Which is the greater NRA failing: Clinical Paranoia or Willful Blindness?

---

Sonali January 9, 2013 9:23 pm (Pacific time)

Ok, so I take it the madman now wants to corontll and have power over the media also? So tell me what must the Caymanian Media do lie to the international press about what's really going on here in our Country? Ok lets limit it.........."Calm down now everyone it's just some young Caymanian gangsters robbing and shooting each other! "Theres no need to be alarm about anything, lets just keep bringing those tourist ships in and lets get back to making MONEY!!! Money! Money! Money!Money is the root of all EVIL Mr. Mckeeva, it is greed that has bestowed you! Put your Cayman Children first. Give your Caymanian Children jobs and find good programs for them. Also the people have a right to know what's going on anywhere in this world. You can't have the tourist coming here and walking freely and dont have a clue what's going on in our streets. You want the media to lie to the people? Prevention is better than cure...The tourist safety should be our number one priority. Tourism is what makes up the Country yes we know that Mr. Mckeeva, but lets face it Mckeeva you have let your people down, you have let the young people down,and also your own Country down and now u want to let the tourist down by not being truthful with them? Cayman went down the drains when you started teaming up with Dart and Company and Immigration with this roll over policy! You are just being money hungry first you start off by selling all of our good beach land and many other land to foreigners. You want to have power and corontll over everything are u kidding me? Sooner or later you will be telling us all what kind of clothes to wear and what shoes to put on. I'm a WBayer that voted for you all these years but its hightime that you GOT to GO and you better believe this will be your last term in office!!!!

---

Anonymous December 27, 2012 2:36 pm (Pacific time)

"BTW: The story you quote is six years old and it quotes statistics from 2003. Not exactly current news." How do we really know that 2003 was not some other time? The comparing of other countries with America means what? The misinformation that the gun-grabbers and their associates continue to make just further embolden the criminals and the gangbangers and the future criminals and gangbangers. In time Canada will be getting more of the same that we have, then you think your people with guns are going to admit having those AR15s and other weapons with high capacity mags? In my state the left warned us that the Concealed Handgun License would bring back the wild west (a myth in most regards), but these people have the lowest crime rates in the country, even lower than Vermont. I just cannot understand why you hate America so much Daniel? Everything you have in tech and medicine is from us, you have literally never had to face any risk in your life. Maybe someday you will send us a thank you card, maybe a cake? I like chocolate.

 You asked what comparing other countries means. You quoted Gotlieb who wrote:

"Canada's experience has simply demonstrated that no matter what kind of gun control law a government passes, that law is doomed to failure because instead of keeping guns out of the wrong hands, the law disarms the wrong people. Canada's gun control scheme has not just failed - it has failed disastrously. Clear evidence of that can be found in a comparison of the crime rates for Canada and America.” 

His statement is directly refuted by the stringent gun control in countries like Japan, Switzerland, etc. The gun problems in Canada I attribute to our proximity to the U.S. and the leakage of America's violent culture into an otherwise peaceful society.

I don't hate America but rather I hate some of your attitudes. You say that everything we have comes from America. It's arrogance and wilfull blindness like that, that generates a lot of animosity--and not just among Canadians. 

---

Anonymous December 27, 2012 11:52 am (Pacific time)

In over 52% of the murders in the US in 2011 in which the race of the murderer was known, the murderer was black. Over half of the victims of murder were also black. But blacks are only 13.6% of the population. Put all that together, and the murder rate in the US for non-blacks was more like 2.6 per 100,000 in 2011. Counting the hispanic murder rate puts the white homicide rate at 1.4% and decreasing. Americans are statistically far safer outside of our cities than most any other place on the planet.


It seems Canada is looking for a scapegoat, too: Former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin blamed the United States for his country’s violent crime wave. He says his southern neighbor is eagerly bringing guns over the border.


Blaming the United States for Canadian crime is an argument that does not pass the smell test,” Gottlieb wrote. "Canada's experience has simply demonstrated that no matter what kind of gun control law a government passes, that law is doomed to failure because instead of keeping guns out of the wrong hands, the law disarms the wrong people. Canada's gun control scheme has not just failed - it has failed disastrously. Clear evidence of that can be found in a comparison of the crime rates for Canada and America.”

Gottlieb cites an article by Canada's National Post columnist David Frum where he revealed that "Canada's overall crime rate is now 50 percent higher than the crime rate in the United States.” Moreover, "Since the early 1990s, crime rates have dropped in 48 of the 50 states and 80 percent of American cities. Over that same period, crime rates have risen in six of the 10 Canadian provinces and in seven of Canada’s 10 biggest cities.”
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/24/150547.shtml

And how do you explain the low gun homicide rates of countries like Japan, UK, Switzerland, etc.?

BTW: The story you quote is six years old and it quotes statistics from 2003. Not exactly current news. 

---

Anonymous December 26, 2012 4:16 pm (Pacific time)

"Chauvinism? Most Americans are very proud of our country and our obvious exceptionalism. Those foreigner's and/or the domestic disgruntled opinion regarding our patriotism is of no significance, and those who dislike us is generally based on ignorance,envy, jealously, and a profound limited and cherry-picked knowledge of our history. Why else would they continue to offer an opinion on this matter when no one cares about their opinions? Are they simply passive-agressives that have no life of their own? Methinks something is seriously wrong with these types.

How the mighty are falling. This is not a prediction, but is happening all around you if you but had the eyes to see. 

You might also look up arrogant, an outstanding trait of many Americans like yourself. An attitude very similar to many Germans in the 1930s 

---

Kathy December 24, 2012 2:05 pm (Pacific time)

'Gun Free' Zones Attract Killers. "With just one single exception, the attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns."

A few things you won't hear about from the saturation coverage of the Newtown school massacre:

•Mass shootings are no more common than they have been in past decades, despite the impression given by the media.

•In fact, the high point for mass killings in the U.S. was 1929, according to criminologist Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections. •Incidents of mass murder in the U.S. declined from 42 in the 1990s to 26 in the first decade of this century.

•The chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about what they are for being struck by lightning.

•Until the Newtown horror, the three worst K–12 school shootings ever had taken place in either Britain or Germany.
"We must reject the idea that each time a law's broken, society is guilty- rather than the lawbreaker.

It's time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions"

-Ronald Reagan

"People improve themselves.
You can't improve somebody else by taking another person's money and giving it to them." Kathy

Germany, 1921-38. The first step in disarming a population is to put a 'hidden' gunman in a school, murder 27 people, then plant a disturbed kid as the fall guy, then you can persuade the politicos to publish lists of gun owners. Turn the public against gun owners, use mob mentality and lynchings to thin the gun owners' numbers, before an outright ban and confiscation.
Yes, the police were chasing a second shooter early in the incident, then news reports on the second shooter stopped and were never mentioned since. Today newspapers around the country have been publishing registered gunowners names and addresses.

People do not come out of a vacuum; they come out of society. Society creates its members, for good or ill 

---

Anonymous December 24, 2012 11:14 am (Pacific time)

You are over generalizing this "violence" stats, and the crimnologists I have talked in this matter who have an international background in this field have clearly made it clear that quality life in terms of having exposure to violent crime,it is far more safer here than in Canada, and in the other countries listed in the below post. Certainly the homicide rates are horrible, but they are getting lower, and paradoxically, to many who do the research, as firearm ownership is growing at record levels. Homicides are essentially located in area's that just do not affect most Americans. In 1965 and 1967 when we had some large national race riots, our brave firemen were often fired upon, and certainly, like pizza delivery people, know when not to tempt fate. Our quality of firemen are second to none on this planet, as is our miltary. It's unfortunate that you have not had the opportunity to travel around the world and see/compare and realize that the United States has many enemies who engage in propaganda. They always fail in their mission, which is so obvious to the super majority of Americans.

 Look up chauvinism.

---

Anonymous December 24, 2012 6:43 am (Pacific time)

Regarding acts of criminal violence:
"What Piers Morgan doesn’t want you to know about Britain and violent crime.
According to the UK Mail, Britons suffer 1,158,957 violent crimes per year, which works out at 2,034 per 100,000 residents. By contrast the number in notoriously violent South Africa is 1,609 per 100,000.

The U.S., meanwhile, has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is lower than France’s, at 504; Finland’s, at 738; Sweden’s, at 1123; and Canada’s at 935.

As a result of both the different ways in which these statistics are collected and of varying definitions of “violent crime,” there will naturally be some discrepancies between countries. Enough to account for a 5:1 difference between Britain and the United States, though? I rather think not." SEE CHART at link to see how our European states and Canada compare to our 466 per 100,000 violent crime rates: http://www.therightscoop.com/what-piers-morgan-doesnt-want-you-to-know-about-the-britain-and-violent-crime/

Of course violent crimes, including "Homicides," in politically "red" conservative areas of America are just a tiny fraction of the "Blue" areas. Evidence like that cannot be explained away as anything other than a high percentage of lawful citizens possessing firearms/and some demographics, so those on the left ignore it, for this empirical reality diminishes their false narrative. 

 Your numbers don't really prove anything:

 A violent crime or crime of violence is a crime in which the offender uses or threatens to use violent force upon the victim. This entails both crimes in which the violent act is the objective, such as murder, as well as crimes in which violence is the means to an end, (including criminal ends) such as robbery. Violent crimes include crimes committed with weapons. With the exception of rape (which accounts for 6% of all reported violent crimes), males are the primary victims of all forms of violent crime.

Violent crime by country

The comparison of violent crime statistics between countries is usually problematic, due to the way different countries classify crime. Valid comparisons require that similar offences between jurisdictions be compared. Often this is not possible because crime statistics aggregate equivalent offences in such different ways that make it difficult or impossible to obtain a valid comparison.

Canada

Canada classifies homicides, attempted murder, all assaults, all sexual offences, abduction and robbery as violent crime.

United Kingdom Violent crime rates in the UK

Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.

Rates of violent crime are in the UK are recorded by the British Crime Survey. The Home Office Statistical Bulletin on "Crime in England and Wales" summarizes the findings of this survey. For the 2010/2011 report,[9] the statistics show that violent crime continues a general downward trend observed over the last few decades as shown in the graph.

"The 2010/11 BCS showed overall violence was down 47 per cent on the level seen at its peak in 1995; representing nearly two million fewer violent offences per year."

Regarding murder, "increasing levels of homicide (at around 2% to 3% per year) [have been observed] from the 1960s through to the end of the twentieth century". Recently the murder rate has declined, "a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index.

By contrast, there is a widespread belief that violent crime is on the rise, due largely to a mass media which disproportionately reports violent crime. This phenomenon is described by Steven Pinker in The Better Angels of Our Nature.

United States

The United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) counts five categories of crime as violent crimes: murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, andsimple assault. It should be noted that these crimes are taken from two separate reports, the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), and that these do not look at exactly the same crimes. The UCR measures crimes reported to police, and looks at Aggravated assault, forcible rape, murder, and robbery. The NCVS measures crimes reported by households surveyed by the United States Census Bureau, and looks at assault, rape, and robbery. According to BJS figures, the rate of violent crime victimization in the United States declined by more than two thirds between the years 1994 and 2009.[10] 7.9% of sentenced prisoners in federal prisons on September 30, 2009 were in for violent crimes.[11] 52.4% of sentenced prisoners in state prisons at yearend 2008 were in for violent crimes. 21.6% of convicted inmates in jails in 2002 (latest available data by type of offense) were in for violent crimes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime )

Late breaking news: Four firefighters shot, two die in Rochesster NY http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/25/nyregion/2-firefighters-killed-in-western-new-york.html?

Only in America. How long before firefighters won't even show up if your house is on fire?

---

Anonymous December 23, 2012 2:55 pm (Pacific time)

You did not read my comment I see, so you want to wager on the theme of that last comment of mine: Violence?

I  refuted your assertion with verifiable statistics. What's to wager on? 

---

Anonymous December 23, 2012 1:11 pm (Pacific time)

Daniel we Americans are literally helping people in every country on the planet, both via private and government funding. For you to judge us is really not much of an important assessment. Maybe you should do some world traveling and see what's going on outside of that basement you appear to live in. It's a big world full of very talented people, and America has a disproportionate share of fantastic people and we're more than happy to help others in need. We also like our weapons and we are far safer from violence than you are in Canada, just look those stats up. In fact all of Europe is far more violent than we are, a fact, and easily documented. I also believe you know that, unless you really do not do any comprehensive/empirical research? Want to wager on the above's accuracy?

You gun people really do live in la-la land. Now the internet makes your disinformation so easy to refute, it makes you look like gullible fools. The intentional homicide rates according to the UNODC are:

Australia 1.0, Canada 1.6, Denmark 0.9, France 1.1, Greece 1.5, Italy 0.9, Japan 0.3, Norway 0.6, Switzerland 0.7, UK 1.2, US 4.2 (the highest) Check it out yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate 

If you have stats that refute those--bring them on. 

---

Anonymous December 23, 2012 11:04 am (Pacific time)

Just received this in an email. Don’t know if the stats are right, but,,,,

“-— Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.

Not only are the stats egregiously false...but I think you wrote it yourself perhaps thinking you could fool everyone...

---

Anonymous December 23, 2012 9:02 am (Pacific time)

Daniel to be frank, Americans simply are not all that concerned about the opinions of Canadians, europeans, nor anyone else as per our internal affairs, and also foreign affairs when it deals with our security interests.

That's the primary cultural problem with the U.S. You think you're the only ones on the planet. Well, as the U.S. declines globally, the chickens are coming home to roost. 

---

Gary Brotherton December 22, 2012 5:50 pm (Pacific time)

I'm all for gun control and proper enforcement of gun laws, and it's sad that it takes a tragedy like the Shandy Hook shooting to bring attention to the fact that the current system is not working. But when we speak of gun control and gun laws, we should start at the beginning and look at the entire spectrum of gun sales and gun ownership as well as ALL the criminals and crimes, not just the mass murderers. I'm very strong on gun registration as this is very important when it comes to keeping people accountable. Keeping people accountable wouldn't have stopped the shooter at Sandy Hooks, but it would serve to stop a greater number of gun related crimes and deaths. Unfortunately there are many gun owners that don't like the idea of registering all of their guns for fear that some day the Government will take them away. It's a real shame when law abiding Citizens don't feel that they can trust their own Government. What world do I live in? I live in the real world. Let's go take a look at the schools in my area and see what we find. Many of the high schools already have a Police Officer on duty! Why? Because of drug/gang related crimes. Isn't that one of the reasons for making schools a Gun Free Zone? Must not be working out very well if we need Police Officers there. At least the gang members have to wait until after school to shoot somebody. I'm glad the Police are there, and so was my Daughters when they were going to school there. Many of the drug/gang related crimes in this area are committed by illegal aliens who have total disregard for the law. Some are the very ones that Obama wants to give amnesty. It's not that they haven't committed crimes, they just haven't been caught committing them. Back in the 90's we had a rash of drive by shootings in the area. Gun laws didn't stop the gang members from getting their hands on fully automatic Uzi's. The local Police Dpt. was able to put a stop to the shootings in short order, simply because they were allowed to do their jobs. Which they did very well I might add. They found the parties responsible, they made the arrests and enforced the existing laws. Any illegal alians were turned over for deportation. Now here it is 2012 and the last time I remember hearing about a drive by was back in the 90's. Some 3000 people lost their lives on 9/11 and we've bombed and invaded several countries in our War On Terrorism. From what I can find, in 2011 around 4000 people (that we know of) died in the U.S. at the hands of illegal aliens. But yet our borders are in effect wide open. Let's face it. If terrorist should ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb without us knowing it. They could probably smuggle it across the U.S./Mexican border by simply disguising it as a shipment of cocaine. The gun laws in Mexico are doing very little to help the Citizens of Mexico as long as the drugs and human trafficking continues to pour across our borders. The law abiding Citizens of Mexico are unarmed making them easy targets for the Drug Cartel. Personally, I don't feel the need to own an assault rifle to protect my home. But the sad fact is, there are parts of this country where I might very well feel such a need. After all, there are cases where people did use such firearms to protect their homes after Hurricane Katrina, and they did so without firing a shot. And we don't want to forget about the signs in Arizona warning people of drug and human trafficking. The ones that are 80 miles from the border inside of Arizona. I don't know if the sings still exist, but I'm sure many of the problems still do. Tell ya what, let's all move down there and see how safe we feel shall we? If we're lucky, we'll only be intimidated into helping out the smugglers by allowing them to fill water jugs and such. It seems the Border Fence can only do so much by it self. How many troops have we sent to fight over seas in the last 10 years? National Defense does include protecting our borders, or at least I think it should. I know! How about State Militia? Oh wait, that would take us back to that nasty little thing called The 2nd Amendment that none of us can agree on.

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 5:15 pm (Pacific time)

The problem is not the NRA, the problem is not that we have to many guns. The problem is that to many criminals, unstable people get guns. Why should I, as an honest citizen, not be able to defend myself if someone wants to hurt my family or myself? Do you want me to depend on the Government to protect me? Think again, a Government who supports criminal behavior and terrorism? A Government who is criminal all the way around? I don't think so.

That's called paranoia, that's the problem and the basic difference between Americans and (for example) Canadians. We don't, and have never believed that the government is out to "get us". Americans are afraid of tyranny and have not even noticed that it has already arrived. Your guns have never done you any good. I'll be covering that in my next few articles. 

---

ECA December 22, 2012 3:22 pm (Pacific time)

Not taking any sides here, but this is a very well written article. WORD! ;)

Thank you! 

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 2:56 pm (Pacific time)

Yes, we need more guns, and with record gun sales going on, along with lowering gun crimes, that seems to be the ticket we need. I see all those countries you mentioned all come under our umbrella of protection. You are quite welcome, but would appreciate some remuneration. By the way, it appears many of your articles comments/quotes were by people who are pretty clueless, but then, they are obviously pretty much on an arc that goes no where. Class warfare development is pretty easy compared to getting a majority of Americans to dismiss the value of America's 2nd Amendment. As the people of Feinstein's ilk will once again find out. See there are nearly 30 democratic senators coming up for election in 2014, and though there are push polls going on, they will fail. Obama will attempt some executive order diversions, they will be futile. America needs more firearms in the hands of responsible citizens, and that is a worthy goal.

No, we are not under your umbrella! You could perhaps have made that argument in the 50s and 60s, but no longer. The world is no longer America's oyster. Others have moved on, but America, as a failed state, is like a specimen in amber. Hang on for a day or two and you can comment on my next piece where I show how the Second Amendment has come to trump both the First Amendment and the Constitution.  

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 12:53 pm (Pacific time)

Daniel maybe there's a lot of chuckle-heads out there too quick to attack the NRA's various suggestions? Knowing the history of topical matters is a valuable asset for serious people in my opinion- ["Think about it: The media is entering a new year

attempting to convince parents that their children will be less safe with a policeman in their school. Off the rails doesn’t even begin to describe it.]"


"Flashback: Clinton Requests $60 Million to Put Cops in Schools. Today, the same elite media who no doubt send their own kids to private schools that employ

armed security, just can't stop howling ridicule at the NRA's idea to give every student in America those same protections. Because the NRA's idea is so

appealing, as I write this, the media's going overboard, mocking it as bizarre, crazy, and out of touch. The media also doesn’t care how wildly hypocritical

they look.

In their zeal to rampage this left-wing agenda, the media has apparently forgotten that back in 2000, on the one-year anniversary of the Columbine shooting

(which occurred with an assault weapons ban in place), President Clinton requested $60 million in federal money to fund a fifth round of funding for a

program called "COPS in School," a program that does exactly what the NRA is proposing and the media is currently in overdrive mocking..." By the way Obama let lapse funding for school security programs. In time info will be getting out to expose the hypocrisy. Just the same this was a horrible event and as a father and grandfather I am deeply saddened and want policies in place to protect these kids. Liberals have proven since the 1960's that they simply are incapable of governing.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/12/21/Flashback-Clinton-Cops-in-Schools

Really. There has never been a need for armed police/guards in schools in Canada, UK, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, etc. What's the problem with the U.S. Do they not have enough guns, perhaps?

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 12:42 pm (Pacific time)

I love how the writer denies the existence of evidence contrary to his opinion. I wish he could learn to be a good debater, but he is too old to learn new tricks.

Point out the denial, please. 

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 10:47 am (Pacific time)

Bottom line: When people are armed, they are a lot safer than those who died in that school who were not. That is not propaganda. We have both longitudinal and latitudinal evidence showing that more gun laws (over 20,000 now) create a more dangerous environment. So how many of you want total gun confiscation? You think guns will not be hidden no matter how serious the sanctions? How many governments did that in the past, and how did that work out? No folks, we sanction our violent criminals with very long minimum prison terms, fast track the death penalty, and remodel our mental health programs as they were back prior to Clinton. Look at those options and others to begin a conversation on this matter. Also for being up front by all policy makers: A CALL FOR FULL DISCLOSURE IN THE GUN CONTROL DEBATE:


What is missing in every gun-control discussion is a "full disclosure" of which politician has a concealed weapons permit, has any guns in their own home, or

is ["protected by armed security guards!]." Just like some in the media insist on full disclosure regarding stocks and the personal holdings of the person

touting the stock, we need a "full disclosure" rule regarding armed protection of the politicians who advocate gun control.

For example do you recall Rosie O'Donnell several years ago decrying people having guns, while her armed bodyguard stood behind her? Sen. Diane Feinstein, a

proponent, in my informed opinion, of ultimate gun confiscation via her histrionic crusade of disinformation has security with personnel who have fully

automatic, not just semi-automatic, firearms. Will she give up that security? Will New York City Mayor Bloomberg, Sen. Charles Schmer, Sen. Barbara Boxer,

and on and on? Of course not! The vast majority of the tens of millions of lawful firearm owners know of people like those referenced above, as do the

millions of criminals who could care less about any laws, much less any gun restrictions.

America has a gun problem, followed closely by a people-like-you problem! 

---

Kathy December 22, 2012 10:33 am (Pacific time)

Here's an idea some of you who don't like factual debates and resort to name-calling, diversions, cherry-picking and augmenting events that have no serious macro application.:"Lock up Anonymous below and he/she won’t post." Incidents like Newton are fortunately, incredibly rare, random acts. A child has a GREATER chance of being killed struck by lightening, in a school bus ( either in a traffic accident, or being hit by a car while getting on or off the school bus) than by a crazed gunman. So, shall we now ban school buses? Leftists are so eaten up with symbolism they can no longer distinguish between it and reality in my opinion.

---

R. Adelman, Philidephia December 22, 2012 9:51 am (Pacific time)

I envision a USA of the future where everyone has a gun. Children have little guns with cartoon characters inscribed on them. Elegant ladies have pretty guns that glitter and fit in a pocketbook. Hipsters have flat guns that don't disfigure their tight clothes. Old folks have guns with positive grips and triggers easy to depress. There are YSL guns with designer handles, guns that evoke sharp cars, like Carrera guns, big honkin' guns for guys with low self esteem, and demure guns for folks who don't want anyone to know they carry a gun. Guns that communicate for teenagers. A gun for everyone... Then, when the madman pulls out his crazy-gun in the crowded mall, everyone will follow suit, and colorful bullets will fly all over the place; no one will know who the original shooter was, or even if he is among the fallen shoppers, and when the mall cops arrive with their musical machine guns they'll just have to mow down everyone.

---

Anonymous December 22, 2012 9:04 am (Pacific time)

Some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple victim public

shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Landes and Lott examined many of the very policies being proposed right now in response to the Connecticut massacre: waiting periods and background checks

for guns, the death penalty and increased penalties for committing a crime with a gun.

None of these policies had any effect on the frequency of, or carnage from, multiple-victim shootings. (I note that they did not look at reforming our lax

mental health laws, presumably because the ACLU is working to keep dangerous nuts on the street in all 50 states.)

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

The effect of concealed-carry laws in deterring mass public shootings was even greater than the impact of such laws on the murder rate generally.

Someone planning to commit a single murder in a concealed-carry state only has to weigh the odds of one person being armed. But a criminal planning to commit

murder in a public place has to worry that anyone in the entire area might have a gun.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches,

Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut starting gunning down

shoppers a few weeks ago. In Portland it was reported that a CHL owner pulled his gun on the shooter, did not fire, but the shooter then quickly killed

himself.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid.

NOTE: In Oregon, the newspaper, The Oregonian, in Portland Oregon provided data that there are currently over 162,000 Concealed Handgun Licenses. These CHL's

began to be issued over 20 years ago. In that time, handgun crime by these licenses is statistically nil in this state of over 3 million. In the last year to

date, Chicago alone has had over 442 school age children killed. This is one of the most firearm restrictive areas in the country. The empirical data that

the FBI has would hardly be called "anecdotal crap." Of course it's horrible to have these deaths, but criminals are not going to follow any current or

future laws, that is also not "anecdotal crap." The 162,000 CHL's in Oregon, and throughout America, clearly demonstrate that law abiding citizens make their

respective communities safer, also not "anecdotal crap."

Just more pro-gun propaganda. As I noted from yesterday's NYT editorial: 

We have known for many years that a sheriff’s deputy was at Columbine High School in 1999 and fired at one of the two killers while 11 of their 13 victims were still alive. He missed four times.

 In August, New York City police officers opened fire on a gunman outside the Empire State Building. They killed him and wounded nine bystanders. 

More nuts running around with guns are no solution. 

---

Daniel Johnson December 22, 2012 5:36 am (Pacific time)

As I published this piece, the NYT published an editorial, "The N.R.A. Crawls From Its Hidey Hole". Here are a few excerpts. (The complete editorial is here http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/opinion/the-nra-crawls-from-its-hidey-hole.html?)

…we were stunned by Mr. LaPierre’s mendacious, delusional, almost deranged rant.

His solution to the proliferation of guns, including semiautomatic rifles designed to kill people as quickly as possible, is to put more guns in more places.

Any town officials or school principals who take up the N.R.A. on that offer should be fired.

We have known for many years that a sheriff’s deputy was at Columbine High School in 1999 and fired at one of the two killers while 11 of their 13 victims were still alive. He missed four times.

In August, New York City police officers opened fire on a gunman outside the Empire State Building. They killed him and wounded nine bystanders. 

---

Bill Annett December 22, 2012 2:49 am (Pacific time)

Anon, as long as there are cretins like you, with your anecdotal crap, there will continue to be Newtown massacres.

---

Anonymous December 21, 2012 9:50 pm (Pacific time)

"Coincidentally, on the same day as the Connecticut massacre, a deranged man in China attacked twenty-two school children with a knife. None of them died!" About one million died in Rawanda by knife/machete! Had they been armed with firearms that would not have happened. More people are killed by hands and feet than by "rifles/shotguns" which include the semi-auto AR15, or any other semi-automatic long gun. In those states that allow CHL's to be carried at schools, or by students at universties there have been no shootings. These mass murderers are crazy, but they are not stupid. They stay away from those locales where they know, generally, people will be armed. Criminals could care less about gun laws, and elite liberals could care less about law abiding citizens, nor will they give up their paid security. I remember a few years back when Rosie O'Donnell was on TV saying how people should not be allowed to have any guns. Behind her were two of her 24/7 armed security guards. Later one was arrested for assault in a New York City bar. The 2nd Amendment is not to be infringed, so expect a major battle, and the far left will lose, completely is my guess. Merry Xmas and happy 2013 everybody, even to you athiest Marxist losers.

[Return to Top]

---

©2025 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.