2012's Mass Shootings And Some "Gun Control" Observations

Tyler Durden's picture

With the resurgence of gun control politics storming to stage center over the past 72 hours, and providing yet another fulcrum point of social division precisely at the time when the nation is already hopelessly divided on other key political talking points which look set to push the Fiscal Cliff debate unresolved into 2013, below we provide two useful benchmarks to frame the "gun debate." The first, courtesy of WaPo, is an interactive chart of all mass shootings, including all the relevant details, taking place in 2012. The second, is a dispassionate and fact-based observation courtesy of BusinessWeek of the realities and challenges facing politicians, and the broader society, as America grapples with 200+ years of Second amendment history on one hand, and a society that is ever more "troubled", and increasingly prone to violence and murder on the other.

First, click on the chart below for a jump to the WaPo's succinct and interactive chart showing all 2012 mass murders.

Second, we recommend everyone read the following narrative from BusinessWeek's Paul Barrett, titled "A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate", in which without any attempt to score political brownie points (a rare occurrence these days), the author "reviews some of the proposals that politicians and others will talk about in coming weeks."

From BusinessWeek:

Demonization A couple of weeks before Newtown, our premier sports broadcaster used his Sunday Night Football halftime soapbox to issue a heartfelt appeal for reducing the prevalence of handguns. Responding to the Kansas City Chiefs’ Jovan Belcher murder-suicide, Bob Costas said, said: “Handguns do not enhance our safety. They exacerbate our flaws, tempt us to escalate arguments, and bait us into embracing confrontation rather than avoiding it.” Similar pained cries have echoed in the wake of the Connecticut disaster —for example, this column by the New Yorker‘s Adam Gopnik, entitled, “Newtown and the Madness of Guns.”

The emotionalism is understandable. Yet railing against guns in general gets us nowhere. What are Costas and Gopnik suggesting? Confiscating some, most, or all of the 300 million firearms already in private hands? The Second Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, says that’s not happening. Our democratically grounded political system says that’s not happening. The United States, for better or worse, is a gun culture. Nearly half of American households have one or more guns, according to Gallup. Publicly mourning the degree to which firearms are woven into the fabric of our society only plays into the hands of those who contend that any discussion about regulating guns is a pretext for prohibition. The hard truth for gun foes is that the firearms are out there, and they’re not going away.

Assault weapons President Barack Obama supports a reinstatement of the assault weapons ban, according to White House aides. After asserting this position during his 2008 campaign, Obama dropped it, fearing a politically costly fight with the National Rifle Association and its allies in Congress. The Newtown shooting revives the issue because the killer used an assault weapon—more precisely, a semiautomatic military-style rifle—to kill most, and possibly all, his victims, according to the Connecticut medical examiner.

We tried an assault weapons ban from 1994 to 2004. It didn’t work. To avoid the restrictions of a poorly written law, gun manufacturers simply made cosmetic design changes and then enjoyed a sales boom. American gun enthusiasts reliably buy more of any make or model opponents want to deny them. Moreover, while black matte military-style rifles may look especially ominous to the uninitiated, they’re not more lethal, shot-for-shot, than grandpa’s wooden-stock deer hunting rifle (which is derived from an earlier generation of military weapons). Fully automatic machine guns—capable of firing a stream of bullets as long as the trigger is depressed—are already unavailable, unless you have a special permit. And finally, any proposal to ban the manufacture and sale of new assault weapons would do nothing about the many millions lawfully owned by private citizens. Democrats are not going to propose impounding rifles already in private gun racks.

Large-capacity magazines The coming proposals to limit the size of magazines, the spring-loaded boxes that contain ammunition, are more relevant, if no less controversial, than assault weapons “bans.” In a mass killing, the lethality of a semiautomatic rifle (or pistol) relates to how quickly and often the shooter can fire before reloading. Law enforcement officials said Sunday that the Newtown shooter used multiple 30-round magazines with his rifle, firing something on the order of 100 rounds in a very short period.

It’s not difficult to buy a 50-round “drum” magazine. Banning civilians from owning such magazines, it seems to me, would not infringe on anyone’s Second Amendment rights. Perhaps the same could be said for 30-round magazines, or 20-round magazines. Choosing the cap is necessarily arbitrary. The assault weapons ban of 1994-2004 prohibited the manufacture and sale of new magazines exceeding 10 rounds. In theory, we could reinstitute that rule.

The problem with restricting magazine capacity is that to make such a limitation meaningful, Congress would have to ban the possession of large magazines, not just the sale of new ones. Otherwise, the millions of big magazines already on the market will provide an ample supply to future mass killers. As a matter of political and law enforcement reality, are lawmakers prepared to send sheriffs and police out to take away all privately owned magazines exceeding 10 rounds? In the 1990s, the answer was no. Has that changed? I doubt it.

Background checks Here is where there’s room for achievable, meaningful improvement. The existing computerized background-check system screens out felons, minors, and other prohibited categories. The system has gaps, however. It covers only sales by federally licensed firearm dealers. “Private collectors” are allowed to sell guns without background checks. By some estimates, 40 percent of all sales slip through this gaping loophole. It ought to be closed. Nonlicensed sellers could be required to conduct their transactions via a licensed dealer, who would receive a small fee.

Improving the background-check system would make it more difficult for some significant number of shady characters to obtain guns. (They could still acquire them illegally, of course.) The Newtown shooter tried to buy a rifle at a local store shortly before his rampage and was turned away when he wouldn’t submit to a background check.

However, an improved background-check system would not have stopped the Newtown killer from doing what he did: scooping up his mother’s legally acquired guns before shooting her and all those teachers and children. Mass killers tend to be young men who, despite deranged minds and evil hearts, prepare carefully. Some have clean records before going berserk. Others obtain their weaponry from relatives or friends. Fixing background checks is worth doing. It won’t stop the next Newtown.

Mental illness Now we are getting to the heart of the matter. Congress and executive branch agencies at the federal and state level can do more to make sure that disparate and often disorganized records of individuals who’ve been found to have serious mental health problems find their way into the background-check system. The law already prohibits people who’ve been adjudicated mentally ill from buying firearms. We need to do a better job of collecting and disseminating the relevant information.

Many who are dangerously mentally ill escape treatment that would prevent them from harming themselves and others. Short of mass murder, hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people commit crimes and end up in prison without adequate antipsychotic medication. It’s too difficult for relatives, friends, teachers, and others to civilly commit dangerously mentally ill individuals before they do harm.

Taking steps well short of incarceration—our current de facto policy for warehousing the dangerously mentally ill—would be a humane alternative for all concerned, and it could prevent school shootings. This is not gun control, per se, yet it deserves urgent attention.

Personal responsibility People who own guns need to keep them away from children and psychologically troubled members of their households. With the right to own firearms comes great responsibility. We don’t yet know all the details about the Newtown killer and his deceased mother. Yet it’s hard to imagine what she was thinking: a disturbed, antisocial, 20-year-old son and a half-dozen guns?

The most important gun control can’t be legislated. It’s common sense.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
francis_sawyer's picture

truth alwayz be rayciss...


I kno dat ~ I heard it on a TV show...

Dingleberry's picture

And I highly doubt they have an entire generation of kids on psych meds. That's what all these shootings have in common: psych meds combined with family dysfunction.

Colonial Intent's picture

"Smart Racist"

Contradiction in terms.

trav777's picture

the US has a substantially higher percentage of the criminal demographic.

wagthetails's picture

I just wish we could delay this debate with a several month moment of silence.  Just reflected on it.  Already those children and teachers are fogotten as the Left doesn't waste a good crisis and the Right uses this 'fear' that guns will be eliminated (they won't) as commercial for their freedom loving party.   I mean, GD...these children aren't even in the ground yet.   


francis_sawyer's picture

Sorry to interrupt your sadness, but most of the global elite would prefer you to take as may moments of silence as you need... Emote as much as possible & BY ALL MEANS ~ take to overreacting in a way that they can shove a new wave of freedom stripping regulations down your throat, which, you will be glad to adhere to because you acted on emotion [which they took advantage of]...


The children are dead... The best way you can honor them is to set about defeating the malaise that allowed their death to happen (instead of wallowing in self pity over somebody else's encounter)...

Skip's picture

The ADL (Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith) issued a press release in response to the Newtown school massacre. Expressing its “shock, disbelief and horror” over the killing of at least 18 children, the ADL statement by Abe Foxman and the organization’s Connecticut regional director reads in part:

There is nothing that can justify the killing of innocents, especially young children. We hope that this was not an act motivated by hatred, as so many other school shootings have been in the past.

The statement concludes with a reminder that the self-described “nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency” is hardly a disinterested party in such tragic events:

ADL has long been an advocate for strong, effective and sensible gun control legislation. Since 1967, ADL has favored expanded federal and state regulation of the sale and transfer of firearms and other dangerous weapons. Unfortunately, all too many times we have sadly witnessed the tragic dangers guns present. Across the country in schools, businesses and houses of worship, individuals have used guns to terrorize communities and local institutions. We firmly believe that one way to limit the power of extremists and reduce violence in our communities is to enact tough, effective gun control legislation.

If you value your life and property better join the NRA TODAY.

john39's picture

odd that the ADL doesn't apply this gun control mandate to Jewish "settlers" in Palestine...  who are armed to teeth with weapons that can't even be bought in the United States...  by average citizens anyway.

Urban Redneck's picture

Perhaps if Foxman's hypocritical hebe ass had been facing liquidation as a child down the road in the Vilna Ghetto, or had been resisting in the Warsaw Ghetto, instead of doing the cafeteria goy stint in comparable peace and luxury-  he might have a different take on the fascist State trying to disarm the masses.  For all the millions he has been raking in with his "Remember the Holocaust" shpiel the unmensch seems quite content to conform to Einstein's paradigm of insanity.

Perhaps it's a Zionist-Nazi collaboration redux...

It's impossile to forget something when you haven't learned it in the first place.

JR's picture

The case being made by some that the Connecticut massacre could be another false-flag operation is not so far-fetched when one realizes that the driving force behind the real terrorists setting the stage for gun confiscation is the fact that these are innocent little children. And who better, or worse, than the ADL to get the gun control bandwagon rolling?

Dr. Kevin Barrett of Sott.net writes: “Since we know that many if not most ‘lone nut’ massacres are actually false-flag operations, we might as well assume that this one is too. Getting that message out early, in order to shape public opinion while it is still malleable, should be a top priority of everyone who wants to put the real terrorists out of business.

“The answer to the question, WHY?” says Barrett, “is really very simple: When you terrorize the population, you open the door for fascist, authoritarian politicians.”


JR's picture

Referring to the July 1984 massacre at a San Ysidro, California, McDonald’s restaurant, Israeli criminologist Abraham Tennenbaum wrote that:

what occurred at a [crowded venue in] Jerusalem some weeks before the California McDonald's massacre: three terrorists who attempted to machine-gun the throng managed to kill only one victim before being shot down by handgun carrying Israelis. Presented to the press the next day, the surviving terrorist complained that his group had not realized that Israeli civilians were armed. The terrorists had planned to machine-gun a succession of crowd spots, thinking that they would be able to escape before the police or army could arrive to deal with them.

From John Lott & William Landes, Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement

Few events obtain the same instant worldwide news coverage as multiple victim public shootings. These crimes allow us to study the alternative methods used to kill a large number of people (e.g., shootings versus bombings), marginal deterrence and the severity of the crime, substitutability of penalties, private versus public methods of deterrence and incapacitation, and whether attacks produce copycats. Yet, economists have not studied this phenomenon. Our results are surprising and dramatic. While arrest or conviction rates and the death penalty reduce normal murder rates, our results find that the only policy factor to influence multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. We explain why public shootings are more sensitive than other violent crimes to concealed handguns, why the laws reduce both the number of shootings as well as their severity, and why other penalties like executions have differential deterrent effects depending upon the type of murder.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 52

hooligan2009's picture

we should be grateful i suppose that the insane people who commit mass murders whilst on medication are not smart enough to operate radio controlled remote devices.

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez's picture

"our premier sports broadcaster"

Say what you want about Bob Costas, his hair darkens with age! 

Seriously, nearly all shooters are on "psychotropic drugs".  I held my breath and watched establishment TV last night and 60 minutes and in interview with a surviving nurse that knows the family said the shooter was on medications.  Hell would freeze over before an establishment interviewer would ask "what type of medications"?


crusty curmudgeon's picture

Here's an idea:  let's regulate drugs.  That way, nobody will be able to abuse them!  It's genius, no?

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez's picture

Medications kill not drug companies!

Bicycle Repairman's picture

"our premier sports broadcaster"  Bob Costas?

No way.  Not even close.  He makes Brent Musberger look appealing.

Skip's picture

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

~ Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Bagbalm's picture

They can't teach grammar and arithmetic and you want to force them to carry arms? Only the few who volunteered. Most of them were trained in college guns are evil and the black shadow of evil creeps off the gun and snatches your soul if you touch the filthy thing.

demsco's picture

I just ponied up and became a lifetime member of the NRA. Now I am on a list to be carried off to a camp somewhere, but I would do it again and again. These things are rare and the facts remain, as the WaPo article PROVES, assualt rifles are a small portion of violent crime further backed up by FBI stats. Gun bans are bullshit.

Cthonic's picture

Make sure you're on the list, join Gun Owners of America and JPFO as well.

yellowsub's picture

Screw Gun Control, the gov't is looking to implement People Control.

carambar's picture

just a few comments

Backgrounds checks are wothless since Republican refuse to renew the Backer law.

Now, thanks to the GOP, anyone can buy any weapons at a Gun Show without the fear of a background check.

A very telling data, Number of gun homicides per 100000 inhabitant   2.98 (US), less than .50% in the 12 largest OECD countries.

Since the failed attempt by the Shoe Bomber to blow up a plane (2001) millions of travelers have to take their shoes off before airport security.

After all the murders and mass killing by guns in this country we did.... NOTHING  (courtesy of the NRA)


Bagbalm's picture

"anyone can buy any weapons at a Gun Show without the fear of a background check"

LIE - not from a dealer - If you do a private sale that can be anywhere - gun show - home in his living room - out of his trunk.

Gift Whores's picture

You didn't shoot that.

groundedkiwi's picture

Perhaps some stats done on the shooters and their addiction to violent video games needs some investigation.

Ignorance is bliss's picture

There was a time when people would have believed the corporate news agencies. That time is long gone. Weapons and munitions sales are sky rocketing. Anyone with two functioning brain cells can only  conclude that 911 was a false flag. There are lots of incongruities surrounding the tragedy at the Sandy Hook elementary school that require further explanation.

I think the Govt is trying to remove as many weapons from the street ASAP, because of the accelerating financial collapse. Too little too late and no one believes their B.S. anymore. Preppers are everwhere and the sheeple are awakening.

dexter_morgan's picture

If you look at OKC bombing and 911 there was anti crime legislation pending but stalled before both of those. After OKC they didn't get the patriot act through, though it was ready, but they did get a major omnibus crime bill through. After 911, eureka the 'temporary' patriot act is passed. Is this just another in a tradition of effects needing a cause?

Terminus C's picture

In the Canadian media they are calling the mother a prepper. They even used that terminology.

That is how I was sure it was a false flag.

BurgundianRon's picture

Requiring a license to own a gun is far less important than requiring a license to have a child. The parents of these kids (or young adults) are largely to blame here (if evil has an actual blame). These people are committing these horrific acts because they feel alone, unloved, imperfect, etc...normal human emotions. However, in a strong family unit, these feelings are recognized, understood and counteracted by an immense sense of purpose, belonging and love. Strength is recognized by the ability to overcome anger, not subdue it with video games and facebook.

In a culture where many families are dual income (if two parents exist in the home), should we not ask "are you capable of raising this child" before we allow parents out of the hospital. One needs to prove more responsibility to adopt a dog in the USA than to have a child.

Start with dysfunction at home. Violence is a symptom of the disease.

dexter_morgan's picture

Was this shooter bullied at that school? Did he think he was getting even? Was his dad a LIBORgate witness? Could be a lot of things at play here......

goodrich4bk's picture

He never attended the school.

I would be looking closely at any meds he was prescribed.  There is mounting evidence that in about 10% of patients, psychotropic drugs increase thoughts of suicide and/or murder.  It could also explain why these incidents have been occurring more in recent years than in the past, when there was much easier access to weapons.

LadyEconomist's picture

Leftists are going completly nuts over this. Every single article on HP is about banning guns. There is no discussion, no reasoning with these guys or gals (I suspect more women are behind than men) what-so-ever. They are completly certifiably crazy. They shouldn't have guns. Maybe party affiliation should be also checked and and dems should be banned from gun ownership.  

trav777's picture

I'm convinced at this point that there can be no common ground.

There must be secession and separation.  Those who want the rainbow coalition of the disarmed should be able to have that nation.  And when it goes BK, they have nobody to blame but themselves.  Likewise, the opposite should have its own nation and people.

As things stand, people are too different...yankees have nothing in common with people in the mountain states, and the yankees and libs are all suffering from Passover Syndrome.  They intend to pay their own guilt with others' blood

Bagbalm's picture

The government has already shown it is not willing to pay significant money to treat mental health. All the residential treatment centers were closed and the crazies (yes not a PC term) are now 'homeless'. The new cost is things like Friday. The parents are paying the price of insane people not being treated and a couple dozen dead kids are a lot cheaper than lots of mental hospitals fully staffed and functional. As usual if somebody else is paying it's good for business.

AlamoJack's picture

Uh, what part of "the right of free men to own guns shall not be infringed" (Quote from faulty memory).  No one has asked me but I'm tellin' you what I think - It ought to be like the 1800's - everyone that wants to wear a firearm - DOES.  Respect for the law and well being of others will skyrocket.

bpj's picture

W and BHO have blood on their hands, (But it cites estimates by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which has reported extensively on drone strikes, of 474 to 884 civilian deaths since 2004, including 176 children.

Fix It Again Timmy's picture

A word on the media, CNN specifically.  In the weeks preceding the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, I attended daily meetings in a large conference room at CNN's Atlanta headquarters, this conference room was called the War Room.  These meetings discussed the massive planning and coordination necessary for the upcoming war coverage.  These people were hoping and counting on the war; during the times that some sort of peaceful resolution seemed remotely possible, the atmosphere was one of disappointment and dejection.  Well, they got their war and in May of 2003, a large party was held in CNN Center to celebrate the "end of the war."  During this celebration, various news anchors and reporters were falling over each other in praising their courage and dedication during the course of the war when they were embedded with the troops and reporting the "news".  They got their war, the anchors were able to report in their fashionable and chic Banana Republic clothes, and thousands of people died.  CNN is a whore for blood and guts as are all the other major media outlets.  But you know that, right?




Hammerabi's picture

I don't see Chicago on WaPo's map.

goldfish1's picture

Businessweek? Fukk Businessweek.

gwar5's picture

More must read Gun facts which will make socialists hate you even more for pointing out:


Since before 1950, all public shootings have been in "Gun free zones" except for one, Giffords in 2011, and she did not have her CCW on her.

The Batman Shooter had a choice of 7 nearby theaters, but he deliberately went farther out of his way to go to the only Cinema that banned guns and posted signs declaring itself a "Gun free zone"

Mass shootings have actually decreased over the decades, 1929 was the biggest year with 46 (I think John Lott says 26 this year).

Until Newtown, CT -- it was the UK and Germany who had the biggest mass school shootings.

"Gun free zones" are really "Kill Zones" for deranged killers and are causing likelihood of mass casualties in Malls and schools by creating unarmed soft targets.


John Fund, NRO: The Facts about Mass Shootings:

One World Mafia's picture

On February 14, 1929, seven men were machine gunned to death in Chicago. Although this caused outrage, the St Valentine's Day Massacre was a simple case of mobsters murdering others during the Prohibition Era.

Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/329111#ixzz2FM7KSTQY

Today the shootings have strong links to anti depressants.


Gravy's picture

So here we go again:  ban “assault” rifles, ban handguns, ban magazines, restrict this and control that.  It’s all been tried and failed at some point. 

The simple fact is we can’t regulate hate. 

So, the next psycho killer is out there.  What are we going to do to stop him?  Really, he/she’s out there, what does it take to stop him?

We need to allow people the right to protect themselves.  If only one teacher/principal/administrator in any of these schools had been allowed to carry a gun, then lives could have been saved.  While the recent homicides are tragic, the real tragedy is that no one was allowed to protect those kids except for the police.  It’s painful to think that one dozen, maybe even two dozen, of those kids could still be alive today if it were not for the Federal law that prohibits guns in schools. 

The blood of those kids is on the hands of our fascist dictators in DC. Give us the right to protect our kids and maybe the next psycho killer will get stopped in his tracks.  I, and many others around this country, would not hesitate to help.  I think it’s insane that our help is not wanted.

One World Mafia's picture

They recommend putting more mental patients on antipsychotic meds. Never heard of these school shootings before the '90s and the rise in popularity of serotonin uptake inhibitors.

Side effects of anti-psychotic medication and andtidepressants include psychotic behavior. Psychiatrists have said people become crazier each time they go on and off. Going off them quickly instead of weaning off them can throw people into dangerous black moods.


More people on these drugs also means more pregnant mothers taking these drugs.

Chartist's picture

Half the country is on some form of psychotropic drug and there's no way the NRA is going to allow half the US population to disappear from the gun buying market.

derryb's picture

Missing from your list:

Video games that teach "killing is fun."

Actual mass murder with a gun is akin to playing a video game. He who has the most on-screen practice will achieve the highest body count in the shortest period of time when it comes time to take it to the next level. Strange how most of our modern mass murderers are young male adults while most young female adults have no interest in video games that condition players into having a little fun with a real weapon. It would be interesting to see study results of the hours spent playing these games by our modern killing machines.

Marley's picture

Time for gun and gun owner control.

loveyajimbo's picture

GUNS and a fast history lesson:
A little Gun History Lesson
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 19 75 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes,
44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent . Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect!

ejhickey's picture

what is the source of your info about Australia?  while i am against gun confiscation and most gun control laws, i think the statistics you quoted are out of date by about 10-15 years.  also they are disputed.   can you provide a link?

that said even if australia's gun laws were successful, their experience is not applicabe to the US

jughead's picture

Go long on wooden stocks and 10 round magazines