Skip to content

Liberty Vs. Gun-Grabbing Liberal Opportunists; How Gun-Free Zones Attract Mass Shootings

December 16, 2012

Gun grabbers in the United States shamelessly took the Connecticut school shooting incident as an opportunity to revive gun debate. Among the celebrities and limousine liberals who aggressively  push for total gun control include British CNN anchor Piers Morgan, communist propagandist Michael Moore, socialist online medial mogul Ariana Huffington, and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The delusional Morgan tweeted: “America has got to do something about its gun laws.” This potential liberal dictator didn’t mince words when he also said: “I’d Remove Every Gun in America.”

Tough luck, Piers. I can almost hear millions of gun owners in America shouting: “From my cold dead hands, gun grabbers!”

Many clueless Filipinos also joined the anti-gun bandwagon promoted by the United Nations. A Filipino article commenter said: “Growing evil incidents in the US because of uncontrolled gun ownership is telling. Many lunatics and drug addicts can readily buy one. And it is unbelievable how a woman, a teacher, could own three, yes, three guns at a time. She was not into hunting or shooting hobby unlike the Philippine president.”

I know millions of Filipinos naively share that view– the so stupid, so dangerous a view that the government must confiscate all guns to ensure people’s safety and security. Again I say, we’re indeed fucked up.

Another liberal political pundit, Ed Schultz, brazenly lambasted gun owners and gun advocates for “hiding behind the Second Amendment” every time mass shootings like the Connecticut incident occur. He then urged the country’s lawmakers to make the necessary changes. He said:

“Tonight is… a time we as a people come to grips with a changing society. We need to be the Founding Fathers on how we deal with the sickness in our country called ‘gun violence.’ Hiding behind the Second Amendment doesn’t cut it anymore. Hiding behind the Second Amendment can no longer be the shield for access. The people who wrote that document owned slaves, oppressed women, and were short on tolerance.”

Schultz was simply parroting the leftist and liberal talking points that America’s Second Amendment is “outdated”.

This radical left website sums up this anti-American madness:

“The American Right is fond of putting itself inside the minds of America’s Founders and intuiting what was their “original intent” in writing the U.S. Constitution and its early additions, like the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms.” But, surely, James Madison and the others weren’t envisioning people with modern weapons mowing down children in a movie theater or a shopping mall or now a kindergarten.”

Second Amendment clearly states:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The wordings may seem vague and jumbled, but what is very clear is that the founding fathers actually believed that “a well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State” and that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The purpose of the Second Amendment is personal self-defense. This is very consistent with the founding fathers’ view on individual rights and liberties– that every man is entitled to his right to LIFE, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness. Thus, they envisioned a sovereign individual who must have the capacity and be well-equipped to defend himself not only against criminals, but also against an oppressive, tyrannical government.

The best explanation to this “self-defense” and “free State” view can be found in Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence.

In that great document Jefferson wrote (emphasis mine):

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Jefferson harbored this skepticism or belief that “the people can not be all, and always, well informed.” Yes, America was founded by geniuses during the Age of Enlightenment, but it has been- and is currently being- run by political naifs and welfare imbeciles. This is the reason why the founding fathers envisioned an armed citizenry that must be strong and prepared enough to fight government tyranny. Thus he said: “And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”

Yes, Jefferson believed that “when the people fear the government there is tyranny”, but  “when the government fears the people there is liberty”.

Is it still unclear?

Yet the gun-grabbing liberals and communists fear the word “militia”. What is this militia in the first place?

Section 311 of US Code Title 10, entitled, “Militia: composition and classes” in its entirety:

“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are —

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”

Furthermore, the founding fathers defined and described this militia in the following manner:

Tench Coxe, 1788: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of anAmerican … The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal orstate governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.”

Tench Coxe: “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right 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.”, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts: “What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.” Rep. of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress at 750 (August 17, 1789).

Alexander Hamilton: “…that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.” (Federalist Paper #29)

Thomas Jefferson: “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”, Proposal for a Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334 (C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950)

Alexander Hamilton: “Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped.” (Id) {responding to the claim that the militia itself could threaten liberty}” There is something so far-fetched, and so extravagant in the idea of danger of liberty from the militia that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery (mockery). (Id)

Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.” (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788)

James Madison: “A WELL REGULATED militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” (1st Annals of Congress, at 434, June 8th 1789, emphasis added.

Sir George Tucker: “The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits…and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – Sir George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in I Blackstone COMMENTARIES Sir George Tucker Ed., 1803, pg. 300 (App.)

Richard Henry Lee: “To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them…” (LIGHT HORSE HARRY) LEE, writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic (1787-1788)

Joseph Story: “The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people.” – Joseph Story. Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. 3 vols. Boston, 1833.

Joseph Story (Supreme Court Justice): “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic…”

George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

Still, the left don’t get it because of their distorted, warped understanding of freedom and human nature. The left believe that man is inherently selfish and evil, thus he must be controlled by society. This is the main reason why they promote and advocate gun ban and confiscation.

But gun ban doesn’t work. There is absolutely no real-world, statistical correlation between gun ban and lower gun-related crime rates. The failed gun ban experience of the Philippines proves this. Technically, the entire Philippine archipelago is a gun-free zone. There is gun ban almost everywhere. But did gun restriction solve crimes and lower crime rates? Absolutely not. In fact, the Philippines has one of the highest gun-related deaths in the world.

Take a look at the following facts (Philippine experience):

  • Number of Privately Owned Firearms: 3,900,000
  • Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population: 4.7%
  • Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking: 20
  • Number of Licensed Firearm Owners: 358,934
  • Number of Registered Firearms: 775,000
  • Number of homicide by firearm: 7,349
Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People

Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People

Here’s one undeniable fact about the Connecticut school shooting: Sandy Hook Elementary School, like all other schools in the United States, is a gun-free zone.

This law professor hit the nail on the head when he argued that gun-free zones provide false sense of security to people and even encourage criminals to commit crimes.

Gun-free zones are premised on a lie: that murderers will follow rules, and that people like my student are a greater danger to those around them than crazed killers. That’s an insult to honest people. Sometimes, it’s a deadly one. The notion that more guns mean more crime is wrong. In fact, as gun ownership has expanded over the past decade, crime has gone down.

John R. Lott, one of the nation’s leading gun experts, calls for the banning of gun-free zones to stop mass shootings. He argued that there is a “very good chance” the school shooting could have been thwarted or mitigated, if teachers there were allowed to carry concealed firearms. He said that there is correlation between concealed carry laws and lower murder rates.

Do gun free zones invite these attacks?

Lott answered in the affirmative, saying “they’re magnets for these attacks.” He further said:

“These gun-free zones are really tiny areas within a state, and yet that’s where these attacks occur time after time.

“Whenever you see more than a few murders taking place, the odds are almost a hundred percent that they are going to occur at a place where permit-concealed handguns are banned. And they were doing it, ironically, in an attempt to try and make people safe. But the problem is it is law-abiding citizens who obey those bans, not the criminals.”

Also, this report also reveals that the guns used in school shooting were already illegal and that there is already a gun control statue on the books.

The media has been reporting that the police found 2 handguns at the scene of the crime.  HoweverThe law in CT states that one must be 21 years of age or older to own a handgun.  Fox News and others mainstream media outlets have reported that the alleged shooter is 20 years of age.  This being the case, there is already a gun control statue on the books which (in theory) should have prevented this massacre from happening.  Regardless, within minutes of the shooting the gun grabbers were already calling for the death of the 2nd Amendment and blaming the gun its self for this horrific crime.  These authoritarians are trying to use this incident to say that we need to outlaw guns and suggesting that if we do we will then be able to get them off the street.  But, wait a second… the gun used in this crime IS ALREADY ILLEGAL (minors are not allowed to possess a handgun in either NJ or CT) The fact that the gun supposedly used in this horrific crime IS ALREADY ILLEGAL points out the governments inability to prevent incidents like this from happening by drafting new laws.

Did gun restrictions in CT states prevent the mass shooting? Absolutely not!

In regard to Piers Morgan’s hilarious claim that gun confiscation can solve crimes, reality and statistics show that Britain’s gun control laws increased gun-related crimes by 89%. Here’s a related report:

“Gun crime has almost doubled since Labour came to power as a culture of extreme gang violence has taken hold.

“The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year  –  a rise of 89 per cent.”

Also, in terms of violent crime records, Britain is worse than United States and South Africa. Britain has the worst violent crime rate in Europe. The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, show:

  • The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
  • It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
  • The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
  • It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.
Australia’s gun ban also failed to work:

“It has now been over 10 years 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 Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.  While the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns. Criminals in Australia now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws ONLY adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.”

In Israel, teachers and ever visitors are allowed to carry and bring guns at school.

In Israel, teachers and ever visitors are allowed to carry and bring guns at school.

Meanwhile in Beijing, China, 22 school children were stabbed by a

Meanwhile in Beijing, China, 22 school children were stabbed by a “mentally deranged” man, armed with a knife. An officer said the attack, in the village of Chengping in Henan province, happened shortly before 8am on Friday, as students were arriving for classes.

How concealed carry works and saves lives

From Facebook: “I’m sure you’ll be as shocked as I was to not hear ANYTHING about this in the Leftist Media. This man, Nick Meli, is a true Hero as far as I’m concerned. He is a CCW holder in Oregon and he confronted a

Concealed gun carrier Nick Meli, 22, saved lives.

Concealed gun carrier Nick Meli, 22, saved lives.

psychotic murderer at the Clackamas Town Center mall last week, thus saving an unknown number of innocent lives. Nick saw what was happening, took cover and then drew down on the suspect. Nick held his fire though, because the background wasn’t clear and he feared he might hit an innocent person. But he was willing and that made a profound difference. Nick’s actions made the killer retreat into a stairwell and kill himself, like the coward that he was. [RELATED STORY]

VICTIMS OF THE SANDY HOOK SCHOOL MASSACRE

Because their names and memories must also be remembered.

CHILDREN:
Charlotte Bacon, 6
Daniel Barden, 7
Olivia Engel, 6
Josephine Gay, 7
Ana Marquez-Greene, 6
Dylan Hockley, 6
Madeleine Hsu, 6
Catherine Hubbard, 6
Chase Kowalski, 7
Jesse Lewis, 6
James Mattioli, 6
Grace McDonnell, 7
Emilie Parker, 6
Jack Pinto, 6
Noah Pozner, 6
Caroline Previdi, 6
Jessica Rekos, 6
Avielle Richman, 6
Benjamin Wheeler, 6
Allison N. Wyatt, 6

ADULTS:
Rachel Davino, 29
Dawn Hochsprung, 47
Anne Marie Murphy, 52
Lauren Russeau, 20
Mary Sherlach, 56
Victoria Soto, 27

RELATED VIDEOS:

42 Comments leave one →
  1. December 16, 2012 3:38

    “Those who “abjure” violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.”
    — George Orwell

    Also from Orwell:

    “That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer’s cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

    Implication? Personally, it reminds me of Machiavelli warning of the danger of being unarmed: one becomes despised.

    Personal side-note:

    “What do the anti-gun protestor and the pro-censorship oligarch have in common? They are both jackbooted, goose-stepping, totalitarian thugs.”

  2. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    blame all the gun owners for the actions of those who abuse the right to carry and defend

    • December 17, 2012 3:38

      If you’re being sarcastic, it doesn’t show. Otherwise… You didn’t get the point of Orwell, did you?

  3. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    it’s easy to by-pass the guilty and go right to the law abiding citizens rights to carry and defend themselves,rather then blame the people who commit these crimes.

  4. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    anothere maniac attacks a school,it’s the second amendments fault,not the fault of the person commiting the crime.lets linch the law abiding citizens for the crimes of the guilty.

  5. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    second ammendment caused this hook school shooting and not the acual criminal,blame americas people for what this criminal did.passing the buck for injustice is the american way of life.

    • December 17, 2012 3:38

      Yeah! And the more than 9,000 gun related crimes in the Philippines per year were also caused by the “right to bear arms”?

  6. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    disarm the people.that will stop all these mad people from killing.

  7. GENE WILLIS permalink
    December 16, 2012 3:38

    once again,the gun grabbers of america want to protect the criminaly insane by disarming lawful citizens,even the jewish owned net works want to help protect the criminals this way as well.

    • December 17, 2012 3:38

      You’re hilarious! Read the article again. Oh, the Jews again…😉

  8. Pro-Gun Ban are Lunatic permalink
    December 17, 2012 3:38

    @ GENE WILLIS,

    In case you don’t know, Connecticut has one of the toughest gun laws in the U.S.

    To buy a gun, Connecticut law requires residents apply for a local permit, typically with the town’s police chief, have their fingerprints taken and submit to a state and federal background check with a 14-day waiting period. To buy a handgun, residents also are required to take a gun safety course.

    The state is also one of seven to have an assault weapons ban that specifically lists more than 35 semiautomatic and automatic weapons. It does not appear to cover the .223 caliber rifle used in Friday’s attack.

    http://www.twincities.com/politics-national/2012/12/connecticut-gun-laws-among-the-toughest-in-the-u-s/

  9. GabbyD permalink
    December 18, 2012 3:38

    your data on australia is wrong.

    ” Actually, Australian crime statistics show a marked decrease in homicides since the gun law change. According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, a government agency, the number of homicides in Australia did increase slightly in 1997 and peaked in 1999, but has since declined to the lowest number on record in 2007, the most recent year for which official figures are available.”

    care to clear up ur facts?

    • Gun-toting Guy permalink
      December 18, 2012 3:38

      You need to watch this…

    • Gun-toting Guy permalink
      December 18, 2012 3:38

      As to statistics, assault rates in Australia increased… http://www.reasonorforce.com/2010/08/australian-gun-ban-facts-statistics.html

      http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

      • GabbyD permalink
        December 18, 2012 3:38

        uhm, note that assault rates includes ALL assaults, i.e. knives, etc… including guns. the ones caused by guns have been falling.

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 18, 2012 3:38

        There are also many kinds of homicides. Homicides can be committed thru stabbing, blunt objects, arson, strangulation, etc.

        You simply missed the point. The blogger’s link talks about “Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate”, assaults” and others.

        Your link talks about “homicide” in general. It does not say whether they’re gun-related homicides. So, I think you’re wrong.

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 18, 2012 3:38

        Hmmm…

        “note that assault rates includes ALL assaults, i.e. knives, etc… including guns. the ones caused by guns have been falling.”

        Precisely! Are you gonna call for the ban of those weapons as well? Knives, like guns, are just tools.

      • GabbyD permalink
        December 18, 2012 3:38

        nope. the point is that the link froi provided is simply wrong.

        look to the australian inst of criminology.

        “Analyses of the 2008 victim-based NARMP dataset suggest that:

        while the number of victims of armed robbery has fluctuated from year to year, there has been an overall decrease of 28 percent since 2003, with a smaller decrease of approximately 10 percent in the number of victims compared with 2007 data (6,427 in 2008 compared with 7,133 in 2007 and 8,865 in 2003);
        knives were the most commonly used weapon (51%), with a four percent increase in the use of knives compared with the previous year’s results. Armed robberies involving firearms decreased by three percent to account for only 13 percent of all weapons used in armed robbery;”

        don’t rely on second hand sources — go straight to the source.

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 19, 2012 3:38

        GabbyD

        there’s nothing wrong with the blogger’s source. you’re simply using government statistics that tries to cover-up the failure of australia’s gun control…

        from your link: “while the number of victims of armed robbery has fluctuated from year to year, there has been an overall decrease of 28 percent since 2003”

        let’s compare that with the blogger’s source: “Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate. From immediately after the ban was instituted in 1997 through 2002, the robbery and armed robbery rate was up 200% over the pre-ban rates.”

        the blogger’s source talks about 200% increase of robbery and armed robbery from 1997 to 2002.

        your source talks about “overall decrease” since 2003.

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 19, 2012 3:38

        australia should ban knives then…😉

    • Gun-toting Guy permalink
      December 18, 2012 3:38

      Guns are part of human history and reality. You cannot just make guns disappear so that criminals and bad guys won’t get access to guns.

      But if you want a total gun control law and to totally disarm an entire population, try the North Korean model. Just migrate to NoKor then…

      HIGH CRIME RATES IN COUNTRIES WITH GUN CONTROL
      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1083303/posts

    • Gun-toting Guy permalink
      December 18, 2012 3:38

    • GabbyD permalink
      December 18, 2012 3:38

      about homicides, again from aust inst of criminology:

      There has been a pronounced change in the type of weapons used in homicide since monitoring began. Firearm use has declined by more than half since 1989-90 as a proportion of homicide methods, and there has been an upward trend in the use of knives and sharp instruments, which in 2006-07 accounted for nearly half of all homicide victims.

      well, froi? how about recognizing the facts this time?

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 19, 2012 3:38

        that doesn’t prove a thing. lol! do you even understand your links?

      • Gun-toting Guy permalink
        December 19, 2012 3:38

        you talk about banning gun as the solution to crimes. well, your source simply proves you wrong. remember that the australian government confiscated the firearms of its people.

        here are facts you missed from your source:

        – the number of armed robberies involving organisational victims at residential locations (possibly indicating some type of home business) almost DOUBLED in 2008 from the number recorded in 2007 (142 in 2008 compared with 76 in 2007);

        – During 2008, there were 5,686 incidents of armed robbery recorded in Australian states and territories.

        – The majority of armed robbery incidents involved a single individual victim (63%) or a single organisation (27%).

        – Knives were the most common weapon used in the majority of locations (eg corner stores, supermarkets and takeaways 62%; post offices and newsagents 58%; open spaces 58%).

        should you also demand banning of knives?

      • GabbyD permalink
        December 19, 2012 3:38

        who wants to ban knives? knives are better than guns, fewer fatalities. this is the point.

      • Michael Schwartz permalink
        December 20, 2012 3:38

        Funny! That’s how scatter-brain people think, actually…

  10. December 19, 2012 3:38

    “The Switzers are completely armed and quite free.”
    — Chapter XII, The Prince

  11. GabbyD permalink
    December 19, 2012 3:38

    beyond just looking at the historical behavior of crime stats, there are lots of careful academic studies to show that the gun ban reduced gun related crime. you can cite those, but you chose not to?

    • Michael Schwartz permalink
      December 20, 2012 3:38

      Yeah, it works in North Korea, dude. It also works in South Africa, which has the highest gun-related crime rates in the world. Keep fooling your twit self.

      • GabbyD permalink
        December 20, 2012 3:38

        what works in South Africa?

        nothing “works” in north korea. i’m sure even froi would agree to that.

  12. December 20, 2012 3:38

    Europe, with very strict gun control, has more mass murders than does the USA.

    From this news article:

    The attacks in Europe might not get as much attention in the U.S. or even in other countries in Europe besides where the attack occurred as the attack in the U.S., but multiple victim public shootings appear to be at least as common in Europe as they are here. The following is a partial list of attacks occurring in Europe since 2001. As mentioned, all of them occurred in gun free zones, places where guns in the hands of civilians were not allowed:

    – Zug, Switzerland, September 27, 2001: a man murdered 15 members of a cantonal parliament.
    – Tours, France, October 29, 2001: four people were killed and 10 wounded when a French railway worker started killing people at a busy intersection in the city.
    – Nanterre, France, March 27, 2002: a man kills eight city councilors after a city council meeting.
    – Erfurt, Germany on April 26, 2002: a former student kills 18 at a secondary school.
    – Freising, Germany on February 19, 2002: Three people killed and one wounded.
    – Turin, Italy on October 15, 2002: Seven people were killed on a hillside overlooking the city.
    – Madrid, Spain, October 1, 2006: a man kills two employees and wounds another at a company that he was fired from.
    – Emsdetten, Germany, November 20, 2006: a former student murders 11 people at a high school.
    – Southern Finland, November 7, 2007: Seven students and the principal were killed at a high school.
    – Naples, Italy, September 18, 2008: Seven dead and two seriously wounded in a public meeting hall (not included in totals below because it may possibly have involved the mafia).
    – Kauhajoki, Finland, Sept. 23, 2008: 10 people were shot to death at a college.
    Winnenden, Germany, March 11, 2009: a 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers.
    – Lyon, France, March 19, 2009: ten people injured after a man opened fire on a nursery school.
    – Athens, Greece, April 10, 2009: three people killed and two people injured by a student at a vocational college.
    – Rotterdam, Netherlands, April 11, 2009: three people killed and 1 injured at a crowded cafe.
    Vienna, Austria, May 24, 2009: one dead and 16 wounded in an attack on a Sikh Temple.
    – Espoo, Finland, Dec. 31, 2009: 4 killed while shopping at a mall on New Year’s Eve.
    – Cumbria, England, June 2, 2010: 12 people killed by a British taxi driver.

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/06/10/john-lott-america-gun-ban-murders-multiple-victim-public-shootings-europe/

  13. GabbyD permalink
    December 21, 2012 3:38

    John lott’s work on guns has also been widely discredited. dont you want to cite any of these other studies froi?
    ___________
    But Lott Is Not A Credible Source For Information On Gun Violence

    Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime” Hypothesis Has Been Widely Discredited

    Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime” Hypothesis Maintains That Gun Ownership Helps Curtail Crime. In his book More Guns, Less Crime and in other media, Lott repeatedly pushes the myth that increased gun ownership, especially increased concealed weapons permits, results in a decreased incidents of violence crime. [University of Chicago Press, accessed 12/17/12]

    Stanford Law Review: Lott’s Central Hypothesis Is “Without Credible Statistical Support.” In a Stanford Law Review report titled “The Latest Misfires in Support of the ‘More Guns, Less Crime’ Hypothesis,” Ian Ayres and John J. Donohue III studied how coding errors in data undermine Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime” hypothesis.

    Lott Relies On Unscientific Research And Factual Distortions To Promote His Views On Guns

    Lott Pushed Discredited Claim That Gun Laws Disarm Law-Abiding Citizens. In The Wall Street Journal, Lott cited dubious survey research to claim that members of law enforcement generally believe that “too often the laws disarm law-abiding citizens, not criminals, and thus make it easier for criminals to commit crime.” In fact, academic research indicates broad support for some gun violence prevention measures within the law enforcement community. [Media Matters, 8/3/12]

    Lott Used Distorted Anecdotes To Advocate For Dangerous National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act. In a FoxNews.com column, Lott inaccurately described legal proceedings against individuals who ran afoul of New York’s gun laws to push the passage of the gun-lobby favored National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act, which would allow for weakened restrictions on carrying concealed guns. Several law enforcement associations have spoken out against the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act, suggesting that it would “endanger” police officers and “compromise public safety.” [Media Matters, 1/20/12]

    • kentblack@gmail.com permalink
      December 21, 2012 3:38

      so are your unreliable sources. is media matters credible? the point is, look at the facts and use your empty mind. you simple googled articles that say negative things to lott’s article. a typical below-average mind.

  14. kentblack@gmail.com permalink
    December 21, 2012 3:38

    what is unreliable about these facts? these are solid facts, empty-brain.

    – Zug, Switzerland, September 27, 2001: a man murdered 15 members of a cantonal parliament.
    – Tours, France, October 29, 2001: four people were killed and 10 wounded when a French railway worker started killing people at a busy intersection in the city.
    – Nanterre, France, March 27, 2002: a man kills eight city councilors after a city council meeting.
    – Erfurt, Germany on April 26, 2002: a former student kills 18 at a secondary school.
    – Freising, Germany on February 19, 2002: Three people killed and one wounded.
    – Turin, Italy on October 15, 2002: Seven people were killed on a hillside overlooking the city.
    – Madrid, Spain, October 1, 2006: a man kills two employees and wounds another at a company that he was fired from.
    – Emsdetten, Germany, November 20, 2006: a former student murders 11 people at a high school.
    – Southern Finland, November 7, 2007: Seven students and the principal were killed at a high school.
    – Naples, Italy, September 18, 2008: Seven dead and two seriously wounded in a public meeting hall (not included in totals below because it may possibly have involved the mafia).
    – Kauhajoki, Finland, Sept. 23, 2008: 10 people were shot to death at a college.
    Winnenden, Germany, March 11, 2009: a 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers.
    – Lyon, France, March 19, 2009: ten people injured after a man opened fire on a nursery school.
    – Athens, Greece, April 10, 2009: three people killed and two people injured by a student at a vocational college.
    – Rotterdam, Netherlands, April 11, 2009: three people killed and 1 injured at a crowded cafe.
    Vienna, Austria, May 24, 2009: one dead and 16 wounded in an attack on a Sikh Temple.
    – Espoo, Finland, Dec. 31, 2009: 4 killed while shopping at a mall on New Year’s Eve.
    – Cumbria, England, June 2, 2010: 12 people killed by a British taxi driver.

    are you saying those mass shootings didn’t occur? you’re just a typical empty-minded twat.

  15. Simon Raval permalink
    December 24, 2012 3:38

    A good video which explains how liberals play with statistics to pursue their agenda.

    • December 24, 2012 3:38

      A comment before actually watching that video… TYT is really hopeless. A good video indeed.

    • GabbyD permalink
      December 26, 2012 3:38

      what is the problem?

      1) why add mexico in international comparisons? they have a huge drug problem where merely saying guns are illegal wont work, and it was never an issue that a gun ban would prevent gun related deaths because implementation would always be a problem.

      2) note that the video concedes that gun related deaths are higher, but violence perse isnt, in the US.

      thats the point. how do we reduce gun related deaths?

      the last, only really interesting point is implementation. Implementation is very difficult, and its not clear how it would be carried out.

  16. GENE WILLIS permalink
    April 10, 2013 3:38

    hello to all who are here and who have been here.the right to the preservation of ones life and family isnt a goverment right,it is an inharited right.a right fought for by those who believed in freedon of choice and the right to life.people died for this country and we are taring it apart with our guilt.why?who is it that tells another where or when they should die or give up all they have worked for and earned.why is it that the weak talk the loudest,but do nothing unless it affects them directly.in 1980,the liberals,progressives,courts,hand wringers,and people who have never had children toke it into thier own hands and decided that all of them from here on will tell you how to and what not to in raising you’r family.want to know why we are where we are at and why?1980thats when this nation started to downspire into what we are to-dATE.GUNS DIDNT DO IT,OR CRIMINALS.WHEN THESE PEOPLE CONSPIRED TO INFLCT HARM ON THE FAMILY VALUES,NO ONE PERSON TRYED TO STOP THEM.GUNS DONT KILL,WEAK MINDED PEOPLE DO WHEN THEY DO AND SAY NOTHING,UNLESS IT AFFECTS THEM DIRECTLY.WELL,HAS THIS 1980 AFFECTED THE FAMILY VALUES ON RAISING AND SCHOOLING YOU,R CHILDREN?

Trackbacks

  1. RP’s Guns and Crimes: A Reality Check « THE VINCENTON POST
  2. The Right to Bear Arms is an Individual Right! « THE VINCENTON POST
  3. Philippine Daily Pravda’s Renewed Tabloid War Versus Gun Owners « THE VINCENTON POST

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: