Why they voted no

Over the weekend, millions of Brazilians went to the polls, no not to elect a new member of Congress or choose a new president, they were voting on a national referendum to determine whether the government should ban the sale of firearms. The referendum was soundly defeated with over 60% of the electorate voting to keep their firearms or at least in favor of the right to posses them should they desire to do so. Brazil is without question one of the most violent countries on Earth. For all the talk about crime in America, there were twice as many murders in Brazil (a country whose population equals half that of the United States). Why then, with so much violence, didn’t the people of Brazil vote in favor of the ban? The left and outside observers, especially in Europe, will the dismiss the result as the byproduct of a skilled “No” campaign that manipulated the electorate, in reality the Brazilians are keenly aware that such a ban would leave law abiding citizens defenseless as the criminals would in no way be inhibited by such an embargo. Gun bans have never been linked to a reduction in crime. Indeed, in Europe where firearms are virtually unknown, violent crime is at an all time high. The existence of firearms does not create a criminal, anymore than the existence of rope will drive someone to hang themselves. Once again, politicians looked for the quick fix, the window dressing to solve a deep rotted problem. Violence and murder in Brazil is a serious problem, rooted in poverty and culture, not it in the existence of guns. If the mere existence of guns influenced the crime rate, then it would stand to reason that in every country from the US to Brazil to Britain, violent crime would have been higher decades ago when firearms were more prevalent. No such statistics exist, for the simple reason that no such correlation exists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4371120.stm