8 fictions about gun control, and they come from anti gun sources...

2aguy

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2014
112,037
52,320
2,290
Yes...an anti gunner did this research....after the research he showed wisdom by ending his anti gun silliness....

'Gun Control Fails,' Say Statistics from ... Gun-Control Advocates

Fiction 3: "Gun Violence"

“Gun violence” is a crafted phrase to induce people into associating guns withviolence. Using Ezra Klein’s logic, Brady’s "A"-graded, low-gun states should be the safest. But when collated with CDC firearms murder rates, an inconvenient correlation appears: more gun control, higher black homicide, lower Caucasian homicide.




Fiction 4: Gun Control Will Make You Safer

Two days after Sandy Hook, Slate reported on how the Australian government enacted “sweeping gun-control measures” just twelve days after a mass murderer killed 35 tourists in Port Arthur, Tasmania. Then CNN reported on how the UK enacted a gun ban following the school massacre of 15 children in Dunblane, Scotland. If there is a formula for successful gun bans, twenty dead children in Newtown presented a key factor.

The advertised benefit of gun control: fewer guns means less violence. This is false -- including in the Australia and UK examples.

Before their bans, both countries had lower violent crime and murder rates than the United States. Ten years later, all U.S. violent crime categories have decreased, yet they have been increasing in the UK and Australia.

The biggest tragedy: by 2007, UK women were raped twice as often as American women, who were able to partake of their civil right of self-defense. Australian women were raped three times as often.

In 2008, the Guardian reported that guns were “easily and cheaply available on the streets of the UK's big cities.”

This mirrors U.S. research: “Gang members were significantly more likely to report it has been easier since the Brady Bill went into effect to acquire illegal guns.”

The Daily Express reported:



Shocking statistics released last night show a 14 percent increase in murder and manslaughter in England and Wales between 1998 and 2007.


There was also a 28 percent increase in deaths from bladed weapons. Those killed by shootings increased by the same figure.

Most shockingly, there was a 57 percent increase in deaths caused by punching and kicking.



Slate misleadingly claimed that Australia hadn’t had a “similar massacre” since banning guns in 1997. This is false: their deadliest mass murder occurred in 2009, when 135 died after arsonists set brush fires. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said: “There’s no words to describe it, other than it’s mass murder.”

Four other Australian mass murders involved knives, fire, and carbon monoxide.

Here’s the most revealing aspect of the failed attempts to reduce violence by restricting law-abiding citizens: after 10 years of failure, neither country said: “Those bans didn’t help. Violent crime is worse, so let’s restore the civil right of self-defense.” The obvious implication: gun bans are not about enacting the most effective policies for reducing crime, but about civilian disarmament for its own sake.

Our crime data corroborate the British and Australian experience. Collating Brady grades with FBI violent crime rates shows similar correlations at the state level, though not quite as strongly as with black and white homicides:


 

Forum List

Back
Top