Gun Control

No comments

Somebody help me here, I am having a hard time understanding where these people are getting their thoughts from. What needs to be said or shown to the people in organizations like the "Coalition for Gun Control" (CGC), in Canada, and "Handgun Control Inc." (HCI), in the USA, to make them think for themselves? Media rhetoric is at an all time high everywhere you go. The only place people get their information from, anymore, is from, as my mother used to call it, the "idiot box". What does it take for people to realize that, like the internet, not everything you see on TV is true?

There are loads and loads of statistics and real world proof out there as to the ineffectiveness of gun control. The problem is media. The only place you can hear or see this proof, is on the internet. How often do you hear another news story that is sensationalizing another shooting, somewhere in this world. How often do you then hear to proponents for gun control issuing statements about the "criminals" owning guns? <Begin Sarcasm>You know, those criminals like me. I mean, I know I'm a terrible person for wanting a gun. I know I'm a mentally deficient person for enjoying shooting down at a range.<End Sarcasm>

Gun Control Comic

I have written 3 or 4 articles on this matter and, if you've read them, you've also read the comments:


...The easier it is to accquire guns the more criminals will have them, true they might always find a way to get them but if it were easier then a lot more band e's and robberies would be performed with them

To which I say, you just proved my point. They might find a way to get them. Rest assured, they will, and there's nothing you or our government can do about that fact. So, what can we do to help? Instead of asking, how we can disarm the rest of our law-abiding citizens, what can we do to address the problem?


Total guns per capita in the States is about 3 times higher than in Canada if my stats are right ... total firearm deaths per capita, is also 3 times higher... more guns = more death ... thats pretty much what it comes down to i think

That is exactly what CGC and HCI would have you believe. It is, in fact, not true. In the latest International Crime Victimization Survey, done by a University in Holland, they found that the USA is not even in the top 10. According to a statement by

"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.

Cime Graph

A graph, I found, shows more (right). also notes in an article from March 3, 2000, that:

Since Australia banned private ownership of most guns in 1996:

  • Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent;

  • Assaults are up 8.6 percent;

  • Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent;

  • In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent;

  • In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily;

  • There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.

A British self defence company, All Safe Defense Systems, wrote it like this:

It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics, however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993.

This just doesn't match with the theory that "... more guns = more death ..." as that last comment stated. Ok, on to another comment:


Handguns have no purpose besides causing another individual personal bodily harm. They are not useful for hunting and are terribly inaccurate....

That is that person's feelings, not fact. Handguns are dangerous. So are cars, knives, baseball bats, chainsaws, airplanes, bicycles, motorcycles and so many other inventions. Many things these days have inherent risks. A chainsaw in the wrong hands, well, the movie "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" comes to mind. Should we punish chainsaws? How about their owners? No, we should punish the person that abuses them. A handgun, in and of itself, is nothing more than a tool. How you use that tool dictates both its purpose and how dangerous it is, just like a chainsaw. The only reason politicians, the CGC, etc are after guns, is because the media has sensationalized the tool into something more.

A large group of people have never been out to a shooting range, they've never handled a gun, and they, sure as hell, have not fired one. The only place that they've gotten their information, is from what they've seen in the movies, video games and the evening news. In the movies you've got the likes of Rambo and Kill Bill, which were both blood baths. In the video games you've got hundreds of hundreds of first and third person shooter games, all of which have a certain amount of realism to them. Lastly, you've got the evening news.

How often do you hear of a Conceal Carry Permit (CCP) holder using their handgun for defensive use where no shots were fired? How often do you hear of a mass shooting where a CCP holder was the one to stop the carnage? How often do you hear of robberies gone bad because a CCP holder was able to stop the crime before it got bad? I would say pretty much never. Now, how often do you hear of Police shooting and killing a suspect? How often do you hear of mass shootings where the killer has kept shooting unabated for long enough to amass major casualties? How often do you hear of gun wars or robberies where someone has died?

My point is that the media tends to show guns in a bad light. Are you aware that handgun owners in the USA use their handguns an estimated 2 million times a year? In 95% of those cases, no shot is fired. Merely the presence of an armed target is enough to scare the would-be criminal away. Are you aware that, in at least 2 instances that I'm aware of, a mass shooting has been stopped by a CCP holder? In his book Straight Shooting, Dr John Lott wrote:

... In January 2002, a shooting left three dead at the Appalachian Law School in Virginia. The event made international headlines and produced more calls for gun control.

Yet one critical fact was missing from virtually all the news coverage: The attack was stopped by two students who had guns in their cars.

The fast responses of Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges undoubtedly saved many lives... Both immediately ran to their cars and got their guns, then approached the shooter from different sides. Thus confronted, the attacker threw his gun down.

Yet, out of some 208 news stories that followed, none of them mentioned that the 2 heroes had used guns to defend their fellow students. They all stated something similar to the Washington Post, who said:

Three students pounced on the gunman and held him until help arrived.

Media is constantly putting citizens lives in danger with their bad reporting. Other citizens may actually attempt to try and restrain a gunman, falsely believing that someone else was able to do it. Why is it that mass shootings take place in places such as Post Offices and Schools and certain malls? Those areas, in a lot of states, are legally "gun free zones". Which only means that law abiding citizens cannot carry defence with them. Nothing is going to stop a criminal from bringing in a gun, because he's a criminal, he doesn't care. What would have happened had those two students been allowed to carry on the school premises? They may have been able to stop the gunman much earlier and may have prevented 3 deaths.

It's lies like these and irresponsible reporting by news agencies that causes the issues we have today. Gang violence, murders, mass shootings, car chases, guns, drugs, and the like. They are all sensationalized by our newspapers, but the real heroes, the people who put themselves in harms way to protect lives, they are the left in the dirt. Their stories are not being told, they may have saved lives, but they did it in a "politically incorrect" manner. If the news agencies just change a few details, they can be politically correct and still be heroes. Maybe we should ask them if that is what they want, or maybe they want the, politically incorrect, truth told.

Unless we stand up for our rights, and stand up now, they will be taken away. Your natural birth right to life, liberty, self defence and the means by which to do it, are slowly being eroded away. They will be gone unless something changes. I encourage you to get out and start looking into these things for yourself. Visit the sources I have provided. Don't just believe what I say, don't just believe what you see on TV, and please don't just listen to what you hear from politicians. Look it up for yourself.

I will leave you with a couple links, please don't just pass them over, check, at least, a couple out. You might be surprised by what you see and hear!


Please insert the result of the arithmetical operation from the following image:

Please insert the result of the arithmetical operation from this image. =