This article appeared in Spanish in the Argentinian publication Full Aventura. The original article is available here.
.
On Tuesday, July 8th, at the NH Tango Hotel, convened by the Federation of Legitimate Users of Argentina (FLUA) and the Association of Legitimate Users of the Province of Buenos Aires (ALUPROBA), economist John Lott, known for publications such as “More Guns, Less Crime” and “Myths of Gun Control,” gave his presentation. High-ranking officials from the Controlled Materials Agency were present, along with officials from the Ministries of Security of the Nation and the City of Buenos Aires, various police authorities, politicians, including Senator Florencia Arietto for the Province of Buenos Aires, representatives of industry and sports, gun shops, the top brass of BERSA, and various journalists.
.
John Lott presented interesting statistics about our country and compared them with North American statistics. His analysis of these data went beyond a simple “gun defense.” For expert eyes who read between the lines, John Lott gave us a roadmap for developing effective public security policies based on a powerful, equipped, and trained police force, strong laws with harsh sentences, and the power of responsibly armed civilians to deter and reduce crime.
.
Probably the most intense moment of the evening came when, speaking of international statistics, John Lott asked: “Tell me, in which country did crime decrease after implementing a citizen disarmament policy?” Faced with a hush in the room, he categorically responded: “In none.” Thus, debunking all the disarmament policies promoted by NGOs and government agencies.
.
As an example of failed disarmament, I cite the United Kingdom. To summarize, in 1997, the United Kingdom had one of the lowest homicide rates in its history. Citizen disarmament was later introduced as a policy to reduce violence and crime. The result of this was not long in coming: the homicide rate and crime soared uncontrollably into the stratosphere. It took the British almost 30 years to return to an acceptable homicide rate only after recruiting huge numbers of police and prison officers, changing laws and harsher sentencing, building modern prisons, and achieving preventive technology, but it still hasn’t reached the initial rate of 1997. The obvious question is: was the disarmament and the tons of public funds burned worth it to obtain, after 28 years, a worse result than at the beginning in 1997? The answer is clearly no, not only from a monetary perspective, but also because of the horrific cost in human lives lost to crime that Her Gracious Majesty’s disarmament policy left in the balance.
.
Another myth that John Lott debunks with real statistics is the famous passivity promoted by anti-crime organizations and television media, which is to avoid provoking the criminal. We already know that journalists and anti-crime activists, when faced with a crime, advise “doing nothing that might upset the aggressor,” as if the aggressor weren’t ready to attack. Therefore, the victim in the face of a crime has to allow themselves to be robbed, raped, and killed because the perpetrator is a poor “misunderstood victim of society.” John Lott demonstrated that the victim’s passivity only makes the situation worse and escalates into worse things. And if the victim is a woman and acts passively, even worse: she is 2.5 times more likely to be murdered than a man. The best option a victim has is to defend herself, and if she is armed, even better.
.
For those interested, the full lecture can be found online. I highly recommend watching it because of the interesting conclusions drawn from local Argentine data and statistics. John Lott’s lecture in Buenos Aires was truly a treat.
.
Goodbye ANMaC, Welcome (again) ReNAr
Just before John Lott’s presentation, early on July 1st, we had breakfast with the news from the Official Gazette of the Argentine Republic (BORA), publishing Decree 445/2025, Controlled Materials Agency – Transformation Ordered.
.
If the reader consents to my marketing, allow me to remind you of the list of my articles referring to ANMaC, namely: on November 12, 2018, I wrote “Termination of the ANMaC-Dienst Consulting Contract,” warning about the registry damage caused by a monopolistic contract. On January 31, 2019, I published “Serious Drop in Legitimate Users” with statistical projection charts warning that legitimate users would tend to zero in 2020, a projection that came true and earned that publication recognition throughout Argentina. On July 12, 2019, he again warned: “Let’s save exReNAr – Today the ANMaC,” again warning about the decline in legitimate users and the monopoly contract. On November 21, 2019, he again wrote: “ANMaC 2020-2025 Deficit of Legitimate Users.” On May 4, 2020, he warned: “ANMaC – The worst of realities and the greatest of challenges” and the danger of disarmament ideology applied to a gun control agency. On February 23, 2022, he again published: “ANMaC under fire” due to the harmful effect that attacks by disarmament organizations had on the organization amid the pandemic. On October 18, 2023, the ANMaC announced: “ANMaC 2023-2025 When idealism collides with reality,” warning about the disconnection of the entity’s management from legitimate users, even creating an advisory council without the participation of any representative entity from the shooting industry and sport.
.
If I may be ironic, I don’t understand what could have gone wrong with ANMaC.
.
We must remember that, since its creation with Law 27192, the entity has always had uncertainties and obscure points that simply hindered its progress. The law was full of loopholes, such as stating that the object of control was “weapons,” without clarifying that they were firearms—an excessive ambition on the part of the legislators, since practically everything can be used as a weapon. Another key and disruptive point was the article that dedicated 20% of the revenue to promoting disarmament policies and combating violence, thus squandering those funds on tailored reports whose results were “what the politician wanted to read.” Continuing with another critical point that no one ever dared to address was the labor dichotomy and the incorporation into the public curriculum of employees hired by the Cooperating Entity, with its meager and declining revenue, and public officials dependent on the national budget. Finally, and just to keep things short, we mention the damage caused by the monopolistic contract, the irrational increase in tariffs, the lack of key clauses in the law, and so on. We could go on listing errors.
.
Conclusions
It is evident that the creation of the ANMaC was intended to deny legitimate users their demands and requests, and to comply with the public disarmament policies they were pursuing. In short, to deny legitimate users their identity and their existence. It was known that the entity would fail as it did. Politicians and legislators still don’t understand that the owners of the registry system are the legitimate users. The system exists thanks to everyone involved in this sector. One cannot go against centuries of Argentine history and try to strip away the gun-wielding essence of those who want to own weapons.
.
The change made to the RENaR (National Weapons Registry) is not only administrative but also symbolic. Under José Genaro Báez, the RENaR became known as “The Home of the Legitimate User.” Assistance was provided and all questions and concerns were answered, something that never happened with the ANMaC, whose employees were ordered not to provide information. Many fundamental policies emerged from the Registry that contributed to National Security in the 1990s. Interaction with Legitimate Users was superlative, and the actions were productive: Gun Rights Workshops, Shooting Entities Workshops, Sports Shooters Workshops, the development of Manuals for Shooting Instructors, Shooting Entities, Gun Identification, and countless other issues. Everyone was heard and had their place in contributing to improvements to the system.
.
As a hypocrite, it is worth mentioning that before the transformation, the pro-gunning agencies referred to ANMaC as a hopeless and useless agency. Later, and with an irrational and incoherent attitude, on July 29, they published a Letter to the National Congress rejecting the transformation decree. Speechless, or else it would be necessary to say that thanks to the articles they themselves suggested and incorporated into Law 27192, they were the architects of their own failure.
.
Finally, John Lott’s visit was invaluable, especially in demonstrating the reality and truth of the situation with statistics, even though it may not please the disarmament organizations and national media outlets, who, despite being invited, were absent. This is a strange attitude from those who claim to want to report the facts and protect citizens, except when it goes against their disarmament agenda and monetary interests.
Socolovsky Christián, “John Lott en Argentina y Nuevo ReNAr,” Full Aventura, October 13, 2025.
Senator Florencia Arietto of the Province of Buenos Aires expressed her genuine interest in the data provided by John Lott in his conference.
0 Comments