Because “worldwide” would mean that all countries, supranational organisations and sovereign corporations should go along with this.That does not happen. A pariah-state with a lead that is shy of money, sees his chance (that already happens, see North Korea).
But let me go ahead, say that this ban would be there.Then we are with a piece of enforcement. Anyone with a global idea of metalwork, a lathe in the barn and a tight scholarship, is already right in a position to earn a lot of money-provided few scruples. Forget hemp plants in crawl spaces, lathes in barns are then much more lucrative. And yes, enforcement. How does that work if the law enforcement officers are not able to have weapons, but the owner of the lathe is probably?
This is only going to work if by some catastrophe, we suddenly get thrown back into the Stone Age, and we first need to find metal working out.Oh wait:
(The stone axe, for the Stone Age-dweller a handy weapon or piece of tool, and still easy to make too.)
A ban on weapons is not effective, a ban on ammunition, however, much more.
Making weapons in the sly is simple as said.
When the former Yugoslavia, in the nineties of the last century, fell bloody apart, there were arms embargos. Those were rigorously controlled. What nobody checked was whether the machine factories and the bike makers actually made machines and bicycles. The result was all kinds of house industry that soon began to take small-industrial forms:
(The Zagi M91, one of the many weapons manufactured in one another in small workshops.)
Ammunition on the other hand is difficult to make.
Making ammunition requires thorough knowledge of not only metalwork, but also chemistry. You will need to have large heavy machinery, as well as small precision instruments. There is also the fact that ammunition is more smuggler: easy to clog, and high value-to-weight ratio. All properties that have weapons cannot (no, unlike the films, most international arms dealers of this world are not a puisant wealthy penthouse residents, but it is more sapping around minimal margins). Ammunition smuggling, on the other hand, seems a lot like drug smuggling. It can be in small packs, and the value is relatively high for the smuggled weight. This is also the reason why search, security and intelligence services are now focusing much more on the smuggling of ammunition than weapons. Ammunition is indeed an ant track that goes towards weapons.
There are a lot of weapons in the world.
Even if the production and sale of weapons tomorrow, is discontinued worldwide, we are on an immense stock of weapons.Enough to be able to give every 6th world citizen one.
Do you still remember that epic movie with Tom Cruise, The Last Samurai?Played itself off, late 19th century, where old Samurai shooting against the newly founded, modern, trained, well-armed Japanese army? The guns used in that movie, were real. And really came out of the period in which that film played off. Simply because the creators were asking around, and stumbled upon a trader who had a warehouse full of those guns somewhere. That turned out to be cheaper than making fake guns.
Do you remember those news footage from Syria or Afghanistan from fighters who walked around with weapons from the second and even the First World War?Yes, those stocks are still there. This is the nasty of weapons: they are going to last incredibly long. Once lubricated in cosmoline, and wrapped in fat paper, they can be put away until the end of time. Look around, and you encounter stocks of weapons that have been made in the time of the peasant war. Even better looking around, and there are still stocks of weapons from far before.Waiting for someone to come along with money.
But yes, those weapons go nowhere when there is no ammunition.
Then all the bad guys would get the monopoly on weapons and all the people/countries that obey the law are defenseless.
So the reason is that such law never comes through, because it is pure nonsense.
Great Britain has sustained it for a long time to ban firearms.
Cops went there long street with only a bat.If necessary, they could ask for support from heavier armed agents.
The number of murders was slightly lower.Unfortunately not absent. People will find a different way.
Just for the convenience that IRA states omitted.Although that may also be relevant: armaments from US by Irish immigrants. People do a lot of trouble getting guns. Even if there is a strict control. It’s apparently not doing anything to stop it.
It is a utopian idea, just like a fair distribution of wealth or absolute truth.If we could regulate it, that ban would be a countershell.
In Many cases, we cannot do more than choose the least bad of two evilis.Still prefer police with weapons. Because criminals come to weapons, be it or not.
Pretty little.Do you have an idea how you are going to enforce the ban?
The ideal image.Which I would be right behind. Also for all governments.
Unfortunately, there are a mountain people who are not honest, and they are going to hide those weapons.
And, of course, governments do exactly the same.
I don’t know if I believe in hell after we die, but unfortunately it does exist on Earth.
By a minority of our fellow human beings.
Then the person issuing that prohibition would ignore the prohibition.Because people are still people. Welcome to the Monkey Rock.
THE US would completely ignore the commandment
Such a ban will be evasive worldwide.Of different parts of weapons is “dual use” possible. This will make control biwithout tricky. And without control and compulsion, it will be a pointless prohibition.