is the direction in which Canada is going. Once weapons are registered, and the more "dangerous looking" weapons confiscated, the government begins a campaign to confiscate all firearms. In this final stage, there are three types of people. The law-abiding citizens who registered their guns, and turn them in, the citizens who registered their guns, but dont want them taken, and criminals who never registered and will not turn them over. The people who have registered their guns are in the most danger, because the government now knows that they own guns, and where they live.
